September 24, 2019 Regular Meeting of Mountain View City Council

Video

Transcript

Segment 1

[00:11:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, I guess we will get started and he'll be here momentarily. So we will call the meeting to order. And we will start with the pledge of allegiance, if you will join me for that.

[00:11:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[00:11:55] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next item is roll call.

[00:11:58] City Clerk Lisa Natusch: All council members are present, thank you.

[00:12:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next item is 4.0, the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council or audience wishes to remove the item for discussion. The reading of the full text of ordinances and resolutions will be waived unless a council member requests otherwise. Are there any items that a council member would like to pull?

[00:12:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, seeing none. Are there any items that a member of the public would like to pull?

[00:12:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, seeing none. Councilmember Clark.

[00:12:38] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: I'll move that we approve the consent calendar which includes item 4.3, that we adopt a resolution of the Mountain View City Council authorizing the application for and receipt of SB2 planning grant program funds to be read in title only, further reading waived, and 4.4, adopt a resolution approving salary plan documents from fiscal year 2014-15 through fiscal year 2019-20 to comply with the Public Employees' Retirement Law definition of compensable earnings as defined by Government Code Section 20636 and the definition of publicly available pay schedules defined by California Code of Regulations Section 570.5a8 to be read in title only, further reading waived.

[00:13:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So we have a motion by Councilmember Clark and a second by Councilmember Ramirez. Any further discussion? Okay, we can call the question.

[00:13:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So the consent calendar passes unanimously. Next item on the agenda is 5.0, which is oral communications. And this portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to three minutes during this section, and state law prohibits the council from acting on non-agenda items. So is there anyone who wishes to address the council on items that are not on the agenda tonight? If you could come up to the microphone and be sure to fill out a blue card and leave it with our city clerk either before or after you speak is fine. Welcome.

[00:14:23] Melise Lieb: Thank you. My name is Melise Lieb, and I am a Mountain View resident. There has been a lot of momentum going on in recent days on fighting climate change. Definitely individuals are taking responsibility in reducing their fossil fuels. I know Mountain View for a long time has been instrumental in making this city sustainable. I am so grateful for that, that my city is doing that. But that's not enough. We need to do more at the national level, and I am here to give Mountain View the opportunity to do something at the national level.

[00:15:08] Melise Lieb: The way that they can do that is to endorse HR 763, the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act, an active bill on the US House floor. A carbon dividend policy works by putting a fee on fossil fuels, like coal, oil, and gas. It distributes 100% of that money on a share basis to individuals, and those individuals can spend it, or excuse me, not individuals but households, who can spend it as they see fit. This legislation will be effective. It will reduce America's emissions by 40% by 2030 and by 90% by 2050. I support this bill because it's something that we all can agree on.

[00:16:04] Melise Lieb: Liberals like it because it will improve the air we breathe. It will also put money in the hands of low and middle-income Americans. Conservatives like it because it doesn't grow government. It's a free-market solution that doesn't pick winners or losers. And everybody likes it, it will create 2.1 million new jobs. I'm grateful that Mountain View has been a champion of clean energy at the local level. But we need to do more. Endorsing this legislation will give us a voice at the national level.

[00:16:38] Melise Lieb: The city of Los Altos as well as both California state legislature and state senate have already endorsed carbon fee and dividend. I contacted Steve Attinger, your sustainability manager last month, and he is agreeable to doing an assessment of this policy. Tonight I encourage you to officially ask Steve to make a recommendation. I will return at the next meeting to follow up on the progress. Thank you.

[00:17:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to address the council on an item that's not on the agenda?

[00:17:20] Joan McDonald: Good evening. I'm speaking for myself, Joan McDonald. I know that you are faced with very difficult decisions, particularly the ones on this particular agenda. What I want to say is broader than either of the items on the agenda. And I want to say this in a very heartfelt way. I think all of us, whether it's through our families, our churches, our temples, our schools, however, have been encouraged to agree that we are our brothers' keepers, and that's brothers and sisters, that there but for fortune go you or I. And especially the golden rule, which is universal.

Segment 2

[00:47:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Are there any questions from Councilmembers? Okay, seeing none, we will open this up for public comment. Is there anyone who wishes to address the Council on item 8.1? Okay, seeing none, we'll close the public input portion. And Councilmember Clark.

[00:47:48] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: I move that we adopt a resolution for exception to the 180-day wait period, Government Code section 7522.56 and 21224 to be read in title only, further reading waived, an attachment one of the Council report.

[00:48:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So we have a motion by Councilmember Clark and a second by Councilmember Hicks. There is no further discussion. We'll call the question. That passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay, now we will move to item 7.1. And I think before we get into this, our City Manager wanted to say a few words.

[00:48:38] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, just a few comments as staff is getting set up to kind of set the stage for tonight. The Council is considering two separate but related items this evening. 7.1 proposes a restriction of oversized vehicle parking in certain locations, and 7.2 proposes provisions to help establish more safe park parking locations for people living in vehicles. Tonight's items recommend specific actions that respond to Council direction that's taken shape during several rounds of discussion. These discussions began more than three years ago to seek solutions to the increasing occurrence of people living in vehicles as housing. The causes and impacts of this regional phenomenon are complex, and there is no one straightforward solution. Tonight's issues relate to two important purposes. One is maintaining the safety of the public right-of-way, and also addressing the needs for housing and supportive services for the unstably housed. The first purpose is addressed through tonight's item on oversized vehicles. The second purpose, the safe parking item tonight, addresses the second purpose, and is part of a wide range of City efforts over the past three years to provide outreach and services for a path to more stable, permanent housing. This is an addition to the City's investment in affordable housing, and support for increasing the supply of housing in Mountain View. I just wanted to kind of set the stage a little bit, it's very challenging issues were facing here. And so with that preamble, I'd like to turn it over to Kimberly Thomas, Assistant to the City Manager, and Nicole Wright, both of whom have spent literally innumerable hours on these issues over the last few years.

[00:50:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you, Mr. Rich.

[00:50:34] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Thank you, Mayor and City Manager. As noted, I'm Kimberly Thomas and I'm the Assistant to the City Manager. Nicole and I, as well as Mike Fuller, the Public Works Director, will be assisting and responding to questions on this presentation tonight. The presentation outline is shown on screen for you this evening. We'll be providing some brief background, the ordinances for amendments related to bicycle lanes and narrow streets, parking restriction exemptions, required signage, noticing, enforcement, the recommendations overall, and questions and directions from the Council. Starting with some brief background. On June 11th of 2019, the Council directed staff to return in the fall with the following: restrictions addressing key public health and safety concerns related to oversized vehicles near driveways, pedestrian crossings, key bike and pedestrian corridors, and daytime restrictions in certain areas around Eagle Park and Rengstorff Park. Also what restrictions might look like in residential zones. Also an ordinance with an effective date of January 1 of 2020 for an overnight prohibition, citywide for oversized vehicles parking from two to, two to six a.m. After further review, reviewing Council's direction, analyzing a range of options, staff is recommending a more focused approach, addressing bicycle safety and narrow streets. The Council had also directed, as noted, a safe parking ordinance that will be coming up next for you this evening. Oversized vehicles have been defined in the proposed ordinances as any vehicle, or combination of vehicles, of connected vehicles, which exceeds 22 feet in length, seven feet in width, and seven in height. The proposed definition of oversized vehicles would generally exclude passenger vans and pickup trucks. The Public Works Department typically requires eight feet of roadway width for on-street parking. In some areas of the city, the parking width has been reduced to seven feet to accommodate a particular road construction configuration. For this reason, the proposed ordinance includes a parking restriction of oversized vehicles that are in excess of seven feet, feet wide, as this is the minimum needed. In addition, even when eight-foot parking width is provided, eight feet is only available if the vehicle parks on the curb face, directly on the curb face. For the bicycle lanes, the Public Works staff reviewed the safety impacts of tall vehicles near roadways, near driveways, bike pedestrian crossings, pedestrian corridors, and intersections. Staff believes that the existing ordinance restricting parking of vehicles in excess of six feet in height is sufficient to address these. This was last updated in October of 2018. A process is already in place to address that issue. What is not in place is a process to address width. The encroachment of oversized vehicles into bicycle lanes can force bicycles into the vehicle lanes to avoid oversized vehicles. The minimum bicycle lane width in the city is typically five or six feet depending on the posted speed limit for the vehicles on that street. If parking is allowed adjacent to the bicycle lane, at least an additional eight feet are needed adjacent to the curb in order to maintain the minimum bicycle length. Staff recommends that an oversized vehicle parking be restricted at all locations where bicycle lanes exist to prevent oversized vehicles from encroaching on the bike lane. If this ordinance is introduced tonight, staff would return with a resolution as required and a revised parking signage table after further analysis is done to ensure the accuracy of each street restriction. Shown next, and also in attachment five, and on display in the Council Chambers and outside, is a copy of what that bike lane map would look at, the impacts of the restrictions. The second component. Council directed staff to evaluate restricting oversized vehicles and parking in residential areas due to safety concerns. As noted earlier, staff recommends a focus on street width as a direct way to address traffic safety implications. Oversized vehicles present visibility concerns at driveways, and as parcels on narrow streets are smaller than commercial industrial streets, such concerns exist on a much greater percentage of these streets, the narrow streets, than wider streets. While the width of narrow streets varies, the curb-to-curb width of such streets is typically less than 40 feet, less than or equal to 40 feet wide. Commercial and industrial streets are typically wider to accommodate the travel and parking of larger vehicles. Staff recommends the Council adopt an ordinance restricting parking of oversized vehicles on narrow streets, less than or equal to 40 feet wide, citywide, 24/7, to address this safety concern. Based on staff's preliminary review, the locations of streets that are less, less than or equal to 40 feet wide are shown on the map, on the next slide and also as an attachment to your report. If the ordinance is introduced, staff will perform a detailed analysis of the narrow streets, prepare a resolution as required, enumerating each street restricted. Staff would then return with the required resolution and table to ensure the accuracy of each restriction. In addition, if directed, staff would also return with an analysis of existing restricted parking on streets greater than 40 feet wide. Shown next is the map which is also in attachment six and also shown in Council Chambers and outside. Shown on screen here are exemptions. These are similar to things that have been explored before. These exemptions are to address the needs of the community while reducing the overall presence of oversized vehicles that can contribute to safety concerns. There is signage and noticing that is required. As per state law, adequate signage must be installed to give notice of parking restrictions before it can be enforced. The Public Works Department estimates that the manufacture and installation of signage would be completed by the end of December of 2019. This would allow for enforcement to begin in January of 2020. If Council adopts these parking restrictions, wide outreach, vehicle noticing, and supplemental city communications would be implemented. An additional item is the parking restrictions at parks. Oversized vehicles are regularly parking near Eagle and Rengstorff parks. A portion of the frontages of these parks would be included in the bicycle lane and narrow streets restrictions discussed. Staff recommends separately considering parking at park frontages to address turnover issues for the parks for all vehicles, as this is not specifically related to oversized vehicles. If directed by the Council, staff could add this as a work plan item and return with a separate recommendation to address parking generally adjacent and along the frontage of parks. The fiscal impact of this item is fully funded for this fiscal year at this time out of the current year budget. The recommendations are recapped again on screen. This is regarding bicycle lane safety, safety one A and B. Narrow streets A through C. And the parking recommendation for parks, the review for parks. This concludes staff's brief report. Both myself, Ms. Wright, Mr. Fuller, and the other staff point staff team would be available for questions this evening. I thank you.

[00:53:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. At this point I'd like to open it up for Council questions. Are there any? Councilmember Ramirez.

[00:53:49] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. Just one quick question for clarification. So the additional analysis that you will need to do for the narrow streets and bike lanes, what precisely will that entail?

[00:54:05] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I'll refer that to Mike Fuller.

[00:54:10] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: Mike Fuller, Public Works Director. The map included in the staff report is based on our geographic information system, so it's basically our electronic mapping citywide. What I would want to do is basically field check each of those streets. We didn't do that in the absence of Council direction on this item, but it would involve field checking all the streets. I think there are over 500 of them.

[00:54:34] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Field checking what? The curb to curb width, I'm sorry.

[00:54:37] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: Oh, so, so measuring the width.

[00:54:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Yes. Okay, thank you.

[00:54:40] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: And it also includes documenting and creating the table which has to be very explicit of what streets, from where to where, and that will take some time as well.

[00:54:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I just have one question. And that is on page eight of the presentation, the very last bullet about narrow streets says staff will also analyze existing parking restrictions on wider streets. So I'm pretty sure I know what that means, but I was wondering if you could elaborate on that and maybe give an example because it seems like there's a lot of confusion among residents about what that really means.

[00:55:30] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: Over the years, we have installed signage for this issue. And if Council approves the recommendations, basically we're setting a framework for restriction of oversized vehicles citywide. And so we're gonna look at existing restrictions that have been placed on streets that don't fall under the narrow street or the bike lane prohibitions and consider whether to remove those restrictions or not. What we don't want to do is have this patchwork of older restrictions under a different philosophy for dealing with oversized vehicles when we've got this new framework.

[00:56:12] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So it could be that some streets right now that have no parking between the hours of 2am and 6am, those restrictions could be removed?

[00:56:24] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: Yes.

[00:56:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate the clarification because I don't think people appreciated that one. Councilmember Hicks.

[00:56:32] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I had a very similar question. So those are what people have sometimes referred to as legacy streets, maybe? And can you tell me what a, like a small list of what some of those are, off the top of your head? Do you have them?

[00:56:49] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: What some of those streets are?

[00:56:50] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah.

[00:56:51] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: Shorebird Way I think is one of them. I'm not, I don't have a list with me. I know there are some out in North Bayshore. There are some in our commercial and industrial areas. And those are primarily where they were at the time. And this goes back six or eight years to when we started doing that.

[00:57:12] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Independence, Terra Bella, primarily commercial and industrial streets.

[00:57:17] Public Works Director Mike Fuller: Okay, that was basically my question. Thanks. Where they were.

[00:57:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Any other questions from Councilmembers? Okay, seeing none, before I open this up to public input, I do want to remind folks that there are likely to be different perspectives on this topic tonight. And as at all previous Council meetings, it is our expectation that people listen. People listen to what others have to say, and we do not want to have any show of agreement or disagreement, so no applause, no booing, just listen. And listen with respect. As we heard earlier tonight during oral communications on items not on the agenda, you know, we need to show respect for each other. And I'd say, you know, tonight's a real good way to do that during oral communications from on this topic. So with that said, and I'm gonna be very strict about that. Can I see a show of hands of how many folks want to speak tonight? Okay. Let's see, each speaker will have a minute and a half. And I know there's at least one speaker who has asked for additional time because they have others that will cede their time to them. So, please come over and form a line and be sure to fill out a blue card, either before or after you speak, and leave it with our City Clerk.

[00:58:58] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Mayor, might I just suggest for process, for the benefit of those who might not be used to this, you might want to explain the ceding time rule so that others don't try to do the same without understanding the context of it.

[00:59:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Sure, so we have a Council policy that if there are five people who agree not to speak, and you're here and you fill out a blue card, then someone can have a little bit more time to speak on your behalf. And tonight, we are using the rule of if there's five people who agree not to speak, the speaker can have five minutes. Okay, so now we'll start.

[00:59:48] Public Speaker: Good evening. I'm Ida Rose Sylvester, representing the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning. Tonight, I come here in the spirit of finding solutions for our community, which is becoming painfully divided because of the ongoing battle on the issue of safe parking and a parking ban. Tonight, I hope we walk away more unified than divided, more hopeful than angry, and more directed toward solutions than stuck in uncertainty. MVCSP has spent this summer convening diverse members of our entire community, from lots of love, to vehicle residents, legislative staff, community agencies, concerned residents, and other community and groups and experts from around the region, engaging in dialogue and research with the attempt to better understand our collective role in solving this crisis. We are convinced of one thing. No matter how people feel about RV parking on the street, virtually everyone we spoke to wants safe parking, 24/7, with few, if any, unnecessary restrictions. To that end, we'd like your support in continuing to build a community-driven safe parking and parkulation regulation task force to continue the work we've started. We would like the City's support as much as feasible to help us coordinate efforts better. We would also like the support of the Human Relations Commission, which I'm on, to formally aid this effort, which we've already agreed to do. Having these additional resources and the City buy-in would be invaluable to our work. Thank you.

[01:01:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So I just want to remind folks that the topic we're talking about right now is the oversized vehicles. We will get to safe parking next. So if you could have your comments on topic, that would be great.

[01:01:37] Public Speaker: Hi, I'm Dave Arnone, and I want to continue in the spirit that Ida Rose has set. I want to propose that with regards to parking restrictions that we go slow. That we resist the temptation to take on the full set of recommendations, but instead we begin some restrictions at a few key locations or hot button locations that have all come up over time. I think if we start with a few key locations, we'll allow enough parking flexibility for all of those vehicles to naturally relocate, maybe into some spots that a lot of us will feel better about. Small, significant changes is what I want to recommend. I want to recommend that we go slow, watch what happens, learn and adjust. Those are our brothers and sisters out there. They're lives, they've got families, and they've got homes. And I just want to ask that we go slow. Thanks.

[01:02:36] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:02:42] Public Speaker: Hi, my name is Mark Lentsner. I have lived on Shoreline Boulevard for the past 31 years, and I have been a bike commuter for most of the last 10 years. As much as I appreciate making Mountain View very bike-friendly, and I understand and recognize staff's logic in the proposals, I have to say, staff could have been directed to find solutions that let the RVs stay and make the streets safe, rather than banning the RVs. I think these proposals instead will have the effect of displacing 300 of our community's families. They have already been displaced from other housing options. I think it's unconscionable for us in Mountain View to displace our community's families until we have found and implemented some solution to affordable housing here, since the item that follows, safe parking, doesn't even come close to providing 300 stable family places at all. I urge the Council to reject these restrictions until Mountain View has a stable housing solution for these community families. Thanks.

[01:03:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:03:55] Public Speaker: Good evening Mayor, Council. Thanks everybody for putting up with my kids. My name is Remi Goldsmith. I've been living in Mountain View for two years and I'm here tonight because of these guys. I want to raise my kids in a community that everybody is welcome. Not just people who can afford a home, purchase it, not just people who can afford the $4,000 rent that my husband and I pay each month. This is something that, but for the grace of God, most of us are only a couple months away from being just like the folks who are now looking at being displaced from their community. And who are right now doing everything that they can to stay in the community that they have roots in. I urge you all to vote against this ban because this is about having a community where all people are welcome. Thank you.

[01:04:40] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:04:46] Public Speaker: Good evening. My name is Arnold Leon, Mountain View resident. To the Mountain View City Council members, I preface my comments and suggestions with the belief that almost all Mountain View residents, whether property owners or renters, want a safe, clean, and neat community to live in. With regards to the third goal of a neat place to live, and specifically with regards to the long-standing RV vehicle dwellers causing blight and other problems for Mountain View, I offer the following comments and suggestions. Ban on sleeping in vehicles. The City of Los Angeles, California, with over 4 million residents, and many more RV street vehicle dwellers than Mountain View has, reinstated on August 16, 2019, by a City Council vote of 13 to zero, a legally defensible total ban on public street sleeping overnight in vehicles, regardless of type and size, and as defined in the California Vehicle Code. The full description of the ban can be read in the Los Angeles City Code Section 85.02 entitled Regulating the Use of Vehicles for Dwelling. The code begins with the phrase, no person shall use a vehicle for dwelling. I have given the Council Clerk three copies of the Los Angeles ordinance. I hope the City Council will read it. It's a short two-page, easy to read ban. I compared it against the oversized vehicle proposal, and I really believe that the Los Angeles ban will resolve the issues that we really are confronted with. I thus recommend the Mountain View City Council consider implementing a similar.

[01:06:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Thank you. Next please.

[01:12:36] Public Speaker: Hi, my name is Alice Rosenbohm, and I am a resident of Mountain View for over 16 years. Um, you have a critical decision to make. You'll literally be deciding the fate of 200 plus RV residents in Mountain View who have been directly affected by this crisis. If they had other choices, they would have taken them. They pay taxes. Maybe not a property tax, but should I as a resident of Mountain View and someone who has also been homeless, now living an apartment here, not paying property taxes, be banned as well? Any vehicle from a semi to a Honda can and will at times continue to block a driver's view on the streets while parking in legal spaces here. Do we ban them? I'm extremely concerned that you look for shortcuts that won't begin to match the scope of this problem. We can't afford to place rigid timelines on an issue of this complexity. We have a great disparity in low-income affordable housing and we need to attack the cause and not the result. It's not a solution to push people out expecting the problem to go away. What other problems will develop? Where do they go? Will they be able to keep their jobs? Being homeless, their needs and our ability to respond to those needs should merit no less because they're in an RV. Please consider this as if it were happening to you or your family member. Because unless you've been homeless, you'll never understand what the fear of facing it is really like. Thank you.

[01:14:05] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:14:11] Public Speaker: If you could speak into the microphone? My name is Barton Lunsford. I've been a contributing member of this community since 2001. I don't take drugs, I don't drink, I don't smoke. I am a personal trainer. I make a six-figure income. And I used to live in the apartments right across the street on Continental Circle. I lived there for four years. Every year the rent would continue to go up and go up and go up. In my line of work, there is no retirement. There's no 401k unless I provide, unless I put money into that. So every month that I'm paying $3,000, $3,500 a month, getting no benefit other than having a place to sleep. By the time I'm close to retirement, that will be more than half of a million dollars out of my pocket that I could have saved for retirement instead of paying for an apartment. And that's the only reason I chose to purchase an RV. It is not comfortable. I am a relatively big guy, 6'3", 280 pounds. Moving around in an RV is not convenient. I don't do it because I enjoy it. There's a lot of restrictions and challenges to living in an RV, but I do it out of necessity so that I can have a future without being completely broke and then having no choice but to live on the street because I have no means to provide for myself. Thank you.

[01:15:40] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:15:46] Public Speaker: Uh, my name is Adel. I lived here for over 20 years in this area, 16 around Mountain View. I have two businesses here. My girlfriend passed away, and the owner of the apartment raised the rent. And I have no other choice to, to move anywhere else because everywhere you go they, they take applications and there's no guarantee to move right away out. So I, I found only one solution is to get an RV. And I know there's 72 hours to park in the street, that's the legal, you know, law. So that's what I went for it. I didn't have enough time to explain all the story. But I'm building this city. I'm paying for this. I'm expecting the city to protect my back and to to be just leave me temporary until I move to another place or to have a, you know, RV park. There's no RV park available here. All the RV park around us, they took them down, they built new building. There's even the RV park available, you go there ask them for place, they say wait, waiting list. So there's no place to go, there's no solution. If there's solution for us, we'll take it. So can you please be patient with us until we have solution. You put a ban now, I have my mother just coming right now end of this week. Now, it's just heard about this, it's just making me very uncomfortable. I don't know what to do. I can't leave out of this city because this is what I have my client, this is my job, my life is here. I love this city, and I wanted to build it more, and hire you guys for to a better solution. Thank you.

[01:17:23] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:17:29] Public Speaker: My name is Rebecca Wright. I've been a resident of Mountain View for 28 years. Today's my birthday. I'm here because I remember when my parents used to come and visit and we live in a small house, so they brought their RV to park outside of our house. 72 hours was fine. Visitors and fish both smell after 72 hours, but this way they could stay with me, but not stay with me. The street I live on, Granada, is one of the streets you show as a narrow street and you're concerned about. There's probably many other, but I want you to consider that you're impacting not just the people who are quote living on the street, but the people who might be visiting. I'm also a bike rider, so I do care about the safety of our streets. I think you've seen some presentations on how to look at safety for bike riders. I'm also a walker. And I can tell you that for the 20-odd years I've been walking around my neighborhood, Wentworth has had RVs on it always. This is not a new situation. And they don't bother anyone there. So I'd just like you to consider the many impacts that you're having as you consider the issue in front of you. Thank you.

[01:18:47] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:18:50] Public Speaker: Hi, I'm Janet Lafleur. I'm a resident of Mountain View. And I'm here as someone who rides a bike is my primary transportation. I ride past one RV dweller community every single morning and I pass by two more on the weekends. I am disturbed by the ordinances under consideration tonight. Like the ACLU and the Law Foundation, I find them disingenuous. It's not about safety on narrow streets. Our designated bike boulevard, Montecito Avenue, is so narrow that people park on both sides, two cars can't pass. But no one goes, 'Well, we gotta get rid of the parking there.' No, that didn't happen. It's not about protecting people riding in bike lanes. Because we've been complaining about those big oversized vehicles on Shoreline for years. Dump trucks, tree trimming trucks, delivery vans. We ask the police and they just shrug. 'Oh, can't do anything about it then.' And it's not about protecting children. From a kid's height, an SUV is equally obstructive as a large RV. And the only kids I see near these RV dwelling areas are the kids who live there. I see them when I go to work and they wave to me, so I wave back because that's what neighbors do. Where sightlines are a problem, you can daylight the intersection. Where the lanes are narrow, please, you know, turn convert the travel lanes to bike lanes like we've been asking. I'm asking you to reject this ordinance. And, um, that's it. Thank you.

[01:20:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:20:25] Public Speaker: My name is Rachel Gilbert, and I live in Mountain View. And so we know that there's an affordable housing shortage in California. Nationally, there's a shortage of 7 million affordable units. So if you kick people out, where are they supposed to go? Please remember that homeowners are not your only constituents. Renters are your constituents. The people who live in RVs are also your constituents. We are all supposed to be equal in a democracy. If you truly believe that you're here to represent the people in a democracy, that all people have inherent worth and dignity. And if you realize that you too will need help at some point in your life, then please vote no on the RV ban. Thank you.

[01:21:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:21:18] Public Speaker: Hi Council. Thank you very much for being here. I would like to thank each and every one of you for spending all your time working on this problem. Everybody knows that it's a problem, but your answer today isn't the answer, and you know that. This is a complete city-wide ban on these people. These people could be your children or you if you don't have a safety net, if should something forbid happen to you and you become disabled. Every one of you have the option of not being or the opportunity unfortunately maybe, of losing your home and getting in an RV. My choice of being in an RV, Mayor, was between being on the street, and in a parking lot, or on a bench, or being in an RV. None of these people make choices to be in an RV. It is that or be on the wet ground. And I'd like you to seriously consider the ordinance absolutely more than a little bit unfair. Right? Thank you.

[01:22:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:22:20] Public Speaker: My name is Job Lopez, a resident of Mountain View. Thank God that I have a place to live, but I am here in support of my brothers and sisters who do not have a place like I do. I agree totally with what Lenny Siegel talked about. And I also I want to remind you once again, even it may sound as a broken record, that you each one of you has the moral responsibility, you have the moral obligation to look for the good of your brothers and sisters. You were elected to take care of each one of us in your community, and in many ways you are not doing that. So please listen to what we say. I agree that some elements, some sanitary issues, some safety issues, some healthy issues have to be taken into account in regards to this whole situation. But don't go so far down the road, don't be so picky, don't be wasting maybe thousands of dollars in unnecessary things just having the staff checking and checking and measuring and deciding, you know, by foot what to do, okay? So please take that into account. The dignity of each brother and sister is the same dignity that you have, the human dignity, and that's what you have to to take into account. Thank you.

[01:23:52] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[01:23:58] Public Speaker: Conor O'Brien, I'm a Mountain View resident. And I want to speak against these restrictions. As you've been hearing, for a lot of our neighbors these restrictions would take away the last option that they have for remaining in Mountain View. It would rule out most of the streets where RVs are parking now. And the plans for more safe parking will not be enough to cover the new need that this policy would create. A few months ago, it was very encouraging when you all voted to prioritize fighting displacement in Mountain View. Passing this ban would set back that fight before, practically before it's even started. A real commitment to ending displacement has to start with not doing new harm by passing policies to unnecessarily displace residents. There's also, there was some discussion earlier on about opening up wider streets to allow places for people to park, which is great, but I think the order is completely wrong here. Finding where people are going to go needs to be a prerequisite to kicking them out of the places they are now, not an afterthought that you'll say you'll look at after passing this. Thank you.

Segment 3

[01:30:20] Michael Zidan: The problem is the construction vehicles that are exempted under section two of this ordinance. Those vehicles move in the evening and then they move in the morning. In the evening and in the morning, children go to school on that street. They bike, they walk. They have to bike on the street because sometimes the sidewalks are too narrow.

[01:30:47] Michael Zidan: By exempting these construction vehicles, you run a risk of injuring and endangering young people who have to commute by bike or by walking.

[01:31:05] Michael Zidan: I also have fine problems with this council's reasoning for pedestrian, cyclist and driver safety. We're not changing the infrastructure of the street in order to make the street safer. You could do things like elevating sidewalks, putting in protected bike lanes, not bike lanes that allow drivers to park in the bike lane.

[01:31:30] Michael Zidan: By putting the infrastructure there, you can actually make it safer and not displace people.

[01:31:43] Diego Delgado: Hello, my name is Diego Delgado. I've been a resident of Mountain View for a little bit over 15 years. I'm lucky enough that I work in an industry that allows me to continue to stay in Mountain View.

[01:31:57] Diego Delgado: I don't care to pay the $3,000 every month for a place that was built in the 40s and that the water stops running randomly and that I have to go fix the plumbing on my own because I'm afraid to get kicked out by my landlord if I put in way too many fixes.

[01:32:17] Diego Delgado: The reason I bring that up is because not everybody is that lucky to be able to afford what we are paying today. And I bet a lot of the older folks here today, had rents been the same equivalent to income as they were today back in the day that they started working, they would also not be able to afford living in Mountain View.

[01:32:38] Diego Delgado: But the main thing I want to talk about is it is often that I find that when I'm reading about the council's behavior, you're often finding yourselves hiding behind this is for the safety of bike lanes. You're not doing this for the safety of bike lanes.

[01:32:54] Diego Delgado: You're doing this to remove what people consider blight. You're doing this to remove the poor and unwanted. You want to push this problem onto somebody else. And I wish you guys, if you're voting for this, at least just say, we don't want these people here. Thank you.

[01:33:18] Superintendent Rudolph: Good evening everyone. I am the Superintendent of Mountain View Whisman School Districts. I don't envy your position. Last Saturday, we spent a considerable amount of time looking at this issue ourselves.

[01:33:31] Superintendent Rudolph: I've met with city staff and we've talked about how we could facilitate the possibility of helping kids, because we have 148 students who are homeless. 21 of whom live in RVs, two of whom live in cars.

[01:33:45] Superintendent Rudolph: Now here's the thing that changed the decision for us. The people who are living in RVs, the 21 students, 17 families, they're renting the RVs. They can't move them, they don't have the access to decide if they park in one of our lots and move it out by 7 a.m.

[01:34:03] Superintendent Rudolph: They don't have that capability because oftentimes they are the ones who will come back home and the RV will be moved because they have to move every three days and they're not told this. They just simply have to find their RVs.

[01:34:16] Superintendent Rudolph: So I don't envy your position, but I want to say this. At what time does someone make a decision to have three kids and three dogs in an RV? That's the decision that you're faced with.

[01:34:29] Superintendent Rudolph: We tried our best, our board fought and we argued about it. And at the end of the day, there was nothing that we could do in order to facilitate this. But I urge you to look at all options that are possibly available so that you could possibly help us until we can find a way. Thanks.

[01:34:46] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Before you leave, we have a couple council members have questions for you. Councilmember Ramirez.

[01:34:50] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you Mayor. So I wasn't able to attend the study session. It was reported in the Voice that the reason the school district is not choosing to participate in the safe parking program is because of objections to the city regulations. Is that true?

[01:35:11] Superintendent Rudolph: Our concern is that for the people who are in RVs who do not have the ability to move the RVs, those RVs will be stuck on our campus for the entire day. And that's... we can't do that.

[01:35:25] Superintendent Rudolph: We cannot facilitate... you know, one of the things that came up clear when we were meeting was that if an RV is on your site for an extended period of time 24/7, there are other infrastructure needs that have to be put into place.

[01:35:39] Superintendent Rudolph: And those are things that we can't facilitate. We also have a large concern about whether or not we are placing kids in a way that they can be identified. You know, the number of homeless kids is actually larger than what we think because most of them are younger than five years old.

[01:35:59] Superintendent Rudolph: And so we estimate that our numbers are probably twice as much as what we think. But placing them all in one spot makes them identifiable to everybody. And that was the other thing.

[01:36:08] Superintendent Rudolph: I mean, we up until Saturday morning, we were even considering using the district office parking lot as a possible option, but again, there are so many logistics that we can't work out that make it impossible for us to pull this off.

[01:36:23] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Do you have any other students who are living in vehicles that are operable that the household can control? And if there are, would you object to hosting a safe parking site for those families that can control the vehicle?

[01:36:42] Superintendent Rudolph: One of the things our trustees were very clear on is that they want us to go back out and to find out more information about the families. And so we're going to do that. We have... we are upping the hours of our McKinney-Vento liaison, which is the Homeless Act, so that she can go out and have more conversations so that we can get some more detail.

[01:37:00] Superintendent Rudolph: Obviously we're concerned that if the ban goes into place by law we are required to provide them transportation regardless of where they live, if they choose to stay in their school. So a person can move to Gilroy, and if they want to stay at their school, let's say Landels, we will have to provide transportation from Gilroy to Landels and back as part of the McKinney-Vento law.

[01:37:23] Superintendent Rudolph: And so that's one of the side effects of a particular ban, and until we have the full information, we understand the full picture, we're sort of stuck. And I think the other thing is most of our families, what we do know from the data, it was in our presentation, are Latino. And most of them are afraid to provide documentation.

[01:37:44] Superintendent Rudolph: So while they informed us that they were homeless a year ago or two years ago, they are very reluctant to provide updated information due to the political climate. And that is one of the challenges that we have, which means we have to do RV to RV visits.

[01:38:01] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So I want to remind my colleagues as well as the audience that this topic is oversized vehicle parking regulations. Safe parking is the next topic. Um, so are your questions about oversized vehicle... Councilmember McAlister.

[01:38:18] Councilmember John McAlister: Will you be back here for 7.2? So that we can discuss it at that time.

[01:38:23] Superintendent Rudolph: I'll be right over here. The item that I'm talking about is most of our families actually are in oversize vehicles.

[01:38:27] Councilmember John McAlister: No, I understand, but will you be here at 7.2 when we discuss...?

[01:38:29] Superintendent Rudolph: I'll be over there.

[01:38:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you very much. Councilmember Kamei.

[01:38:36] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Thank you Dr. Rudolph. I know you and I have spoken about this topic multiple times trying to brainstorm a path forward. And so sticking to oversized vehicles and given the challenges that were discussed at your Saturday meeting, are there any kind of creative solutions that the council and the board can work on to move forward?

[01:39:01] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Because I think that's what we all would like to do is find... I don't want to tear too much into safe parking, but you know, Councilmember Ramirez mentioned restrictions. I know that I have mentioned kind of the predatory practice of people renting out RVs to vulnerable families and that there isn't really a lot that council can do related to that.

[01:39:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, and they're in a vulnerable situation where they don't have control of the location of their RV or being able to move it. Do you have some other, I don't know if you between Saturday and today, any ideas in terms of the restriction aspect on what we can work on to help provide some sort of solution?

[01:39:49] Superintendent Rudolph: So I think there's probably two things. Thomas is right over here. And I think a multi-agency approach to sort of look at how we can solve this. One thing that we have the benefit of is information about the families that are in RVs and that are impacted by this, most of whom happen to be right next door to Rengstorff Park.

[01:40:11] Superintendent Rudolph: Um, which so that's part of the issue. So I think that's... and trying to figure out how we can provide services in working with different governmental agencies and non-profits and NGOs.

[01:40:23] Superintendent Rudolph: I think the second thing is that, you know, I know my school board pushed us to staff to really look at ways that we could facilitate this conversation for oversized vehicles or RVs, and we really struggled with how do we meet the 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. requirement.

[01:40:44] Superintendent Rudolph: And how do we address the fact that we need to move... the vehicles have to move at those times. And so we... I know that's technically the safe parking, but we when we talked about RVs we talked about it under the same vein. That we need the RVs to be able to move.

[01:41:02] Superintendent Rudolph: And I think figuring out a solution for that. When a family is paying five to eight hundred dollars to live in an RV right next to the park, that's an issue when they don't have control over it. And how we can facilitate the movement of that RV or help a family get out of an RV and into stable housing has to be part of our goal too.

[01:41:25] Superintendent Rudolph: And I think that's the other thing that we just need to keep having conversations about to figure out how we can facilitate this a little bit faster.

[01:41:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. We'll see you at 7.2. Next, please.

[01:41:43] Public Speaker: The ACLU has indicated that it will sue the city of Mountain View if it goes through with approving an oversized vehicle parking ban in the city. And considering the details of the proposals in front of you, such a lawsuit would be well justified. The proposed bans are de facto bans on homelessness.

[01:42:01] Public Speaker: Council members, can any one of you reasonably believe that the fledgling safe parking program adequately meets the needs of the over 250 Mountain View residents living in vehicles? That's according to a report earlier this summer. There were only eight parking spots in the safe parking program earlier this summer.

[01:42:24] Public Speaker: Under the narrow streets parking ban, streets 40 feet of curb-to-curb width or less are purportedly narrow streets. And looking at the map, just eyeballing it, it looks like about 80% of the streets in the city fall under that narrow definition.

[01:42:40] Public Speaker: And quite frankly, that seems absurd. Anyone who's been around the city can tell you that that's not the reality on the ground. Where did the 40 feet benchmark come from is my question. A standard lane size is 10 to 12 feet, and in that definition on the smaller end of that you could have a four lane road defined as narrow.

[01:43:02] Public Speaker: And until such time as the safe parking program increases in scope and efficacy to adequately meet the needs of residents, considering the parking ban is not only premature but likely illegal because they criminalize homelessness in the absence of and without providing sufficient alternatives for the houseless community.

[01:43:24] Annie Fisher: Hello, thank you for giving us this time. My name is Annie Fisher. I'm a homeowner in Mountain View. I've lived here since 2001 and really love my community and do want it to be a welcoming place for all.

[01:43:38] Annie Fisher: My concern tonight is I'm a little bit confused as to what is the problem that you're trying to address, because when I was here earlier this summer, it was mentioned that there were problems with crime and traffic, and it was sort of this vague concern.

[01:43:55] Annie Fisher: And tonight it seems to be focused on traffic and bicycle safety. Although there was something mentioned about parks, which I wasn't too clear about. And it seems like the way other people have mentioned, if it's specifically about traffic and bike safety, well, let's look at those problems really specifically. Where are the problems? Where are the danger places? What can we do to make those places safer, rather than looking at a ban on RVs?

[01:44:21] Annie Fisher: Also, if it's not about banning RV dwellers, would you make a commitment to finding an equivalent number of parking places for RVs to the ones that will be off limits due to this new banning them from narrow streets? So would that be a possibility to identify streets where temporarily until you can come up with a more complicated solution to housing in this area, people would have a safe place?

[01:45:00] Michael Kahn: Good evening. I'm Michael Kahn. I'm a homeowner here in Mountain View. I've lived in the town for a little over 20 years. And I'm also a bicycle commuter. I came here tonight on my bike.

[01:45:11] Michael Kahn: And I'll echo a lot of what's been said already. In the places where I feel unsafe on my bicycle, it's never because of the RVs being parked on the street. There are, as we've seen, a lot of other issues that could be addressed for bicycle safety. I don't think this is really the place to start.

[01:45:31] Michael Kahn: I was also struck in looking at the two maps that they seem to leave very, very few spaces left. And the possibility that maybe some streets that are open or that are closed to RV parking right now could be opened subsequently, that seems to me a very poor substitute for making it truly safe for vehicle dwellers in our community.

[01:46:06] Michael Kahn: I know that the safe parking issue is next, but I'm really wondering where folks are expected to go. If these restrictions are passed, I think it's quite possible that they won't simply leave the community. They'll be forced into tents and to other solutions that are much less safe for them and just perpetuate the problem. So I urge you to reject these restrictions. Thank you.

[01:46:40] Paul Wise: Good evening. My name is Paul Wise. I thank you, honorable council and mayor, for allowing me to speak on this issue. Throughout the evening we've heard a great deal of comment about, for example, the 9th Circuit Court decision, Martin versus Boise, saying that criminalizing homelessness is against the 8th amendment.

[01:47:01] Paul Wise: We've heard that really what people believe you are trying to do is circumvent that by making the streets limited to a narrow street at 40 feet, which is a way of criminalizing homelessness in the hopes that the motor vehicle residents will move out of Mountain View.

[01:47:18] Paul Wise: So you're creating a regional problem. I'm sure that you're aware that every homeless person costs a municipality over $35,000, and homelessness in itself is almost a $10 billion problem in this country.

[01:47:33] Paul Wise: In my home city of Denver, we started something similar to this called a camping ban. The very next year, 260 people died from being exposed. Now it's a little colder there. I'm not saying that will happen here. But what it has happened is this last municipal election there was a huge turnover in council, whereas three incumbents who expected to win lost to people who had never run before.

[01:47:55] Paul Wise: I'm only bringing that up because people understood that it was the wrong decision. And without the foresight to consider the future ramifications, both in cost and requirements of public service, and the fact that you're creating a regional problem regardless of what Governor Newsom said, I urge you to reject this. Thank you.

[01:48:20] Public Speaker: Yeah. If moral appeal carried any weight with this legislative body, then I don't think that we'd be here, all of us for the fourth or fifth time, however many times we've been here asking you not to do this.

[01:48:35] Public Speaker: So let me then just say that personally I find it a very short-sighted process that we've undertaken. From actually engaging and speaking to the people who live in these RVs, one thing that I found is that, you know, they actually work here in Mountain View.

[01:48:50] Public Speaker: The unstably housed, whether theyre living in RVs, cramped up with two other families even, they work on our Castro Street. They clean this City Hall. They really are integral to our economic engine.

[01:49:08] Public Speaker: So I actually find it very short-sighted to try and get rid of these people when they are actually serving as the backbone of our economy. I was walking in Palo Alto, and this place I'd never even heard about it, the Prolific Oven, but when I walked up to the door it said, we are shutting down after however many hundred, theoretically, years in business because we can't afford to pay the labor, and people can't live here.

[01:49:37] Public Speaker: So just think about that. Do you really want to be another Palo Alto? Do you really want to have a vibrant economy? You can't have your cake and eat it too. Thanks.

[01:49:53] Michael Truhia: Good evening Mayor, Vice Mayor, and City Council. My name is Michael Truhia and I'm here on behalf of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley and our co-counsel at the ACLU of Northern California and Disability Rights Advocates.

[01:50:05] Michael Truhia: The proposed ordinances along with existing parking regulations would leave virtually no spaces in the entire city of Mountain View for oversized vehicles to park. This amounts to a de facto ban of oversized vehicles that would create the same constitutional issues as a ban implemented simply through a single ordinance.

[01:50:28] Michael Truhia: So, we're still concerned that enforcement of these ordinances would violate the 8th Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, the 14th Amendment's equal protection and due process clauses, the 4th Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act and their state counterparts.

[01:50:50] Michael Truhia: So in sum, we urge City Council to heed the concerns of the vehicle residents here tonight and move forward in a way that does not involve unconstitutional parking restrictions. Thank you.

[01:51:12] Hala Alshawani: Hello, good evening. My name is Hala Alshawani. I'm a Mountain View resident for about 24 years. I am urging City Council to reject the proposed ban on oversized vehicles.

[01:51:26] Hala Alshawani: Especially I didn't realize that it was used, the justification tonight was in the name of bicycle lane safety and access to parks. It seems to me that it is very unrealistic and very unjustified when affordable housing is not available to working and low-income families.

[01:51:46] Hala Alshawani: Please disband this proposal and please find a real solution to everyone who wants to work here and live here. Especially considering that we live in a city that has probably the most prosperous and wealthy industry in the whole world. Thank you.

[01:52:16] Steve Peters: Hi, my name is Steve Peters. I live and bike to work in Mountain View. I want you to reject these ordinances. I think framing these restrictions around bicycle safety is disingenuous. There's more targeted ways to address those concerns. Red curbs, signages for visibility, as Lenny showed.

[01:52:37] Steve Peters: And a car with its doors open is much wider than seven feet. That gives me more concern than RVs. And based on that, if you're going to ban RVs, you could use the same reasoning to ban all on-street parking. I care deeply about my neighbors and I want us to embrace a spirit of abundance. Let us act not in fear, but with power and with love and with a sound mind. Thank you.

[01:53:11] Leona Pierce: Hi there. My name is Leona Pierce and I'm a homeowner in Shoreline West and I would like to advocate for the members of our community that live in RVs.

[01:53:19] Leona Pierce: In the last three years about 300 older, more affordable apartments in Mountain View have been taken off the market and planned with plans to redevelop the property into for-sale housing. If affordable housing demolition far exceeds affordable housing construction being approved by the city, then we need a real solution to the housing crisis and banning RVs from our city is not a real solution.

[01:53:42] Leona Pierce: All this will do is increase the number of residents living in cars or sleeping in city parks. What I would like for the City Council to do is to create a city-sponsored RV park that has enough space for every RV that fulfills the City of Mountain View's live-work policy.

[01:53:57] Leona Pierce: This will give our residents an opportunity to live with dignity off the streets and pay what they can afford to live in Mountain View, which could be a fee to cover the services. Thank you.

[01:54:21] Public Speaker: Okay. If you impose the RV ban, it won't make things better. Traffic before 7 at night will be more crowded and after 7 in the morning will be way more crowded.

[01:54:32] Public Speaker: And then you'll have all these vehicles where they're all of a sudden trying to figure out where they're going to park in the daytime in the middle of the busy traffic of a busy day of business activities.

[01:54:46] Public Speaker: If you declare all the streets too narrow, that will be cruel and unusual punishment to the occupants of at least 207 RVs in Mountain View now. That could be 350 or more people who within a matter of a few weeks could end up homeless once your police go issuing tickets, having a feeding frenzy of ticket issuing for vehicles all of a sudden being banned throughout the city.

[01:55:15] Public Speaker: Whether it's because of your new narrow street ridiculous idea or your just other ridiculous idea, they'll basically you're just justifying the theft of their property, their vehicles within a few weeks as they accrue the police basically like shooting fish in a barrel handing out tickets so they'll all be within a few weeks losing all their anywhere to live.

[01:55:45] Public Speaker: So all of a sudden you'll have about 300 more homeless people relegated to the bushes or riding the 22 bus, which already is stressed. Thank you.

[01:55:56] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Just want to remind folks to turn in a blue card either before or after you speak so we have record. Thank you.

[01:56:05] Marilyn Wiggleby: Good evening. I'm Marilyn Wiggleby. I've lived in Mountain View and owned a home for 31 years. I'm also on the board of directors of the Mayview Health Clinics and a Hope's Corner, and over the years I've known many, many RV and vehicle dwellers.

[01:56:19] Marilyn Wiggleby: I appreciate your empathy toward the homeless in the past and I hope you will pass a plan before a ban. A rigid timeline is going to have unintended consequences as many have pointed out.

[01:56:32] Marilyn Wiggleby: Without a long-term plan, vehicle dwellers are going to move around. They have been here or they're going to sift down and become more impoverished. Those who are displaced by a ban are people like you and me. They're workers, they're seniors, they're college students, they're children living with their families. They're adults who have had serious illnesses and have recovered but have deficits and have sifted down. And there are those with current medical issues that are getting treatment.

[01:57:00] Marilyn Wiggleby: I can't imagine that Mountain View, known for its leadership and compassion, will vote for a ban without a long-term policy to support these residents.

[01:57:11] Marilyn Wiggleby: I can speak to this personally. When I was in middle school, our small family farm could no longer make it, and large farmers moved in. My dad bought a small trailer and my sister and I moved into our pickup truck to live. We were fortunate that the town we moved to to work in let us stay in the city park until we could get on our feet again.

[01:57:34] Marilyn Wiggleby: I can tell you I would not be standing here today if it had not been for the compassion of that park.

[01:57:47] Joan McDonald: Joan McDonald, homeowner in Mountain View since 1960. I know that all of you were not on council when some of the office approvals happened.

[01:58:12] Joan McDonald: However, your predecessors and you also have created a good deal of the problem by lots of office space and not enough catch up for affordable housing. I know Mountain View has done a lot, but we also created a good deal of the problem ourselves in the past.

[01:58:42] Joan McDonald: Banning the vehicle dwellers is not an answer. It is not compassionate, it is not empathetic, and it is uneconomical for the City of Mountain View. A second concern I have is I don't know where the 40-foot narrow streets came in. I believe that there's a code that says a narrow street is 20 feet.

[01:59:24] Sherry Amling: Sherry Amling, Mountain View. I'm not sure that the majority of the speakers tonight have even read what you've written. Because what you wrote is very thoughtful and thorough, you put a tremendous amount of work into it, and it will be the first time in all these years that there's going to be any vetting to see who really lives or works in Mountain View.

[01:59:49] Sherry Amling: I've been to these meetings when people have stood up and said, I have a friend who had to go into a RV and they came from Sunnyvale so they had to move here on the street. I had a friend who came from Santa Clara so they had to move here on the street. I had a friend who came from Menlo Park so they had to come here on the street.

[02:00:09] Sherry Amling: This is a regional problem. It is not only Mountain View's problem. I'm very pleased that you have gone through the work that you have and if people would read what you really wrote, it is compassionate. It does take care of things for the first time something is being done and you're not just kicking it down the road.

[02:00:31] Sherry Amling: And thank you very much. I wish people would read what you wrote, and they would see that what you're doing is positive and progressive. For the first time, very clearly in the last election, some people were not re-elected specifically because they would not handle this. Well, this ship has sailed everybody and get on board. Thank you.

[02:01:07] Megan Frailey: Hi, Megan Frailey, thank you. I would like to speak to the importance of civility and what kind of civility I hope to see tonight. Civility is not a neutral set of rules. Standards of civility in the public square are defined by the powerful, who often use adherence to the standards they set as a way to silence dissent, particularly when forwarded in response to critical dissenting speech.

[02:01:27] Megan Frailey: When the little guy takes a stand and objects to the disastrous discourse being peddled by those in power, they're attacked for being uncivil. Sidestepping the content of a critique in order to police the tone makes social decorum a weapon of oppression. For individuals to interact as equals, Americans have often violated standards of civility set by those in power.

[02:01:44] Megan Frailey: Focusing the civility conversation on the audience versus the council has a perhaps more insidious consequence, deflecting blame. It's everyone else's behavior that's the problem, they're the ones who need to control themselves. Please do not deflect responsibility for doing what is right.

[02:01:57] Megan Frailey: I ask that the council consider deeply what it truly means to be civil in the policy that it passes tonight. Is it civil to ask vehicle residents with no place to go to wake themselves and their children up at 2:00 a.m. to move their vehicle? The vehicle restrictions put forward tonight are not civil. When you vote tonight, be truly civil, listen to the people you represent, the ones who gave you the power that you now hold in your hands. Thank you.

[02:02:24] Phil Mastercall: Evening, my name is Phil Mastercall. I'm the co-founder of the Winner Faith Collaborative in Santa Clara County. I appreciate the mayor allowing me to speak. I will say that we have met with the city manager's office to give input as to various models of safe parking, but I'm going to try to limit my comments here for the parking situation.

[02:02:45] Phil Mastercall: And I know that this is an issue that you believe that you are solving with parking. However, the question is what are the unintended consequences? And to do this, we can look at examples of cities who have done this. San Francisco six years ago started systematically closing miles, miles, miles of parking to oversized vehicles before they had put in place any plan of where they would go.

[02:03:13] Phil Mastercall: And a lot of these people were not only living and working in San Francisco but also operating these vehicles as part of the transportation and repair services for many residents and businesses in San Francisco. So it was a little bit short-sighted. Also in Seattle, they did the same thing.

[02:03:33] Phil Mastercall: Both these cities after the parking bans were instituted saw incredible epidemics of tent cities and people living on the streets and it's created major problems. You can read about San Francisco and Seattle. This is an issue that you don't have to recreate the wheel on. If you look at the Santa Barbara model, it's very clear. Santa Barbara wanted to close all of their streets downtown to the oversized vehicles. But first what they did is they found sites, public city sites and private sites. And I think we should do that and push this off until then.

[02:04:11] Devin Johnson: My name is Devin Johnson, I live in Mountain View. I was here at the meeting a few months ago, and this meeting is very similar. The one person speaking for this ban spoke of no substance once again. And everybody else has been, unsurprisingly.

[02:04:35] Devin Johnson: It's very frustrating, and I know that I'm not just speaking for myself here because there are other people behind me who have spoken as well. The last time that I was here, some of you said, where are those people? Where are those people supporting the ban or against the ban when we were right in front of you?

[02:04:59] Devin Johnson: And at the same time, you're saying, I have so many people telling me that this ban is the way to go. And they were nowhere to be found at this meeting a few months ago. It's the same thing today. And the question that I want to ask again is why? Why are you trying to do this so quickly? What is the rush that is here now that wasn't there years ago?

[02:05:27] Devin Johnson: That is making you not just wait to decide, like think about these things first. We already know that the safe parking will not happen in time for the parking ban. So I mean that's all I got time for, but thank you.

[02:05:52] Susan Barkin: I'm Susan Barkin. In 1972 I bought my little three bedroom two bath tract house for 35,000 which I was able to finance on my teacher's salary of 8,000 a year. And I look around at the houses in my neighborhood, I look around at the apartment complexes, I see the rents rising ever, ever higher.

[02:06:15] Susan Barkin: In my own neighborhood there is a group of 40 medium priced apartments and I just saw a big sign that says a developer wants to buy that, tear them down, displace 30 families and build a 60 unit high-rise luxury condominium set and three houses.

[02:06:35] Susan Barkin: We all know what's happening on Rock Street. More and more affordable housing is being displaced in favor of high-priced things for the profit of developers. All of these people are going to be rendered either homeless or many of them will have to be living in their vehicles because they have no other place to go if they want to stay with their jobs and if they want to stay have their children stay in the schools.

[02:06:58] Susan Barkin: So this problem is only going to get bigger because of the way the housing crisis is continuing. So I certainly beg you to let people stay where they are until more housing can be built. Certainly I drive on Shoreline almost every day, I go past those vehicles, I don't see a problem. I don't see a problem on Crisanto. I don't see a problem on Gemini. These are all close to me. And sometimes I walk in those neighborhoods, sometimes I drive. Thank you.

[02:07:37] Mike Fischetti: Uh, Mike Fischetti, privileged homeowner, 30 years. Uh, I've been trying to figure out for the longest time, uh, where the demand to get RVs off the street is coming from. It really doesn't seem to be coming from the 58% of the people in our city who are renters who are at risk of being on the streets themselves.

[02:07:59] Mike Fischetti: It doesn't seem to be coming from the public health department. It doesn't seem to be coming from the bicycle coalition. And it doesn't seem to be coming from a large part of the population who see themselves at risk for landing on the streets themselves because of a rent increase that they might have, or their spouse may die or they might be divorced and they lose social security, or they'd have a medical illness, or the drug costs go up, or their job hours are curtailed, or they have a disability payment that doesn't increase with inflation, or they age out of foster care.

[02:08:31] Mike Fischetti: No, I think that this demand for getting the RVs off the streets has emanated from this council. And the way I look at it is what the effect is, is going to increase the number of displacements, which was recently clearly demonstrated in the recent homeless count, where we know that this is not just a local but it's a regional problem.

[02:08:57] Mike Fischetti: I think you've created a schism in this community. I think your effort is not very constructive. I think it's an embarrassment to Mountain View just as our neighbors are beginning to step up. For me it feels cruel and it's not a very good legacy for you all to leave. Thank you.

[02:09:26] Malia Perez: So good evening council members and those in attendance. My name is Malia Perez and I am a resident of Mountain View. I've lived here for 13 years, my children have attended school in this area for over 20 years, and I have served the underserved in this community for those 20 years. I am an executive director of a nonprofit who serves children in Mountain View, Los Altos, Palo Alto.

[02:09:50] Malia Perez: And so I'd like to believe that I'm here on behalf of some of those that might not speak up for themselves. But I'd also like to say I'm one of the underserved. I am a family, a single mom of four children. I live in below market rate housing and I am one or two paychecks away from homelessness. This very much affects me personally.

[02:10:13] Malia Perez: This is, and when I work with families, they often say, well, you don't understand. And I say, yes, I understand. I have multiple jobs to be able to live here in Mountain View. So what else I'd like to say, so I am against what's in front of us today.

[02:10:31] Malia Perez: Mountain View is the birthplace of solutions. The namesake of Silicon Valley was birthed right on San Antonio. Mountain View City Council, the world is watching. They are watching to see what Mountain View is going to do with the problem that is in front of us for the least of those amongst us.

[02:10:49] Malia Perez: In the spirit of Silicon Valley and the vibrant startup community that is here in this renowned region, I urge council to pause, seek out the inhabitants that are affected.

[02:11:04] Amanda Cole: Hello, my name is Amanda Cole. I just can't believe that this is happening. Oh my gosh is my response. Who is against this? When I'm living in my van on Crisanto, I do see a guy with two pugs with lighted collars with a cell phone talking to the city council members or leaving a message that he doesn't like the sound of the generators that are about a mile from his house. He has to walk about a mile to find and hear them.

[02:11:33] Amanda Cole: And we are not at all near any residents. We are near parks where these kids can play. My friends don't want me not to be here. They enjoy my presence. I'm an artist, a grandma. I also have been in a blues band and have done many benefits for certain causes. I also have worked at the food closet and the streets team.

[02:12:00] Amanda Cole: I like to eat at the Prolific Oven. I am very sad that they are leaving because there's no one to work there. I used my vote, my Mountain View vote to keep in the compassionate city council members. That didn't work. I am ashamed of the people that were voted in and I am ashamed of my community for voting those people in. Thank you.

[02:12:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, seeing none, we'll close the public input portion and bring it back to council. Are there any other questions or for discussion?

[02:12:59] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Thank you. I will only be supporting parking changes if they're phased in with solutions like safe lot or emergency shelter solutions. Possibly linked to our housing emergency shelter crisis declaration or some other phasing process. I think that's what I'll say for now. Thank you.

[02:13:36] Councilmember Chris Clark: So I'll just state something similar at the outset. I think just in getting to this point, you know when we had our meeting over the summer, I think I'd advocated I think a phased approach where we could look at health and safety and other issues initially and then consider other things on other timelines if necessary and addressing those things over time.

[02:14:04] Councilmember Chris Clark: And I think tonight what's before us I think just isn't exactly what I had in mind. And so I'm open to discussion with others, but I don't think that the recommendation is what I had in mind and I don't think that I can support it in its current form without looking at as Councilmember Hicks said, other ways to proceed on a different timeline basically and tying it to other sort of specific needs or goals.

[02:14:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I do have a question for staff regarding the safe parking. So the timing of when that comes online, could you remind us of that?

[02:14:55] City Staff: There are varying timelines for the different lots and there is a chart that will show you

Segment 4

[02:15:00] City Staff: that's a part of the presentation that gives you the estimates. But the first two city lots will be in November in terms of availability and we're ramping up to provide service at those, those locations.

[02:15:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[02:15:15] City Staff: And that chart will be shown in a later presentation.

[02:15:18] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Oh, I was gonna say I didn't remember seeing it. Right. Safe parking, 7.2. Thank you.

[02:15:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[02:15:33] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So, um, first of all, I'd like to thank staff for their countless hours of work on this issue.

[02:15:40] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, it's, I think, um, you know, very thorough, um, very comprehensive, and also very thoughtful. And I appreciate your responsiveness to, um, our concerns and our interests and, and, um, as well as balancing that with, um, what we've heard from other community members.

[02:16:02] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, in light of this, and you know, we have been discussing this issue for some time. Um, this issue actually came about before my time.

[02:16:12] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And so when we talk about phasing, um, I would, you know, I would argue that we have been phasing this. And, um, we're at a point where, you know, at some point in time, we just have to make some decisions.

[02:16:26] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And they're not easy. Um, you know, I'm, I'm not excited or happy to do this, but that's what we are here to do is to make some of those tough decisions.

[02:16:38] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I think that our community, uh, you know, we try to balance all of our needs and, and the concerns that are raised. Um, tonight we are talking about safety.

[02:16:49] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And frankly, from my perspective, I have discussed and brought up the safety issue. Um, I think folks have maybe misheard me or misunderstood what I was trying to say, but there really are safety concerns.

[02:17:03] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And some of the folks who, you know, are talking against the ban today have even brought up issues of safety. So, um, I, I appreciate what staff has done and is recommending.

[02:17:13] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I am ready to move forward on this, um, from a safety perspective. I don't, we're not talking about safe parking right now, that will come later.

[02:17:27] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, and if, uh, we want, I guess I look at that issue as a part of a bigger issue. And I know we have issues like, uh, displacement and whatnot on our agenda coming up.

[02:17:39] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And so, you know, there's no one solution to all of this. I think we're trying to couple together as many different solutions as we can.

[02:17:47] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I have my own ideas about displacem- or displacement prevention. Um, I'm looking forward to that discussion. Um, so, you know, putting that aside, this tonight is about, you know, is very specific.

[02:18:01] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And it is about oversized vehicles. We're not singling out any kind of vehicle. Um, we've had emails come in about, um, you know, big, I don't know what they are, um, commercial vehicles that are oversized.

[02:18:16] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I think that is an, uh, something that we should be addressing as well and, and this covers those types of vehi- vehicles.

[02:18:24] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, you know, I, I have been supportive of looking at removing parking on El Camino to allow for bike lanes. I think that's, that's just the way that we need to move forward.

[02:18:39] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I know we have to do it incrementally, but hopefully too as we become more sus- hopefully a more sustainable community, um, we won't be needing all the parking spaces.

[02:18:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, so this is to me just a part of that bigger conversation. So, um, I will be, uh, ready to move forward and supporting staff's recommendation.

[02:19:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Kamei.

[02:19:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Uh, I want to echo the Vice Mayor's uh, thanks to staff. I, I know that there's been hard at work.

[02:19:15] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I also want to, um, thank the county, um, CSA, MOVE, and most importantly, the, the residents, those of you who are in the room, those of people who run into me outside of these chambers, um, those who are not, are not here.

[02:19:32] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think the difficult part as a, a newly elected official is that we have to represent everyone. And not everyone agrees, as we can, as we, as we all know. And, um, I've spent the majority of summer doing my due diligence and educating myself.

[02:19:49] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So I have, um, spoken to Dr. Rudolph. I have spoken to Mr. Myers. I have spoken with county officials. I have spoken to various resident groups. Um, different community stakeholders so I can understand every single person's perspective on this issue.

[02:20:08] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Because that is the role we are in trying to do, make decisions with the best information that we have available, and it's our job to be educating ourselves on that.

[02:20:19] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And, um, this is one of the crises that's not only facing Mountain View or region, but on the national level. Uh, I attended a discussion, um, yesterday by leaders in Sacramento that said that there's, uh, we have a thriving economy in California, which we're very fortunate for, but that thriving economy, it's just not working for everyone.

[02:20:44] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And we're reflecting on that, uh, today. Um, this, the city has invested two million dollars, um, in, um, community services. And I think at the root of what we're trying to do is, um, provide community services.

[02:21:01] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And part of what I've learned in all the research I did this summer is that the city can be part of the solution, but we can't be the only solution.

[02:21:12] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And I think that it's going to involve multi-agency, multi-departmental collaboration to get people the help they need, and actually provide the most valuable thing, which is housing.

[02:21:26] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Uh, Santa Clara County did a homeless survey in which 89% of, uh, re- people surveyed would prefer to be stably housed.

[02:21:37] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And I am trying to do everything I can to push forward, um, affordable housing, both rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing, which I know we'll talk about in the next item.

[02:21:49] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um, but one of the things that, um, we have discussed, and this is the third time we are discussing this, um, in the short nine months I've been here, is um, some phased approach to some parking restriction or enforcement.

[02:22:11] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And looking into some sort of restrictions for safety, or public health, or, um, other issues, I think it's okay to look at. Policymakers need to, to look at information.

[02:22:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And from what I read in, in the staff report and what I heard in the presentation is that we will be looking into these various phased approaches.

[02:22:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And so, you know, I'm thankful to Councilmember Hicks and Clark who's, who mentioned that they're open to discussing kind of the different, um, the different options, um, tonight. And I think that that's something worth dis- discussing.

[02:22:59] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So, um, I just, you know, those are my, my open opening remarks and, and hopeful that we can, um, try to do something where we're not only providing services, trying to actually, um, advocate and push for housing, um, but also make sure that, um, we're addressing the safety concerns that we, we have heard about. Thank you.

[02:23:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Others?

[02:23:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Um, so could I do a first round of everybody before we circle back? Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:23:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. Um, so I, um, as we had discussed in June, my strong preference is also for a phased approach, giving us an opportunity to step up um, some viable alternative places to go. The safe parking, all of the stuff that we'll be talking about in the next item.

[02:24:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, so, uh, I guess echoing what Councilmembers Kamei, Hicks, and Clark have said, you know, open to uh, safety improvements, um, ordinances that, that address um, that issue, but um, but on a more gradual timeline.

[02:24:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, um, from my perspective, um, I think my comments are very similar to the ones made by the Vice Mayor. You know, these are very difficult decisions, um, and topics that we're addressing here, but um, we do need to address them.

[02:24:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Um, I will add that from my perspective, this issue came from residents. Um, and it's our job to address issues that are brought forward.

[02:25:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And while we had a lot of people show up tonight who, um, are of one perspective, there have been a large number of people, um, over the past three years, I guess I'd say, even before some of us were on Council, um, that have been asking us to address this issue and improve safety on our roads.

[02:25:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And we have received a lot of emails. Um, I've had many conversations with folks in the community. I would say that this is probably the one topic that at every single, um, meeting or open office meeting hours that I've had comes up. And people are saying we really want you to do something about this.

[02:25:56] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, um, I feel like I've also educated myself as Councilmember Kamei stated on this issue. And I am prepared to move forward tonight with this, um, ordinance.

[02:26:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And to the comment of phasing, you know, I, I feel like we have been phasing this in over the past three years. Um, this is not a new topic. We've discussed it many, many times, as Councilmember Kamei said, just three times since she's been on Council. And we've talked it many, about it many times before that.

[02:26:36] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, um, we have been phasing this in. And we have been, um, working on the alternative. And when we get to that topic, I'm pretty happy with how much uh staff has been able to do in terms of safe parking.

[02:26:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And, um, I appreciate all that work. I appreciate all the work staff has done for the past three plus years on this topic. It's been very time consuming and very challenging, and um, a new topic for us here.

[02:27:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Um, and so I do want to say thank you for all the work you put into it. It's uh, definitely noticed. Um, but I am pre-pair- prepared to move forward with the um, ordinance that's before us tonight.

[02:27:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Anyone else? Councilmember Hicks, did you have something?

[02:27:37] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Unless you want to take your turn, John. You want to take your turn?

[02:27:40] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So, so I agree with uh, with part of what the Mayor said. I think that the next agenda item I'm hoping can be quite positive. Um, and that's one of the reasons that one of the several reasons that I lean towards a phased approach.

[02:27:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: I would hate that we have some, um, real positive steps in terms of uh, safe parking and emergency shelters, and that we kind of miss the boat on the timing of any possible uh, changes in parking.

[02:28:14] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, so I don't know whether people read uh, and I read so much today I'm not even sure where I read it. But apparently Google has, um, has just announced that they're making a, um, a contribution uh to, an- and maybe I'm stealing your thunder, Tom.

[02:28:34] Councilmember Alison Hicks: A contribution to the Community Service Agency of let's see if I can get the, 150 thousand dollars for um, for uh, for homeless services, uh hopefully focusing on RVs and uh safe parking to some degree.

[02:28:55] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, I'm not describing it completely, but um, and you know, I, I have spoken to Google, I'm sure other staff and council people have as well, it's not that creative an idea to ask Google for money. Um, but but I'd like to think that my speaking to them pushed them to some degree.

[02:29:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: And I think and they also earlier announced a 50 million dollar pledge for um, for homeless services. My understanding is that the fine print on that has not been finalized. But I'm also encouraging them to spend that on um, some model safe lots and so forth within Mountain View as a, as a um, pilot project.

[02:29:45] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Um, and I think I have, I'm sure other council people have been speaking to other uh, corporations and developers as well. I would hate with those positive steps forward like I just said, that we missed the boat. And that's one of the reasons that I, that I feel we can take, that I'm hoping everybody can feel they can take a, a phased approach.

[02:30:07] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Because I think we're really on, I understand for council people who have been on prior to me that it probably doesn't feel this way, but I think that we may be on the verge of some very positive solutions and I would like to get the timing right. And I think we can do that. Thank you.

[02:30:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Kamei.

[02:30:23] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. So, you know, I I pose a question to the, to the phasing. So when we're discussing phasing, what does that look like for my colleagues who have who have mentioned that? I think it would be helpful to understand uh, what that means to you.

[02:30:43] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Councilmember Hicks, and then maybe Councilmember Clark, Councilmember Ramirez, I think it would just be helpful. Thank you.

[02:30:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Clark.

[02:30:52] Councilmember Chris Clark: So I'll, throw out some topics that I've been sort of thought about over the last week and weekend, and, and then even in the last 48 hours given the, the school district's actions. So I, I think for me, what's really important at a high level is that we're, and the Mayor is absolutely right.

[02:31:10] Councilmember Chris Clark: I mean, this isn't happening all at once. We've been working on this for a number of years, and, and deferring action, and trying to do our best to, um, provide um, services in many different ways, um, to, um, um, address these issues.

[02:31:32] Councilmember Chris Clark: And I think, um, to some extent now, um, I, I, I think it's, it's easy to forget about um, you know, the, the amount of time and, and effort that staff and, and others have put into um, addressing this, and I don't want that to be a loss.

[02:31:49] Councilmember Chris Clark: But I, but I also think, you know, I've, I've said along that I'm, I'm willing to look at um, you know, in enforcement mechanisms like this once we have alternatives available like safe parking and things that we'll discuss later tonight. And so those have always been the sorts of things that I think I've thought have been important.

[02:32:12] Councilmember Chris Clark: And so the things that I would think about in terms of phasing this in would be um, changing the, the effective date or the, or the the time at which, you know, this begins to be enforced until after um, you know, all of those lots are online.

[02:32:30] Councilmember Chris Clark: So for example, that wouldn't be, I mean, as proposed now I think by the time the second reading is done and everything takes effect, it would be um, January 1. I'd look at something more like the the the spring or perhaps um, deferred enforcement um, or effective dates that are tied, especially given the last 48 hours, um, tied more to the the school year itself.

[02:32:55] Councilmember Chris Clark: So um, it my goal here isn't to push this out forever, my goal is to do what I've stated all along, which is to tie um, these steps to um, tangible um, other options that people might have instead of just um, instead of just you know doing frankly what many other communities have done and why we're in this situation, which is just adopt outright bans, which we are not doing. Um, or is, is not proposed tonight.

[02:33:28] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um, and I, I just, I think it's, it's imperative that we um, time this a little bit more um, along with um, with safe parking and a lot of the other concerns that folks have I think are very valid have been raised and and including that have changed in the last in the last few days.

[02:33:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:33:49] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. So my, my remarks are fairly similar. Um, you know, when, when we last discussed this in June, um, I, we, we discussed sort of the, um, perhaps exploring tying the effective date of the ordinance that was proposed at that time to the expiration of the, um, emergency shelter crisis declaration, which uh, is um, currently scheduled to expire on June 30th next year.

[02:34:23] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So it ties in nicely with the school year, which is also I think a significant um, uh deadline, I guess for lack of a better word. Um, but it's, it's, it's hard for me to justify uh dramatically increasing um, enforcement while we still have a shelter crisis.

[02:34:45] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And to the best of my knowledge, we haven't really tapped into the tools that the crisis declaration opens up for us, the relaxing of certain building standards and, and that, that kind of thing to enable, um, or to facilitate the creation of emergency shelters.

[02:35:04] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So um, that's, that's an important uh, uh connection for me the the emergency delta um, emergency shelter uh, crisis, and then also the school year. So looking more at that timeframe.

[02:35:19] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, and then hopefully, uh, you know, as the safe parking lots uh, become available, uh, dramatically stepping up our ability also to provide caseworkers and and work with the folks living in vehicles to transition them to more stable living environments.

[02:35:34] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: That'll give us uh an opportunity to uh evaluate the effectiveness of that program. And you know I think right now with with eight spaces you can't transition that many folks as effectively, with potentially 60 or more spaces um, that gives us a chance to to really um, uh improve our our ability to transition um the people living in vehicles to permanent housing.

[02:36:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[02:36:03] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So my question um, I guess continues, I I we you talk about phasing and I appreciate Councilmember Ramirez that at least you're providing some dates. And um you know that's what I'm looking for because we've talked about phasing for yes, me, several years.

[02:36:22] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I think we are phasing this. We're not putting this into effect right away. Uh, it's gonna take time for us to you know, make the signs and put 'em up and do the outreach. And in the meantime, we will have safe parking lots coming online.

[02:36:39] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And again, I you know, I'm trying not to get into that topic, but I think there are other alternatives that we could discuss in terms of how to assist the homeless into housing. And um, you know, I don't think this is again about parking, this is and we're not banning it on all streets.

[02:37:04] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: There still are streets and it's from what I looked at, from what I I think I can estimate, you know, a third of our city is still gonna be available. And so if we have the safe parking lots opening up and we have streets still open, I don't see that it's gonna displace that many folks, maybe they have to move from their current location, but we do still have streets that are are gonna be wide enough for for oversized vehicles to park on.

[02:37:44] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, I again, I think we are phasing this. Um, but if, you know, folks want to throw out dates, then I'm open to hearing that.

[02:38:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Kamei.

[02:38:03] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, I'll throw something out there. Um, so, um, I would um, see if there's any support for a motion to introduce the ordinance for the Class 2 bikeways, um, and then for the narrow streets and parks to return to Council at the same time in spring 2020 or um... you know I think that was a date that was given in the staff report. Um, but I'd like those to the narrow streets and the parks to return to Council at the same time, um, but move forward with the ordinance for bikeways. See if there's any support for that.

[02:38:51] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: If I can just seek clarification of that. The way it's structured right now is, um, you would adopt the ordinance, second reading would be in a month, and it wouldn't be implemented until essentially January 1st. Um, there've been some discussions about postponing it maybe to June, but I'm, I'm not sure I'm tracking exactly...

[02:39:14] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay, so I thought that the narrow streets and the parks, that the parks would come back separately from the narrow streets. And my intent would that they would be come back at the same time, or hold those until the spring or or June, and then move forward with with the bike lanes.

[02:39:36] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Staff hadn't set a timeframe for the parks?

[02:39:40] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, so the the recommendation on the park issue is that's really a turnover to allow access to the parks. It's not a safety issue. Um, so that's on a a different track. And we're actually, I don't know if there's a specific timeline, we were suggesting tying it to some uh redevelopment and and new park projects at the Aquatics Center and Magical Bridge. I think there was a third one as well. Uh, but there's not a definitive timeline for those right now.

[02:40:07] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay. So given no definitive timeline for those, I think when I had read the staff report my hope would was that the narrow streets and parks, whenever that time would be, that we could evaluate then. Um, that would that would have been my, my hope and see if there's any support for for that. Um, but move forward with bikeways within ordinance.

[02:40:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:40:42] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: I appreciate um, the compromise offered by Councilmember Kamei. I think part as I understand the staff recommendation part of the the elegance of the the compromise is it we could better we'll we'll have the analysis of the streets that you're proposing in the staff recommendation to uh to evaluate over the next several months. And have the resolution prepared with precisely which streets and which segments of which streets will be um will be covered by the ordinance. Right now we're adopting potentially an ordinance without the benefit of knowing precisely what's covered. So I like the idea of having a more comprehensive analysis looking at the parks, you know, which narrow streets would be covered post analysis, and then also I assuming you're you're also including the the 40 foot, so reviewing the existing restricted parking on the streets greater than 40 feet, I think to the Mayor's point potentially lifting some restrictions if it's deemed appropriate. But without having the benefit of that analysis, it's it's hard for me to support adopting the narrow streets ordinance right now. So I would I would support a compromise to that effect. Thank you.

[02:42:06] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: So just to chime in, I apologize for not understanding your intent before. That an- that analysis we expect to come back um in November, December timeframe when we've done the a specific review of of all the streets. So that would be if if that's Council's desire to tie it to that, it would be probably December.

[02:42:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember McAlister.

[02:42:32] Councilmember John McAlister: A question for you. I've been advocating to me parks is one of the easiest issues to resolve because of children, bikes, people coming and going. So why would you want to postpone parks? Why can't that be done sooner than later? I mean, it's fairly straightforward. We're not banning, we're just putting time frames to peop- cars moving. So I know bikes uh RVs get near some of the parks and they uh push the bicyclists and I see it all the time on Shoreline over here at Eagle where they're pushing people into the the traffic lanes. So why would you want to uh, why can't we do parks sooner than later?

[02:43:15] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: So I think...

[02:43:17] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Just to clarify, that what we're talking about at parks is not related to oversized vehicles. It's about all vehicles, which is why we're separating it from this issue. Um, tonight we're addressing safety issues whether there's either a narrow street or a bike lane. Uh, access to parks and turnover of vehicles around parks is a separate issue that would impact all vehicles and and so we're recommending putting that on a separate track.

[02:43:43] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay. And when would that be?

[02:43:46] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Well, I'm trying to find, I thought there was a Council question about it that I'm not finding, but I say we're, we're suggesting it be a new work plan item and it be tied to some development in parks that are coming up in the next year or so.

[02:43:59] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, that'd be a great place to start our phasing in, parks.

[02:44:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Hicks.

[02:44:13] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So one of the problems I would have with with putting parks first is we've talked about um unhoused families with children that are unhoused. And it seems like the majority of them, from what I've been hearing, are at around Rengstorff Park, so to me that would probably not be good timing.

[02:44:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Uh, Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[02:44:42] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So I'm gonna try to start things moving. Um, it seems like there's consensus at least on the bicycle lanes. So I will make a motion to introduce an ordinance amending articles 1 and 8 of chapter 19 of the Mountain View City Code related to oversized vehicle parking on certain streets adjacent to class 2 bikeways, to be read in title only, further reading waived, and set second reading for October 22nd, 2019.

[02:45:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So we have a motion by Vice Mayor Abe-Koga and I seconded it.

[02:45:17] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Did just to clarify, does that include 1B as well or just 1A?

[02:45:21] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I just uh, I'm just gonna do the...

[02:45:27] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: 1B is to direct staff to evaluate certain streets.

[02:45:32] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, direct staff to evaluate certain streets adjacent to class 2 bikeways, yeah, sorry. And return before the end of the year with a res- resolution prohibiting biking parking of oversized vehicles on specified streets adjacent to class 2 bikeways.

[02:45:49] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: And also there's just one clerical addition, to a definition of oversized vehicles.

[02:45:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yes. That's it. Yeah. You can just incorporate that by reference.

[02:45:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, am I... is there language I, I just makes a c-

[02:46:03] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Uh, yes, you can, you can say um the corrected definition as provided by staff.

[02:46:09] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, so uh, this includes the corrected definition of oversized vehicles as mentioned by staff.

[02:46:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So we have a motion on the floor. Is there any um, discussion about that? I'd say we can vote. Well, Councilmember McAlister. Uh, we have a motion, which is um, bicycle lane safety A and B. Which is to introduce the ordinance and then staff comes back with the maps so we can see it specifically.

[02:46:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Made a motion. I yield.

[02:46:57] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Margaret and I seconded it. So I just wanted to bring you up to speed because um, well, except Councilmember Clark just jumped in the queue.

[02:47:04] Councilmember Chris Clark: It's just a question for staff. So when, I, presumably you would bring back the analysis in November, December when we do the second reading, is that when, or or would you bring that back separately?

[02:47:20] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, it's not tied to the second reading. We think the analysis right now second reading is set for October 22nd. We will not have the analysis at that point. Oh, the bike lanes, if we're only doing that piece might be a little faster than the narrow streets. Uh, but at this point, the intent was to bring them both back probably late November or December.

[02:47:41] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay. And then the second question is, um, so the, I think one of the most impacted um, segments here looking at bike lanes would be um, would be Shoreline, and so my my only question there is...

[02:47:58] Councilmember Chris Clark: Okay, so if, if an analysis isn't coming back before the second reading, if we're going to set the effective date, we should set the effective date now.

[02:48:07] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: It, it can't be implemented, and Nicole jump in. It can't be implemented until that resolution is adopted. It, well, it can not be enforced until the resolution is adopted. It would be technically effective 30 days after second reading. And now I'm playing lawyer. I'll let Nicole be the real lawyer.

[02:49:12] City Staff: No, no, I mean that's correct. So the ordinance would technically be effective 30 days after the second reading, but without specifying the locations where parking would be prohibited, there's nothing to enforce. Yeah. So then it would be adoption of the resolution and again implementing signage for that.

[02:49:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[02:49:32] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And one other quick question for staff. So my, I have this recollection that there is a capital improvement project for Shoreline related to bicycle lanes, and I don't remember exactly when that's programmed, but um, if you happen to have that information, do you, can you share share with us what that project is?

[02:49:57] City Staff: Yes, we're planning to do a slurry seal on um, Shoreline Boulevard and so we will be restriping the street. Um, would it remain a Class 2 bike lane? Yes, it would. Okay, thank you.

[02:50:12] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Any other comments? Okay, we'll call the question. That passes unanimously.

[02:50:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[02:50:33] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I'm going to ask this question again. So what is the interest of those who are looking to phase this, is it June 30th? Is it some other milestone? If you can explain that and be very specific on a date that would be helpful.

[02:50:57] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Hicks.

[02:50:58] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I was interested in the way Councilmember Ramirez spoke about it, tied to the housing shelter emergency which I guess expires in correct me if I'm wrong in June?

[02:51:13] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: It is June 30th and it can be reauthorized by the Council.

[02:51:17] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Right.

[02:51:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So what would the um, expiration of that really mean? Of the shelter emergency?

[02:51:33] City Staff: Uh, the expiration, um again is at the discretion of the Council, but it's based upon findings that were included in the resolution, and if those findings are similar to what that prior analysis was, the Council would consider those at that time when we bring the item forward.

[02:51:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay.

[02:51:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Clark.

[02:51:56] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um, so, as as we talked about in the in the summer, um, I I could um, I I think if we're if we're going to move forward with this, I would be most comfortable tying it to something specific um, like that, with the narrower I think more comprehensive street network.

[02:52:15] Councilmember Chris Clark: The only thing um, in reading through some additional information um, today and and over the weekend, that I think um, I would personally be okay with, um, and I think it might have been in one of the council questions would be um, if there are narrow streets that have a um, um, a centerline, um, then I would um, I think there's a handful of them um, at the roughly 40 feet um, width, then I would be okay exempting um, those, the handful of those, as um assuming that we're going to address the the parks um, turnover at some point.

[02:52:57] Councilmember Chris Clark: So um, that was that was one thing that I, after reading some additional information, would be, I don't think there are that many of them, but there may be some with a centerline that um, that um, would probably be okay. Um, I think um, that was my understanding, but I I'm open to other suggestions too.

[02:53:18] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Can you explain um, the thinking behind that? Like what's different between a street with a line versus a street without a line?

[02:53:26] Councilmember Chris Clark: You have a, you have a clear sort of visual cue and visual separation um, uh as to sort of where in the lane you're supposed where on the on the road of that width you're supposed to be, and I think that would only be probably 40 or 40 plus.

[02:53:42] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um, but um, it, in my mind it it provides some greater separation, a visual cue, and for me is not as um, um, as opposed to a road that just doesn't that is that width but doesn't have any um, visual cues as to who's supposed to be on what side and and when you're clearly you're crossing a centerline.

[02:54:03] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So you're saying that um, if there's an oversized vehicle and a bicycle, that the visual cue is for the bicyclist? Or for the then another vehicle that's driving on that road?

[02:54:18] Councilmember Chris Clark: I'm I'm thinking of the case where you have um two cars coming at the same time. Um, or if you're um, or if if a car needs to sort of slow down and wait for a bicyclist to go, they know not to cro- they have a centerline that they know not to cross. Um, I just think there's a v- there's a significant difference between having a a centerline um, and a visual cue on a road um, that um, than than not.

[02:54:52] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Um, so, if we're talking about um, a different date, then what was before us, um, I guess I kind of feel like the safe parking when it comes online, because that's the alternative, is a date that makes sense to me.

[02:55:08] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And we haven't talked about that one yet, but a lot of that comes online this year. So, I guess I'm trying to understand why folks would want it past that date if that's the uh, you know, a place where oversized vehicles could park. What, what's the rationale for a date past that?

[02:55:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I'm not sure you wanted to answer that, but you're in the queue. Go ahead. But first to Councilmember Clark's point...

[02:55:46] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And first to Councilmember Clark's point, I I'm inclined to agree. I think the centerline does provide a material safety benefit as a as a cyclist. For instance, if there is no centerline, um, I tend to ride generally in the center of the street. There's just the, you know, there's there's a, um, that's me, yeah, I can't speak for everybody, but I feel like you know when when there's a centerline, I I'm I'm inclined more so to stay within my lane.

[02:56:20] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: When there isn't a centerline, there is a perceived safety advantage to being more in the center of the of the entire street just for maximum visibility and that kind of thing. So I I also would be interested in in narrowing the scope um, uh to um provide an exemption for for streets with a centerline.

[02:56:40] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: But to answer the the Mayor's question directly, I think, I think, different ways of approaching this, but um, I, I the, it, it feels, it's difficult for me personally, I'll just speak you know, in in those terms, to, to ramp up enforcement when we have declared a a shelter crisis. So maybe it's more of a philosophical kind of approach.

[02:57:05] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, you know, once we alleviate the crisis, which is the intention of the declaration, um, then that means presumably that there are some viable alternatives available. Um, and it it also gives us time to while the safe parking program is in effect to transition as many folks as we can to stable housing.

[02:57:24] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, so, uh that would be those would be my um, that would be my interest in in tying it to tying the effective date of this ordinance to the expiration of the uh, of the shelter crisis.

[02:57:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Hicks.

[02:57:43] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Yeah, and an additional reason is that I think we may have, I agree with Councilmember Ramirez that I would like to, that I'm not comfortable um, going going along with further pa- parking restrictions before we've um, ceased the shelter crisis. In addition, I think that you know, some of us have been talking to a lot of people about additional lots and additional solutions, and I would like time for some of those to come online.

[02:58:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember McAlister.

[02:58:17] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, let me give you some perspective on what we've been doing for the last four years and and your concerns. Where is my good friend? Passed out? Oh, he stepped out of the room. Oh, there you are. Snuck up on me. Okay.

[02:58:32] Councilmember John McAlister: We've been working on this since 2015, and I always seem to be talking about it. And we've been working with all these corporate clients, we've been talking with the county, we've been talking to inter-agencies, community groups. And where are we on safe parking? Eight lots in four years. That there's not a real commitment from all agencies.

[02:58:55] Councilmember John McAlister: We have people say, hey, we're gonna work, we gotta get a task force. The City of Mountain View has been spending three years on this with their, our money, the city's money, doing the task, going getting this information. So I'm curious when you say, well, we gotta get this crisis housing crisis resolved or when's that's going to keep going on? That's date is a, an imaginary date that it's a good idea if we can work on it, but when do you expect this housing crisis to end?

[02:59:24] Councilmember John McAlister: When do you expect after all the work and energy the city and has been working on with all these faith-based situat- people, when do you expect to get all these parking lots? There, I mean, we, I've been looking at this for a long time. That's why I've been pretty quiet sitting up here. And I'm getting frustrated because we have been working, the city, ourselves diligently looking for it.

[02:59:45] Councilmember John McAlister: I talked, and I don't want to get into safe parking, but I mean that's another issue that we roll into. So what's your realistic idea of getting these issues resolved to get you to a point to start making decisions in a face, in a phased way?

Segment 5

[03:00:00] Councilmember John McAlister: that we can help people get that I mean we have spent millions of dollars and we've given hundreds of thousands to CSA to work with those particular issues so what is your realistic expectation of getting those solutions

[03:00:16] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: All right since I was asked directly so I I don't necessarily think safe parking isn't the only form of emergency shelter. Since I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, but since the council first began discussing this problem in addition to the eight safe parking spaces we've also opened up the incidental cold weather shelter, right? And the next item in addition to making more robust the safe parking program also makes modifications to the zoning code to facilitate the creation of emergency shelter. Um we provided I thought great direction related to lot 12 and permanent supportive housing. There are other ways of addressing this need than just finding 200 plus safe parking spaces which I don't believe is possible. So different kinds of need will be met with different kinds of stable housing, stable living environments, right? It's not just going to be safe parking. It's going to include emergency shelter, it's going to include transitional housing. But so all of those things in the aggregate I think will help uh address the problem. Um I hope that's helpful.

[03:01:32] Councilmember John McAlister: No, it's not. You didn't give me a timeline. We've been working on this issue for a long time and I've been supporting a lot of this stuff. So when do you expect, I mean let's start looking at we're dealing with people's lives. What's a realistic idea of when you're going to get all this housing that's going to come along or lot 12. I mean that's two, three years, four years down the road. So give me a try to give me an idea of you want to push some timelines back until certain things happen. Well, if you move something back, what's your expectation that it's going to get done? How many housing are you going to bring on board? I support all this but I just want the newer members of this council to realize we've been working on it this is not new and when people in the audience say you got to do this immediately, where they been for the last four years? So I'm more frustrated with the community at large that they're not stepping up really. Corporate America's not stepping up. So where's your realistic ideas and how we can put it down on paper and start moving this forward.

[03:02:31] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Sure. Um so it depends on how aggressive we want to be in providing for lack of a better term, viable alternatives, right? So for instance if we wanted to and I'm not I mean the challenge is we're starting to get into 7.2 um but just to provide a a taste of an answer um one option would be using the tools that we now have at our disposal by virtue of the shelter crisis declaration, we could turn Rengstorff Community Center into an incidental shelter. We could provide safe parking there. All of those things contribute to this aggregate number of of places to go, right? And that we could do that relatively quickly because that's our property. Um if we wanted to we can you know purchase uh homes or use other public property, right? The Dana Street conversation will come up I think next Tuesday, do we want to use that for temporary shelter or temporary housing? There are a lot of options that are available to us and it just will depend on how aggressively we want to pursue them. And some of those things could be done relatively quickly.

[03:03:52] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So I agree with Councilmember Ramirez and that's what I'm looking forward to discussing because you know at the end of the day and we've heard from the public before there was a debate as to whether you know living in RVs was uh something that folks wanted to do today folks said no that's not really an option and I've never really thought of it as a permanent solution. And I really want for us to discuss other solutions. You know I will argue that we have been doing um everything we can in the realm of housing. We have, you know in May in one three weeks we approved something like 1,500 units, right? Um we're doing affordable, we've done BMR strategies and upping our requirement for inclusionary zoning. So there's things that are happening. I think there's a little bit of a mismatch right now as to the folks who you know we see need need those the housing and what's coming online and I think we can have that discussion about how to match things up better. But tonight we are talking again about oversized vehicle parking and you know I know some folks maybe I'm not the best driver although I've driven for 33 years um but and I mean interestingly these oversized vehicles aren't right now the majority of them aren't necessarily parked in the narrow streets so I guess I question you know how much of an effect this really would have um but if they were to for instance on my street and Allison Street, if we had RVs or even like the you know when we do we have a lot of commercial vehicles park temporarily, but if you park on both sides and then we have these rotaries and I've seen near misses. And and that was something that came up you know we don't want to do things after we have seen accidents happen. We want to be preventative. And you know I've seen it firsthand on my street um we have the you know the AVs automated vehicles and they don't understand, they don't know what's going what this is all about. So this is really to me a concern and it has been a concern. And so I just think that this is a very phased approach. You know we're not we're not banning everywhere. We are leaving room. We are bringing about a hundred safe parking spaces online. Um I think we are you know doing our best. We've done a lot. We're doing a whole lot more than anybody else in this county right now. Um so I would really like for us to just make a decision and address this issue tonight. So you know whether it's June or you know we can pick a day January, June, March, right, but I don't think I agree with Councilmember McAlister, come June we're not going to have solved the housing crisis. So are we going to be faced to to have to extend that you know emergency resolution again? And does that mean that we're just going to keep delaying this? I think we need to tackle that issue separately and tonight so and we can do that later on tonight to start but we have you know we have planned on our agenda discussions to deal with that and I'm more than you know looking forward to that but this is something that I think we need to just resolve this evening.

[03:07:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah I would agree I would like to um address that this evening. I don't think the end of the shelter crisis is a date that I'm sort of you know hanging my hat on for lots of things to be resolved. That just makes it easier to do some things but it doesn't solve any problems. Um and you know as the Vice Mayor said I am happy to have those conversations about um alternatives um and I'm sure we'll do that. But tonight I do want to address the safety concerns and um I would be open if we want to extend it a little bit um but I don't see why it should be tied to the end of the shelter crisis because that really isn't an action to address um you know having the discussions about what are other options is what's going to increase capacity not a shelter crisis declaration. So um I would be open to you know if we want to say at the end of the first quarter um I would be open to that. Um but I do want to address this. Councilmember Hicks.

[03:08:59] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I do still like tying it to the uh shelter crisis expiration in June. I think we just took one big step addressing some of the community's concerns in voting on the the bikeways or bike paths. And I actually wish that our second item 7.2 came first so that we could kind of know you know people may have a lot of creative ideas for moving forward. I personally would like to know what those are before I go further on the um you know some of the other things, the narrow streets and so forth. So I'm still behind uh the June and the shelter crisis as the trigger. Um and I and then I also have another comment on the narrow streets in addition to the ones with the center striping. I was unclear, I it seems to me that some of the narrow streets, I like the idea of narrow streets with a lot of curb cuts, but it seems to me there may be some with very few curb cuts and I would like that to come back as a part of the analysis as well. Thank you.

[03:10:14] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Um so I just wanted to clarify some of my comments earlier. So when I t- attempted to make the motion earlier about bringing narrow streets and parks back together, my attempt was to kind of gather more information um and part of that is in light and and reflecting upon some of the comments that uh were made today about um if folks are renting out RVs, they might not have the ability to to move them. And I'd really like to look at when we discuss 7.2 maybe some things that the council can do to address that issue. Um and so the fe- a lot of the resident feedback I've received is related to bike safety and concerns with being able to to to get around especially with small children. Um and so I feel like that is why I had proposed going forward with with the bikeways. Um but for the narrow streets and parks um particularly for the families as was mentioned in prior comments, um in that high concentration area, they might not have the opportunity to really control moving it. And and I didn't feel I'd like to look at um whether it's end of quarter next year or tying it to the end of the school year or the end of the shelter crisis so that we might be able to address that for some of the concerns that um were brought up earlier. And I'm hoping that we'll be able to discuss that a little bit more in in 7.2. But that was um that was my thought process on it because I think there's more that we can um discuss there. So.

[03:12:16] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Um so I I may need um staff's help here. Um I'm going to try something and incorporate what a few different people have said might be acceptable um to see if we can move forward and um um so so the it's a multi-part motion so I think the the first would be um to introduce an ordinance amending, this is the narrow streets, introduce an ordinance amending articles 1 and 8 of chapter 19 of the Mountain View city code related to oversized vehicle parking on um narrow streets, read in title only, further reading waived, and set a second reading for um um we can do October 20- this is part of the question I have for staff, October 22nd um 2019 um but I I plan to tie this to a date later. And so in like B if you want more time instead of returning this year to perform the evaluation of narrow streets then I we can um you know modify this to give you more time, but if you if you feel like we should proceed with a second reading regardless of when the effective date would be on October 22nd then I'm perfectly fine doing that.

[03:13:32] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Well I have a vested interest in doing as many things as possible in Q1 of 2020. But uh I also see the Public Works Director nodding that more time to do the analysis would certainly be welcome. But it's really up to council you can adopt the ordinance um and have second reading whenever you want, it really doesn't matter because nothing becomes effective until that resolution is adopted and signage uh so what's really I think more critical is if you want to set a date certain for enforcement, you know you you don't necessarily have to tie that to second reading, you just say and it would become effective, the ordinance would become effective on such and such a date pending you know the resolution being adopted.

[03:14:22] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Okay. So um so I read I got all the way to I didn't quite set a second reading. So um read in title only, further reading waived and then um for with the effective date being um um being um basically after the after the end of the shelter crisis. Um so I don't know how specifically if you need a certain number of days after that or if you if we can just specify that um it becomes effective when a shelter crisis is no longer in place or what the best wording of that is.

[03:14:56] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, I think the the clarification that would be helpful is currently the shelter crisis is expected or will expire on June 30th, 2020. So you can set a date certain like that, but as staff has indicated, council has the prerogative to extend the shelter crisis should it find the conditions appropriate. So I think you need to be real clear, are you saying it doesn't become effective until whenever the shelter crisis is, whenever that might be, or is it effective June 30th no matter what?

[03:15:29] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: I I think what I was going to suggest is that we tie it to the shelter crisis as a few people have said is um really important to them. But you know council can always between now and then change the effective date if they wish. They can modify the ordinance. Um they have that option. So if things are for example going quite well in March or April then we can modify um that just like we would any other modify or modifying any other ordinance, I would assume?

[03:15:56] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yes, but that does involve a reintroduction and a uh second reading also.

[03:16:03] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Yeah. No, I'm saying it's tied to the shelter crisis. So we and unless we decide otherwise. So it's it's tied to the end of the shelter crisis so it would become effective um if if it would become effective if if we choose not to extend the shelter crisis in January 1, or if we see in the spring or summer that if we decide in the spring or summer that we don't um that this doesn't make um that tying it the shelter crisis isn't something you want to do based on progress on other things within the city um and related to this, then you can modify it then.

[03:16:46] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Okay. Well, I mean it's basically just saying just like we can with any other ordinance we can modify this um if if things change and you and for whatever reason you don't feel it should be tied to the shelter crisis once we have more information in the spring.

[03:17:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: What additional information would we have?

[03:17:07] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Well, safe parking would all be online. We would know all the questions around what happens during the day when they have to leave, what um um what other actions might the county take, for example on safe parking or be thinking of. What other um I'm guessing oh there's going to be a lot of movement on these things um in the next six months as well. So um I'll start by tying it to the shelter crisis and we'll we'll see where that goes. For B uh basically so tying the effective date to um basically when a shelter crisis is no longer in place um or or it expires and we don't extend it. Um B direct staff to evaluate narrow streets citywide um and return with a a resolution um prior to it doesn't necessarily need to be the end of the year but prior to um the implementation of the ordinance um with the resolution um prohibiting parking of oversized vehicles on specified streets or a portion thereof less than or equal to 40 feet wide. And um and then I think where I where my suggestion earlier belongs is in C um direct staff to return with an analysis of existing restricted parking on uh no it doesn't it actually belongs in B, sorry. In B with the center line yeah so yeah so that's where you're sort of proposing the list of of streets and you could call out which ones are narrow but have center lines and we could decide at that time um whether to include it or not in the resolution.

[03:18:49] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: But just to be clear are you saying identify everything 40 feet or less and just whether or not it has a center line or are you saying exempt those that have a center line?

[03:19:00] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: I'm saying um draft the resolution such that they're exempt but provide the lists so that if we when we look at the resolution if we wish to pull them off we can. Um we can modify the resolution when we adopt it. Um and then um C direct staff to return with an analysis of existing restrictive parking on streets greater than um 40 feet wide and Councilmember McAlister um I I agree with you I think that we should also direct staff to work on um a work plan item to return with recommendations to address parking generally adjacent to and along the frontages of of parks citywide so that we're ensuring um turnover there. So that's my motion and we'll take happy to hear from my colleagues.

[03:19:52] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So we have a motion by Councilmember Clark and a second by Councilmember Hicks. Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[03:19:58] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So I I think we still need to tie it to a date and that's mainly because of you know preparation staff needs to have an idea of when they need to get things going and to this it's again open ended. I understand but I I sometimes you just have to give folks a date to get things moving. As Councilmember McAlister said we've been talking about this since he was mayor in 2015, right? And because there hasn't been a real deadline or some kind of date it's been continuing and I do question you know this is supposed to be a community effort. I appreciate Pastor Leon and you know David and and those who have been working on this but sometimes I think that maybe um others like the corporate community you know if there's no sense of urgency then I don't know if we're ever going to get any more buy-in frankly. And so I feel like this is you know we need to just step things up and get folks to step up if they really think this is an issue for them or a concern. And to keep it open-ended to just keep kicking it down the can I don't think it's resolving anything. And you know I just want to see like let's just try to motivate people to take action now and I think we need to take action now to get others to do the same. So I would be open to it if it's tied to you know I'm making a compromise here I'm going from January to June 30th but it really needs to be tied to a date just in terms of operations of this. So if you would add June 30th and of course that could change if we decide to you know extend the crisis but I think we should just assume that it's going to be June 30th 2020 and move forward with that date in mind.

[03:22:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Kamei.

[03:22:06] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: that was going to be my question to the motion maker and the seconder if if they felt comfortable adding the June 30th 2019 date to the motion with the you know caveat that that could change um as part of the included motion.

[03:22:27] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Hicks.

[03:22:28] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Well I seconded it because it was tied to the shelter emergency so Right and that I think is until June 30th current the current one. So Right so I I uh seconded it because it because we could tie it to that and examine how things were going at that time.

[03:22:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Right. So I think Councilmember Clark actually made the motion that it's the end of the shelter crisis no matter when it is. Not just June 30th. Right?

[03:23:00] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: No matter when... The understanding would be the current shelter crisis ends June 30th. So all the preparations for this would be moving forward assuming a June 30th date. But but my motion is that if we decide to extend the shelter crisis that we should have to re we should have to talk about whether we want to make this effective before the shelter crisis ends. Um and it should default to following the shelter crisis not default to a date certain.

[03:23:30] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So that was my understanding and that's why I seconded it.

[03:23:37] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Okay I think that confused me further. Um but um so I think for clarity purposes, as of right now the end of the shelter crisis is June 30th 2020. If we work on that date with the idea that staff would come back before us and we would reevaluate if we extended the shelter crisis or not or evaluate kind of things that um we're doing in 7.2 you know that's a motion that I would be supportive of if that would that's part of the conceptual design of what you're you and Councilmember Hicks are going for. So we would tie it to the June 30th 2020 end of shelter crisis ideally the item would come back to us before that time so we could do some sort of evaluation if that's still the the date or...

[03:24:36] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Yes we're talking about the same thing except there's there's just one nuance. In one world regardless of whether you extend the shelter crisis or not um this becomes effective. So even if you extend the shelter crisis this becomes effective and I think that's what the vice mayor is is advocating. Um and what I had proposed was that um we would all work toward like this would all be prepared for to be prepared to take effect June 30th. Should we decide not to should we either a not decide to extend the shelter crisis or b we decide to just make it effective June 30th and no longer tie it to the shelter crisis. But um the in the other world it just becomes effective June 30th regardless of the shelter crisis. It's basically it just happens to be a coincidence that June 30th is um the end of this shelter crisis um before we have to renew it.

[03:25:43] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Did you have more Councilmember Clark? You're in the queue. Sorry. So you know I feel like I'm trying to find um a compromise here as well and I would prefer um an effective date that is certain. Because as we've said many times here we've been talking about this for years and I do think we need to make a decision and have a date certain when this takes effect. So um I would prefer you know the staff recommendation. Uh I could compromise on the end of the first quarter. I guess I could compromise on the end of the second quarter which would be June 30th um but it wouldn't be tied to the shelter crisis because I think we're going to have all those conversations independent of this and we're going to continue to make progress um and because we can just extend the shelter crisis I think these need to be separate. So I could support it if it was not tied to the shelter crisis.

[03:26:55] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember McAlister.

[03:26:57] Councilmember John McAlister: So I'm going to make a motion to see if we can just get the date. So I make substitute motion? Yeah. substitute motion or amendment. That we select June the 30th 2020 as our effective date.

[03:27:18] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I'll second.

[03:27:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So we have a motion uh and a second, motion by Councilmember McAlister, second by the Vice Mayor. Just to clarify that includes the other balance of the the motion for the other items.

[03:27:31] Councilmember John McAlister: I was just trying to get the date. Okay. Okay.

[03:27:36] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Just one more clarification. I don't believe the original motion definitively answered the second reading question. Um so we could, as of now we're scheduled to bring that back October 22nd. I just want to make sure that's the intent of the motion.

[03:27:49] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: That's fine.

[03:27:50] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Second reading is essentially kind of a ministerial task. It doesn't affect the effective date, but but we do need certainty on when we bring it back. So it should it should be in the motion.

[03:27:59] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: It is.

[03:28:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. So um I thought uh the vice mayor seconded it somehow I ended up there. Oh, okay, I'll just leave it. Um okay so everyone clear with the motion? The substitute motion? Are there more comments, Councilmember Hicks?

[03:28:38] Councilmember Alison Hicks: Well just I would not be supporting the substitute motion, I would be supporting the original one that's tied to the shelter crisis in part because I think we just made a big step forward with time definite and so I would like the second one to be tied to the shelter crisis.

[03:28:54] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[03:28:56] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And and likewise I'll be supporting the underlying motion and not the substitute. Thank you.

[03:29:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. So let's call the question on the substitute motion.

[03:29:04] City Clerk Lisa Natusch: Mayor can I just confirm that you were the seconder?

[03:29:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yes.

[03:29:07] City Clerk Lisa Natusch: Okay, thank you.

[03:29:18] Mayor Lisa Matichak: That passes four three. Okay, we will close item 7.1. And um we will need to have a motion to start a new topic after 10 p.m.

[03:29:40] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um Madam Mayor, I think there is still item three that staff was asking for direction, was that already?

[03:29:46] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: No, I incorporated that. I read number three.

[03:29:50] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Oh, okay, sorry. Yeah.

[03:29:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. So um why don't we take a well, we should um decide if we're going to start a new topic after 10 p.m. and we have a motion before y'all leave. John.

[03:30:08] Councilmember John McAlister: Second.

[03:30:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: And all those in favor of starting a new topic after 10? Okay. So let's take a 10-minute break.

Segment 6

[03:45:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, we are coming back to order and move on to item 7.2 which is Safe Parking Ordinance amendments to the emergency shelter regulations and other related minor text amendments. And direction associated with safe parking. And we will start with a staff presentation.

[03:45:26] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Thank you again Mayor and City Council members. I'm Kimberly Thomas, Assistant to the City Manager. I'll be providing the overview this evening along with Nicole Right, Assistant City Attorney, and Stephanie Williams, our Zoning Administrator, Planning Manager will also be assisting with questions. Tonight's staff presentation will include background, the safe parking ordinance provisions and locations, permit processes and exemptions, emergency sheltering, modifications and other amendments since this was last discussed in June of 2019, as well as overall staff recommendations.

[03:46:08] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: As has been discussed earlier, homelessness and the inadequate supply of housing in the region, particularly housing that is affordable and accessible to people in need, has been an issue that council has grappled with for many years. Mountain View has actively responded and implemented a multi-pronged approach to help residents in need and maintaining the quality of life for our neighborhoods. But the county-wide data shows that for every household housed, nearly three more enter the system. This has created an environment where increasing numbers of people are sleeping on the streets, in cars, RVs, abandoned properties, or other locations not meant for living. Mountain View's homelessness is up 46% from the homelessness population in 2017. With vehicle living ranging from 200 to 300 over the past two years, comprised of RVs predominantly and also passenger vehicles.

[03:47:01] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: A bit of background that's been highlighted earlier, the long road on safe parking. Lots of Love was launched in July of 2018 and is operated by Move, the local nonprofit that was supported locally by the council. In December of 2018, the council also approved an unfinished lot requiring substantive work for safe parking for up to 10 vehicles on a lot owned by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation. In March of 2019, the council authorized the city-controlled lots for temporary use at Shoreline during the off-season and also the VTA Evelyn lot stop, that location that we have just beginning to wrap up negotiations on. Then in June, staff presented a presentation highlighting parameters for a future safe parking ordinance, as well as being directed at that time to look at emergency shelter regulations for potentially additional zoning districts.

[03:47:59] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: In September, staff took the item to the Environmental Planning Commission and reviewed the proposed ordinance on September 4th of 2019. The EPC adopted a resolution recommending the city council approve the ordinance to amend the city code and precise plan amendments related to safe parking and emergency shelter as recommended by staff. The EPC also requested that the council consider the following: longer hours of operation, including the concept of 24/7 that's been discussed in other areas; expansion of the options to include all precise plan areas; increasing capacity of lots after the first year of successful operation; and a further analysis of allowing electricity hookups. These will be discussed a bit further in the next coming sections.

[03:48:50] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The safe parking provisions that are included in the ordinance that were discussed in June of 2019 are intended to help safe parking facilities be compatible with surrounding uses, that they are effective at facilitating the participant's transition to permanent housing, and that they meet basic health and safety standards. These are summarized on screen and include a qualified safe parking provider such as Move or other nonprofits in the region, case management services such as those services provided by CSA and others in the region to help folks be assisted on finding the path to permanent housing, general health provisions, things like a 25-foot buffer from residential property lines, providing restroom, water, trash facilities, waste disposal plans, and emergency vehicle access. It also includes the timeframe of operation, which is the dominant timeframe for safe parking programs, which is 7 PM to 7 AM daily. It does not mean that participants as a part of the program can't be flexed within those timeframes. It means it's generally a night parking program. It also includes the modified cooking equipment, the prohibition against modified cooking equipment and fires outside vehicles, vehicles that leak domestic sewage or other fluids, and the prohibition of generators or amplified sound that would affect the surrounding community.

[03:50:17] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: In addition, the following key provisions have been modified since the council discussion in June. They are also called out for you in your staff report. They are included in the proposed ordinance. The maximum capacity of 30 vehicles per site, again 30 vehicles per site not 30 vehicles total, is the number that is still included. And it is the dominant number for vehicles that are served within the county. With most of these sites currently serving passenger vehicles and not RVs. We responded to a council question today noting that approximately 7% of what's served by the county is RV. The city of Mountain View will be making significant progress to be assisting larger-size vehicles. Based on feedback from the EPC, we've also standardized the entrance and exit to each lot. To address potential health and safety concerns, we clarified that the safe parking ordinance does not apply to the city-owned and controlled lots that we will participate and comply with the guidelines. We also noted that there have been modifications included in the staff report and the ordinance regarding the live-work preference based upon additional analysis.

[03:51:33] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The allowed locations for safe parking include conditionally permitted in all commercial, industrial, and public facilities zones in the city. This includes the North Bayshore Precise Plan area and the East Whisman Precise Plan area if adopted. Also at parking lots in conjunction with the following uses in residential zones: churches, community centers, membership organization facilities, and private and public schools.

[03:52:03] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: There are two processes happening in two ways on two tracks. A non-discretionary conditional use permit which will allow approval by the Zoning Administrator based upon defined criteria. It also requires public noticing for a 750 radius prior to a decision being made and allows for that communication process to occur. The non-discretionary conditional use permit process is currently utilized for large family daycare centers... daycares in homes... daycares in homes. The second option is an operational permit. This would be issued by the police department. It would focus on the specific operations at the site and include inspections by police and fire for health and safety.

[03:52:50] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The non-discretionary conditional use permit would be required unless during a shelter crisis, as there is presently until June 30th, or if it's a city-owned or controlled lot. There were also provisions as a part of the safe parking and oversized vehicle discussion on behalf of the council in June of 2019, the council requested staff to bring back recommendations allowing emergency shelters in additional zoning districts. Currently such shelters are permitted only in the general industrial zoning district in conformance with California Senate Bill SB2. Staff is proposing modifications to allow emergency shelters with approval of a CUP, conditional use permit, in all commercial, industrial, and public facility zones, except where it is already permitted.

[03:53:46] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: There were some other related text amendments that are also required by this action to support the permit process for safe parking uses. And this relates to the daycare facilities permit expanding that non-discretionary conditional use permit, as well as the definition associated for safe parking and homelessness.

[03:54:08] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: There were some other follow-ups from the June meeting that staff has also proceeded forward on action items. And this includes the program preferences that the council provided feedback on that was also discussed in council questions and its detailed response was provided. But this includes families and students in Mountain View school districts, those who live, work in Mountain View, seniors and the disabled. A preference for each of these has been included in the proposed ordinance. The safe parking provider would be required to develop a preference list to award available parking spaces based upon these preferences. And there may be a lottery required if the spaces outstrip the need, which is a likely occurrence. The live-work preference would provide a preference to anyone who currently works in Mountain View or had a legal address or resident address for the purposes of voter registration in Mountain View within the past five years. This was changed from the draft ordinance that was presented to the EPC in September the 4th.

[03:55:10] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The council also supported the inclusion of rented vehicles in the safe parking program so long as the renter has full access to the vehicle. The proposed ordinance includes a requirement that each occupant have access at all times to the vehicle and the ability to drive it on and off the site.

[03:55:30] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The next component is an update for you related to current data... the most recent count on behalf of the police department. And the recent data includes the police department has identified 298 vehicles that appear to be used for habitation including 207 RVs, 80 passenger vehicles, typically vans or SUVs, and 11 that are categorized as other, these are things like box trucks, buses, etc. 57 associated vehicles that were also located next to the RVs but did not appear to show signs of habitation. We spoke in the June report about many RV owners also having a separate vehicle for transportation purposes to and from work or other purposes. This data shows that since the May count, there has been an overall increase in a 41% with 86 additional vehicles. This is comprised of 36 additional RVs and 44 additional passenger vehicles. And then 6 other vehicles. There were 9 fewer associated vehicles on this count than the last. The vehicle resident population as you know is mobile and fluxes, and there is no specific reason for the increase but it is certainly can be a cause is the vehicles moving from location to location.

[03:56:45] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The current estimated capacity which is a question that came up earlier and this is the chart which is the summary of current capacity for safe parking. As noted earlier, reflecting the Mountain View Whisman School District, we have removed any reference to the potential for available unit spaces there. And they've chosen not to proceed move forward with the safe parking program on their lots. The capacity at this time and the timeline is shown on the screen with the maximum total number identified as approximately 80. As you know, that number will flex down when the shoreline lot is no longer available. The shoreline lot is only usable for four and a half months. After the temporary use of shoreline ends, it flexes down by 20 to 30 vehicles. Both the city as well as Move, as well as other actors within the community are continuing outreach for additional lots. Given the staff capacity constraints, staff seeks council consideration of using the HRC to assist with some of those safe parking locations in accordance with city policy that was looked at by the HRC.

[03:57:56] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The next question element is regarding other direction we received on that day and that was funding, continuing to liaison and work with the county as well as other partners. A number of avenues are noted in the staff report including ongoing engagement with the county. Ky Le with the Office of Supportive Housing is here this evening. Also continuing to do outreach for funding for grants and sharing non-profits are aware of grant availability and we know one that is, given the good news for CSA today, as well as liaising with larger entities such as the Silicon Valley Community Foundation. The Silicon Valley Community Foundation has committed to providing supporting innovative ideas to help those at risk.

[03:58:39] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Also for the safe parking site outreach, I briefly mentioned it on the last slide, which is a proposal for the Human Relations Commission to increase their involvement as emissaries to reach out to property owners which was considered by the HRC on September 5th of 2019. And the HRC agreed to establish a subcommittee to work on this effort should the council endorse it. Also, ongoing action related to amending the government code. Again this code applies solely to government property, not private property, government property. But city staff has moved forward on a legislative effort for that, implementing a number of items including legislative outreach campaign, drafting suggested sample legislative bill language. And the mayor will meet with our assemblyman in October to continue to advocate for those changes.

[03:59:32] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The fiscal impact of the provisions that are included in this item for you this evening can be funded to provide services for an estimated additional 20 vehicles with a recommendation to reallocate 100,000 from the existing homeless enforcement initiative dollars. There was $200,000 funded as a part of the fiscal year budget 19-20 and we are asking for a reallocation of that to assist with these services. Staff continues seeking partners and outside funding to serve the additional vehicles. Again, the goal being to potentially reach upwards of 100, and so we will need, we have some gap for coverage there for services. And so we'll continue to work on that and if need be, staff would bring back a future budget request.

[04:00:25] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: The recommendations are shown on screen for part one, which is one through two, introducing both the ordinance as well as the resolution for the precise plans. To also approve the direction for the Human Relations Commission. And then authorizing of the budget, and then authorizing the city manager to execute contracts. And this concludes staff's brief overview report. I'd be happy to answer any questions. We also have, as I mentioned, a number of partners that we work with from CSA, Move, Destination Home, the police department, they are all present in the audience and happy to address questions as well. I thank you.

[04:01:03] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Are there any questions from Council members? Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[04:01:21] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, one question I think... I can't remember where I saw it, but I thought I saw the County Social Services building lot on some list... I thought I saw as a possible safe parking space or lot, is that...?

[04:01:40] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Oh, I think you may be thinking of CSA.

[04:01:42] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Is it CSA?

[04:01:43] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: It's CSA. The new entrant would be CSA.

[04:01:44] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Cause I remember last time we asked the county if they would look at allowing their, the use of their parking lot. So, well, we have...

[04:01:54] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: If you'd like to respond, sure.

[04:02:01] Key Le: Our initial conversations with the CSA staff is that, uh, it's currently not feasible, but we're going to go back to see what adjustments can be made, uh, to accommodate sort of staff and sort of safe parking.

[04:02:16] Councilmember John McAlister: Excuse me, who are you?

[04:02:18] Key Le: Oh, Ky Le, Director, Office of Supportive Housing.

[04:02:22] Councilmember John McAlister: For the county?

[04:02:23] Key Le: Yes. Thank you.

[04:02:25] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, I'm sorry, could you elaborate, what is the issue? Is it...

[04:02:30] Key Le: Yeah, staff parking, the time that the staff would arrive, uh, when people would leave, those types of issues. So we're going to start, um, meet with the staff again to see if if we can sort of come up with some accommodations for each.

[04:02:47] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: All right, thanks.

[04:02:48] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So are you can I... So are you saying it could possibly be used for safe parking if you work out the arrangements with staff? Is that...

[04:02:57] Key Le: Yeah, I'm saying that we're going to continue to look at it and try to figure out a way to give you a definitive answer.

[04:03:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, thank you. Arch, you're so glad you came. I can tell. I told him he had to go. This is one of my 15 favorite cities. I'll be here.

[04:03:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Councilmember Ramirez.

[04:03:21] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you, Mayor. A couple of quick questions. So, first, I should know this, but I don't, but are conditional and provisional used interchangeably? Or is there a technical difference? So, a conditional use permit as opposed to a provisional use permit?

[04:03:37] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Provisional temporary... we use temporary, but Nicole might want to chime in on that.

[04:03:42] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: I'm going to look to Miss Williams to respond.

[04:03:51] Zoning Administrator Stephanie Williams: So they are used interchangeably. Yes.

[04:03:56] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you. Um, and then, so, for my benefit, the, the process that's that was used um to secure the cold weather shelter in downtown, um, what what are, I guess you have to make um, you know, a findings in order to discern whether uh an incidental shelter is appropriate given the context, you know, what what are what are some of the objective criteria you use in downtown and then potentially in some of the other precise plans? This is based on a question seven, submitted by the council.

[04:04:32] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: I think Miss Williams can can respond to that probably better than I can. But I know that it was associated with compatible uses Stephanie, for the the downtown plan.

[04:04:46] Zoning Administrator Stephanie Williams: So it would be similar to any other conditional use. We would look at parking, um just overall suitability of that use, um with the uh existing uses on site and what surrounding it. Um, hours of operation and operational characteristics.

[04:05:02] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And so would would the standards for an incidental shelter have to be the same as the standards uh for a a regular shelter, full-time shelter that that are in the zoning code now?

[04:05:13] Zoning Administrator Stephanie Williams: Um, no, it would be it would be different.

[04:05:17] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, um alright, that's that's interesting. And then um, would this be specifically for an incidental use, so if we if somebody wanted to open uh a cold weather shelter in uh for instance North Bayshore, um could they only do so if it's an appropriate incidental use to some other ex existing use, or would they be able to use this process to open a stand-alone shelter?

[04:05:47] Zoning Administrator Stephanie Williams: They could um do either.

[04:05:49] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: They could do either. Okay, thank you. That's all.

[04:05:52] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember McAlister.

[04:05:54] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I want to follow up on this uh recommendation of improved direction for the Human Relations Commission to have a role in safe parking outreach. Did you have any idea uh ideas or thoughts on what specifically that was going to entail?

[04:06:13] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Uh yes. Staff scoped that in a general fashion for the HRC for the presentation on the 5th. And that included things like ensuring that they're briefed on all the parameters and requirements for safe parking. Uh that they would work with staff to liaison with local property owners. Um to be able to do that facilitate that outreach process. Uh that it would also include things like tracking that so that we have a way to ensure we're not you know bothering another private company again if they've already definitively said no they're not interested. Also doing a um it's kind of a foundational training and exchange of information um about how safe parking works and how some of the avenues uh such as liability which is a key concern on behalf of private property owners um is addressed through safe parking through their provider. Uh so those were some of the key themes. And then the uh HRC has tasked a uh stakeholder group um a sub-committee uh to be able to learn and and facilitate and share that content with the HRC and they'll work together on on follow up stuff along with staff.

[04:07:18] Councilmember John McAlister: So, Dave came up a couple of months ago with an idea says let's work as a group. Could, if he was able to get a bunch of uh different organizations, could he sort of also cooperate or work with in alliance with the HRC and would we take his suggestions and have him or his groups work side by side or just work together potentially on this?

[04:07:44] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: Yes, the HRC specifically called out, and uh I believe um Miss Ramberg can chime in if there is anything additional you'd like to add there. Uh but that that's one of their goals would be to have it be complimentary and supportive. Um such that uh additional entities uh that are working on this effort would be able to complement one another.

[04:08:00] Councilmember John McAlister: Do you like how I just threw you guys to include you in our discussions? So, no they... So, is Audrey going to say something?

[04:08:08] Assistant to the City Manager Kimberly Thomas: If, if need be.

[04:08:10] Councilmember John McAlister: She's good. Okay. Okay, so that's why, I mean, I appreciate the effort that the community is doing, but I think they need to have a just a quick discussion with some of the people out there that where do they channel that information? And so we're going to suggest that they work with the HRC. Okay, yes. Thank you very much.

[04:08:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Any other questions from Council members? No. Okay, uh, seeing none, we will open this up for public comment. Can I see a show of hands of how many folks want to speak on this topic? Okay. Each speaker will have, um, a minute and a half. And if you can be sure to fill out a blue card before or after you speak and leave it with our city clerk, we would appreciate it. And I'm assuming I don't have to say there might be different perspectives on this. So, um, but there will be no clapping or booing. Um, our first speaker.

[04:09:18] Tom Myers: Good evening everyone, Madam Mayor, council members, I'm Tom Myers, Executive Director at Community Services Agency here in Mountain View. First, I'd like to make a quick correction to the record that may, uh, uh, be a timing issue. Uh, the grant that we received from Google for $150,000, uh, was actually a grant that we've been working on for the last six months, uh, and it's specifically for case management services, and ancillary services related to case management. So, does that mean that it could, uh, uh, people that are in safe parking will receive case management, which is what we provide to the safe parking program? Sure, it may, it may do that, but it's also, uh, for all of our homeless services programs because I would like to remind a couple of points that I've made from the very beginning around safe parking, uh, at CSA we serve over 700 unhoused clients. Only 9% of those clients live in RVs, and about another, uh, 20% live in, uh, automobiles. And that, I think, is a very important point. Uh, and then lastly, the point that I've made from the very beginning too is we need to look at safe parking as a tool in the toolbox. It's not the solution to all of our problems. So thank you, and I'm here for any questions. Thank you.

[04:10:40] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I think you might have one. From Councilmember Kamei.

[04:10:43] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Hi, um, so uh you're a recipient on the grant, congratulations. Um, I know my team worked hard on that, I'm sure they did. They work hard every day. Um, I'm just curious, I know that um in prior times before council you've talked about how um it would be helpful if you had additional funding for the case managers, services etc. Um, you know with that grant opportunity how much more additional funding do you see yourself needing? Is that, you know, and I hate to put you on the spot, but I think that's one of the things... I mean, I think that's one of the things that we're trying to figure out is, like you said, safe parking is one element in the toolbox. And so if there's additional, you know, um, where would you put those immediate funds if you got additional, and I think that that would help in terms of the conversation if we're, if we explore some further, um, measures.

[04:11:39] Tom Myers: Sure. In, in fact for this conversation here tonight specifically, I would say that yes, we need more additional case management. Not just for the case management that we're doing in the office. But I mean an idea that has been floated is actually having a case manager who is located specifically at the Move office that is doing nothing but uh, vehicles. Uh and I think that's something that's very important that we've talked with city staff about, with county staff about, and getting additional funding for that. Uh, you know, Move operates the lots. We operate the case management that's been going on at the lots, as well as case management for a whole lot of other folks that are outside of the lots. My own personal opinion is that case management is the only way you can really, effectively move people into stable and sustainable housing. Uh, and uh, that that to me is the key. And case management is the key, and frankly that's what one of the things that we do best at CSA.

[04:12:40] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you.

[04:12:42] Tom Myers: Absolutely.

[04:12:46] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Sorry. Next please.

[04:12:49] Dave Arnani: Hello. My name is Dave Arnani. I still live in Mountain View. Um, the task force. Um, I want to tell you that there is a collection of community members that have come together and formed an informal task force. That collection of community members includes members of the HRC. Um, we have been str- we have this summer started to become active, we've been meeting. Um, this summer we have met with uh, officials from the city of Palo Alto, we've uh, been engaged with uh, Dignity on Wheels and Project We Hope. We have connected with people in Saratoga and people in San Jose. We've started to put together a process for, uh, systematically identifying potential sites, and we are just in the beginning stages of approaching some of those lot owners. We've also started to reach out to some of the large companies, um, in our community. As we go forward, I think much like the EPC pointed out, one of the things that we feel like would be helpful to us is to have as much flexibility as we can in setting up these lots. And one thing I want to suggest, uh, for us to consider, is that just like when we started the church programs we started with a pilot program, a small three-month program to get started, and we feel like it would help us to have a similar kind of three-month program to um to try out uh safe parking on business sites where we could go in with very little oversight without a use permit process run the thing for three months and then come back and do the use permit where the neighbors are informed.

[04:13:38] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. We have some questions. We have some questions for you. Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[04:13:43] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. So, um, when you talk about flexibility, is it, is that about, uh, minimal oversight or are there other elements that you would like to see more flexibility on?

[04:13:55] Dave Arnani: So, I'm torn about this. Yeah, I'm sure I'm torn about this because uh, on the one hand I ju- I want to say, yeah, give me all flexibility in the world. And on the other hand, I want to say it's really hard to have been given all this flexibility and then still have, uh, something be up to the discretion of someone else. And so I'm torn between having a really clear list of rules and a wide open scope, and so I don't know, I... I struggle with that. But, you know, things like, just, one of the things we've seen at the churches is when safe parkings gets started, people are concerned, and then as they operate people forget that they're there. Sure. And I kind of expect that that would happen uh running safe parking programs in a small way... I'm talking about a small number of vehicles on on each lot, not 30 vehicles. Right. And so I'm kind of hoping to get the thing open as quick as we can and let people forget it's there. You know, because and let it work, we've demonstrated it worked on churches. But we really need the business community to help out.

[04:15:05] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah. Thanks.

[04:15:07] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I am curious, as you've approached any of the companies here in Mountain View, I assume, um, how are those conversations going?

[04:15:17] Dave Arnani: Very, uh, initial. But people are interested. Safe par- I mean, I feel like this is becoming a, uh, well-known issue now. And so I'm hoping to be able to talk- market it as something that's, you know, cool for a company to do.

[04:15:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, I appreciate your efforts because I know the last time you were here, we talked about this. So I thank you for stepping up and creating the task force and working on this. So thank you.

[04:15:44] Dave Arnani: Okay. Thanks.

[04:15:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: But Councilmember McAlister has a question for you too.

[04:15:47] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you. Again, what is your, do you have a primary mission? Is your primary just to get a lot or to get people into housing?

[04:15:58] Dave Arnani: So, for me, I'm very focused on just people being at risk and vulnerable. I, you know, I look at safe parking programs and I see that they work for moving them towards, uh, more permanent housing and that's great. But personally, I just want to see vulnerable people in a better place.

[04:16:18] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, that's, that's a lofty goal. That's why I'm... if you notice from the last time, I like specifics. I like specific actions. So if you were to just say you had one action of your task force, what would that be?

[04:16:31] Dave Arnani: Uh, find 30 spaces.

[04:16:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Thanks.

[04:16:37] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next please.

[04:16:42] Marcus Givan: Good evening. My name is Marcus Givan. I'm the director of Dignity on Wheels, which is part of Project We Hope, and we're already partnering with the city, so thank you Mayor, Vice Mayor, council members. Uh, we're excited, we hope to get to continue that. And, uh, this is about people, right? Safe parking, and I just wanted to share, instead of all the programmatic stuff, I want to tell you about a person. All right, here in Mountain View, this is Tuesday, so we get to serve at CSA on Tuesdays, and there's a lady there, I'm going to respect her confidentiality, I'm going to call her Mrs. Mendoza, because I have a friend named Mendoza. She brings soap every week. And big bars of soap, sometimes too big, and we have to tell her, can you bring a smaller bar so other people can enjoy it? But that's the... that kind of warmth and excitement that we see, and we think that we see it because she's being treated kindly, she's being treated, uh, with respect and dignity, and she gives it back to us. So we're always excited to see her and others, but it happens, we're able to minister to people like Mrs. Mendoza because we're in partnership with the city, uh, with CSA, and we hope to continue that so that we can serve many, many more people. So I hope that this measure passes, and we get to partner with Lots of Love and anybody else that's that's serving our unsheltered neighbors, we think it's very important and we hope to continue it, and so instead of serving 10, like we did today, maybe 20, 30, 40, 50, and beyond. Thank you.

[04:18:09] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:18:16] Richard Tanner: Hello Council. Um, my name is Richard Tanner and my wife and I have lived in Mountain View for over 31 years. Um, we have a, you may have seen my daughter earlier, she was in... she's in Crittenden Middle School and she took a elective called robotics and engineering. And the theme that the teacher chose was things that we can do for the city. And in response to his question, she wrote: There are homeless people living in RVs and cars, but many are living on the ground. Some of the kids living in RVs went to my school. Their parents have jobs, but the jobs doesn't pay enough to afford a home. One way to help with this is to start building mini homes for homeless people to stay in. Another way is to help them get better jobs to be able to afford homes to live in. And the city is trying to help by finding safe parking places for RVs. Uh, another comment, she meant refers to someone earlier talking about generators, um, one suggestion was to have, uh, the companies, uh, making solar panel systems, and this was in reference to her understanding that you can't be a 21st-century student if you don't have, if you and your family don't have access to cell phones, internet, computer. And this is one idea she had to help these families, uh, be able to participate in the schools. And I just want to say I strongly support the preference for families that have students in the schools.

[04:19:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So I believe you ask for extra time. Um, any of the cards and...

[04:20:00] Public Speaker: If folks are all here, who... if folks could raise your hand if you yield your time. Thanks.

[04:25:52] Brian Leong: I'm Brian Leong, President of Move Mountain View, and uh, I'm speaking on that not as the pastor of Lord's Grace today. Uh, I think we've been doing this safe parking now for a year, and I want to reiterate what Tom said: it is not going to be the solution. I wish it would, and we look for wins all the time, but safe parking's limited in what it can do and we need to be realistic about that and honest with ourselves about it. I think one thing we've learned over this year is that uh our residents that are living in vehicles are unlike any other city's residents. They love Mountain View. They're here because their families are here, and their teachers are here, and their doctors are here, and they love it here. So we modeled everything around Santa Barbara, but we found that Santa Barbara doesn't work here quite the same, just because of the kind of people that are living here in their vehicles. They love being here. And so what I want to advocate for today is, you know, we can push and have a lot of lot spaces, but we need more case management more than anything else. If we don't do something to help them to understand their specific needs and how we can move them into permanent housing, you can give us 300 spaces and it doesn't matter. Uh, we can have eight spaces if we have good case management, and as long as we just keep moving people out of 'em, it doesn't matter. Uh, but we need good case management. I'd like to see us work together, um, to see what we can do to aim more towards finding out how our specific residents can be helped to move into permanent housing, than worrying more about getting more lots. Because we've done it. Uh, we've had eight spaces, but we've put 28 people through 'em and it's fine.

[04:27:37] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. We have some questions, though, for you. Councilmember McAlister.

[04:27:41] Councilmember John McAlister: Again, thank you. I should ask Tom the same question. So, you let's let's go to the concept of okay we need more mana- case managers. How's the flow of places to get those people to? Is that supply opening up? Is that, you know, supportive housing... once we get them from here to there, how is that, I mean you guys are doing great work here, but are we getting them over here?

[04:28:08] Brian Leong: No, I think CSA has done a great job, but we're all dealing with extremely limited resources in terms of opening things up. We've had 19% I think of our residents move into permanent housing, but I would say we've done more than that. I mean by the county definition of housed, uh 19%, but in terms of people moving out of their vehicles and moving into a better living situation, we've probably well over 50% of our residents have moved to a better situation. But there's not a lot of housing, right? It's just, it's just not here.

[04:28:38] Councilmember John McAlister: So, 50% is a heck of a great number. It is. So, I mean, we, that's the type of information... who was saying we got to get this information out, but that's great information. So, when, what type of housing are we getting these people into, or what, anything? And it's not necessarily in Mountain View, or when you say 50%?

[04:28:59] Brian Leong: Well, I know.

[04:29:00] Councilmember John McAlister: ...

Segment 7

[04:30:00] Councilmember John McAlister: I don't want to put you on the spot again because you've been so nice. Uh, so it's throughout the county, wherever, right?

[04:30:08] Public Speaker: Yeah, or out of the county, I mean, one of our first residents at my church was a 20-year-old woman with a two-year-old, a two-year-old baby, and we were taking care of her and giving her blankets. She was freezing in the car. It was winter. And you know, once she had more space to just kind of get her life in order and not spend two to three hours a night looking for a parking space, she found a family member to move in with in Oakland. Now that wouldn't count as housed. She'd still be considered homeless because she's living with somebody else, but she moved into a much better situation for her and her daughter.

[04:30:38] Councilmember John McAlister: So, you mentioned earlier that we've got all these people love Mountain View and they want to stay here. How many are willing to relocate if they get...

[04:30:46] Public Speaker: Not as many as you'd like to think.

[04:30:49] Councilmember John McAlister: No, no, well, that's why I'm asking the question.

[04:30:50] Public Speaker: No. And, you know, I think when we went to Santa Barbara, we did a lot of research. We found people were willing to move out of the city of Santa Barbara to go live, but here, they want to stay here. You know, and um, and I don't, I don't understand it fully. I, I think uh we need to learn why, and how, and how to help them more, and we need case managers to do that. I... it's beyond me. We need people who are experts on our population. And that takes manpower.

[04:31:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[04:31:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. A couple of quick questions. So first, I think you've alluded to it a little bit, but what allows clients participating in a safe parking program to transition more quickly, more easily to a more stable living environment?

[04:31:46] Public Speaker: Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, if I could do it over again, and when we started in 2015, John right? The one thing we didn't do is we didn't talk to vehicle residents, which is what Lenny was talking about, right? The one group of people that we didn't talk to is the people that we wanted to serve. And if I could do it over again, that's what we would do. And the number one thing that was most shocking to us right from the beginning was finding out that they had to take two to three hours every night to find a parking space somewhere they wouldn't get towed, or harassed, or feel in danger. And you know what? When you give people two or three extra hours every day because they know they have a parking space, they can do a lot. We had a woman who, a woman who parked one night in our lot, and the next day she found a job and a place to stay. That was it. She just needed some space. Right? That's the only one who's ever done that, okay? Everybody else has taken at least a little bit longer. But uh, I don't know, sometimes I think about what I would do if I had two or three extra hours every day, and they've done amazing things, a lot of them.

[04:32:49] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And then second question. Um, based on your discussions with um, the faith community, are there any regulations that are proposed here that uh would uh either discourage participation in the safe parking program, or if we made some modifications, would incentivize people to participate?

[04:33:09] Public Speaker: Um, over time we've heard different regulations come in, you know, and we're trying to comply with it, fire extinguishers and carbon monoxide things and rotating every two or three days has has come up. Those things feel prohibitive to us. I think every time we get a new rule that we have to follow. Uh, even waste management can be hard. You know, for this whole year we've just told our clients, don't leave garbage. And we've never had a problem. I think one time in the first month we had somebody leave garbage in the church parking lot. We told them to stop, they did, everybody just takes their garbage elsewhere to dump it. So anytime we have to have these extra things which require more management, we're a very small operation of one employee running it, uh, it becomes pretty difficult for us. And a lot of these things are unnecessary, because the, we've found the residents, they treat that parking lot like their home. They are our best lot monitors. They call us when somebody extra drives into the parking lot. They'll tell us right away. I'll get texts, and um, they, they love their lot, and they love each other. We've seen our residents take care of each other. We have an 85-year-old woman who's extremely frail living in the St. Timothy's lot right now, and other residents are taking care of her. Every day. To make sure she eats, to make sure she has coffee in the morning, to help her get to the bathroom. And um, they're building community with each other and helping each other. We don't need all these regulations. Uh, that's what we learned in Santa Barbara, is that they take care of each other. So uh, I find almost every regulation beyond what our own guidelines are to be very difficult for us and difficult for us to enforce.

[04:34:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abe-Koga has some questions for you.

[04:35:00] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I don't mean to put you on the hot spot, but um, I know that you've reached out to other faith organizations. Um, what do you see as, it sounds like regulations, but are there other barriers um for other groups to take on some vehicles? Is there, are there incentives that maybe we can look at providing? Like how do we get more folks to participate in your view?

[04:35:34] Public Speaker: So, I'm a leader, right? You're all leaders. I respect each one of you for what you do. The main thing that needs to happen in this city if we want to have more churches step in is we need to change the dialogue about how we talk about homeless people. Because when we talk about them with like a criminal element and there's drugs and there's gangs and things like that, the church people hear that. Even for my own church, it took us four months of very intense fighting with each other to accept lots of love into our church. My church, right? And uh, because people are afraid. And as leaders we need to have the dialogue and we need to talk and we need to lead so that we can help people understand who they are. And when we criminalize them and when we make them look bad, we're shooting ourselves in the foot, because then who wants to have those people in their church parking lot? Church is a safe place for most people. Uh, so I think there's a systemic problem we have because of the way we want to talk about things for whatever reason. I think what we've seen from our vehicle residents is they're great people, you know, and not all of them have been awesome. Some of them have been a little scary, you know, and I've had to go be lot monitor and go drive through the lot in the middle of the night at 2:00 in the morning and just, it's, it's scary. You know, but uh most of them are really amazing people who are just trying to get back on their feet. And we all need to talk about them like that, or else there will always be people at churches who don't want to do it. Um, and so, if we change the dialogue a little bit, I think it will make a big difference.

[04:37:20] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you.

[04:37:21] Public Speaker: Thank you.

[04:37:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:37:29] Ray Bramson: Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Councilmembers. My name is Ray Bramson, I'm Chief Impact Officer with Destination Home. As a public-private partnership that's committed to ending homelessness in our community, I want to commend this Council for its work on this challenging issue over the past few years. As the staff report noted, you've invested nearly $2 million in everything ranging from emergency shelter to case management for permanent supportive housing. So with that in mind, we're pleased to support the staff recommendation that's before you today for the adoption of the ordinance for safe parking and other programs, with the caveat, as Councilmember McAlister noted, that these people do need a place to go, so that there is no perfect safe parking ordinance, because it doesn't address the long-term issue of housing. Another action that this Council has taken is in its housing investment plan, approving up to 250 units of permanent supportive housing, a step that no other city has taken in the entire county. Um, there's an excellent opportunity here to utilize county Measure A dollars and to partner with organizations like Destination Home to get projects moving. And there's six projects right now in your pipeline ranging from Evelyn and Lot 12 to sites like the Palo Alto Housing Corporation's site on Terra Bella, um, which could have supportive housing units in it right now and you could take outside dollars and make it work. So we encourage you to look at these long-term solutions while working on these interim strategies as well. Thank you.

[04:38:58] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:39:06] Jonathan Lokston: My name is Jonathan Lokston. I've been a Mountain View resident for 20 years, and uh please bear with me because my comments are short, and they do connect in with what the issue at hand is. Uh, the decision to set a specific date on the implementation of the oversized vehicle ban, regardless of the status of the shelter and housing crisis, is in my opinion grossly irresponsible. Those issues as well as the safe parking plan are inherently interconnected. So my question is pretty simple. Uh, since the Council is so adamant on June 30th, 2020, uh, implementation of that ban, uh, what is the clear and specific plan to ensure that all 200 plus residents living in oversized vehicles will have safe parking spaces or stable housing by June 30th, uh, 2020? Bearing in mind specifically the plan that was just uh shown on uh on PowerPoint, um, only accommodates a maximum of uh 68 oversized vehicles at best by the end of next year. So what, how would you bridge the gap?

[04:40:09] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:40:17] Public Speaker: Hi there, Mark Molino, former resident of Mountain View. Uh, I would just say uh, I'd like to look at the framing of this. Uh, if you look at this as an external crisis, we have an issue of people who are unsecurely housed, and it's something external to deal with, I think that's very attractive, but it lets you off the hook. This is an issue that we have caused. This is an issue that you have caused. We have a moral duty to look at it as, as widely as we can. The overall question is what can we do to leverage all the land and all the resources of Mountain View to serve all the people we should serve? I think we should serve everybody. This includes people who show up at our doorsteps. I believe we have a moral right to do that. We serve the homeowners of Mountain View very, very well. If they complain, you listen to them. We don't do nearly enough to serve the housing insecure here. In this program, it's a very limited program, there are distinct flaws, as Lenny pointed out, but on top of that, it does nothing to acquire new lands directly to be run by the city to uh house these people. It does nothing to to secure enough funds uh to house these people, uh, and to create the right incentives. I'd say, what is enough? I'd say every homeowner in Mountain View should be willing to say I would change places with people living in RVs. And if you're not willing to do that, you know you are not doing enough, because you are not willing to uh, really take on the other issue here. So, I would just ask for more. Thank you.

[04:41:43] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:41:50] Steve Peters: Hi, uh, Steve Peters, um, I am a uh, you know, live in Mountain View, but I also attend St. Timothy's Episcopal Church. I'm on the vestry, that's the leadership board, um, and I've been involved in helping um, you know, operate the the safe parking program there a bit. And um, I just want to echo the the need for case management. Um, you know, it sounds, like when we first started, it was like, oh, it's going to be so easy, like they're all working, you won't even know they're there, and at times that's been true, like, it started and, you know, all the fears that people had, you know, we didn't have those, but there's times when you know, we currently have someone who's very medically fragile, and it takes a lot of um, you know, people, like her fellow, you know, parking lot residents are looking after her, um, and um, you know, but we're getting people from the the church who are in involved in a in a rotation, um, and um, we've had help with CSA, but I know they're they're really slammed on case management as well, so just reiterating reiterating um the need for that. For us to go up from 4 to 10, um, we're going to we're going to need um case management. Because otherwise, um, if we, if we got another, you know, medically fragile person, we just wouldn't be able to, to do that. So. Thanks.

[04:43:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:43:29] Superintendent Rudolph: I wasn't planning on staying, originally. I just want to point that out, because your meetings run a lot later than ours. Um, Ayindé Rudolph, Superintendent, Mountain View Whisman School District. Um, so I want to commend staff for adding the June 30th, uh while it's not what we would have wanted, I I will at least say that the June 30th on the RVs helps us, because moving kids on January 1st is a logistical issue in RVs. Um, I do want to clarify something, and this is why I love the voice, and they probably stopped there, because it never captures the true essence of what we talked about at our board meeting on Saturday. We run into logistical issues that other agencies are not bound by. So we are bound by the Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act, and so putting kids in a particular place that identifies them as McKinney-Vento would be against the law. That is a, that is a logistical hurdle for us. In addition to the fact that most of the of the families that are in RVs um actually do not have the ability to move, and I understand that the ordinance does require for them to be able to move, and so I'm not taking a stab at that, but I'm simply saying what the reality is for us. They don't have that ability. But what we can do, and what our board is committed to doing, and what I'm committed to doing, is being the liaison to help make sure that these families are are capable of getting into the lots. And so we are committed to making sure that that happens and partnering with everyone over here to to to assure.

[04:45:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: We have some questions for you. Councilmember McAlister.

[04:45:08] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I wonder why that happened. We work as a team.

[04:45:15] Superintendent Rudolph: We do.

[04:45:16] Councilmember John McAlister: Um, so you had a, you have a side conversation, and they had this chart about the school district wasn't able to do RVs, but could you clarify what you were talking about cars? And you could put two cars. But...?

[04:45:30] Superintendent Rudolph: There's one family. There's one family. Um, I mean, ultimately the board has to agree to that, right, and so our board is taking the role of being an advocacy. I don't know if they're already captured in one of the safe programs or not, so we would have to go back, but is, I can tell you the uh, behind-the-scenes conversation was that housing a car on a lot at the district office was probably doable. Um, but without having a formal vote, I mean, that's, that's a totally different conversation across the board. But the RVs, I think that's a logistical issue that is beyond our control.

[04:46:08] Councilmember John McAlister: No, I understand. That's... I just wanted tiny steps. And I'm trying to get a commitment that you could get two cars, two families, one car...?

[04:46:21] Superintendent Rudolph: One car. Two kids.

[04:46:25] Councilmember John McAlister: Two cars, one family? No, one car, two kids. Okay. Start small. You know, ABCs.

[04:46:30] Superintendent Rudolph: I hear you.

[04:46:31] Councilmember John McAlister: So you're going to work to get that one family somewhere safe, would that be on school property?

[04:46:36] Superintendent Rudolph: I, I can't commit to that until I have a majority of board vote.

[04:46:40] Councilmember John McAlister: If your board, hypothetically...?

[04:46:42] Superintendent Rudolph: I know, cause you, you know, I, you guys gave me a hard time for about Lucas, but I'm just trying to get people to...

[04:46:51] Councilmember John McAlister: He did, and now you, you're placing it on me. I think I...

[04:46:53] Superintendent Rudolph: I can't go after your boss, I got to go after you.

[04:48:09] Councilmember John McAlister: Does the CSA have a lawyer?

[04:48:12] Superintendent Rudolph: Uh, no.

[04:48:14] Mayor Lisa Matichak: The Law Foundation does.

[04:48:16] Superintendent Rudolph: We have uh lawyers on our board, if you don't serve exactly right.

[04:48:19] Councilmember John McAlister: But, but I think both Tom and I would love if the city would support legal counsel for both our organizations, just a line item that you could...

[04:48:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: What about the Law Foundation? Where's the Law Foundation?

[04:48:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, he works for Zero... that's why...

[04:48:46] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Sorry Michael.

[04:48:50] Tom Myers: We partner with the legal non-profits to provide resources for our clients, and we're doing that more and more these days, uh very important. But for the agency as a whole, the agency as a business, uh, we we go out and we get legal assistance when we need it, and local law firms will provide that assistance usually pro bono, uh, for us.

[04:49:14] Superintendent Rudolph: And, and just to give you a, an example of how the legal issue is, so we technically cannot refer a parent to safe moves. We can take the kid to CSA, and while they're at CSA, if the parent happens to meet someone, then great. But our role, our advocacy stops with the kid. It is not with the parent. And that is one of those legal legal sort of uh, gymnastics that we have to do in order to make sure that we're capable of meeting the needs of our families.

[04:49:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I have a, actually I have a question. Mark, question? Sorry. So, um, I understand the challenges with the vehicles. Um, I guess as we were discussing, I thought about um, you know, I wanted to ask you, have you thought about um, providing shelters, and I know the privacy issue might still exist, but then you're not dealing with, you know, vehicles and so forth. And I was thinking, and I don't really understand who owns and operates like the sports complexes, but I know it's a, I think it's a joint venture, right? Partially owned by both organizations. Yes. So, I mean, has that been looked at, is that something that could be a viable alternative?

[04:50:44] Superintendent Rudolph: We haven't looked at shelters, um, and partly like with the sports center, it's a conversation that's between the city and both of us, and then also understanding what the legal ramifications are. What we have done, though, is for instance, Pure Storage, who's been a wonderful partner, and I can't say that about every single corporate entity in the city. So I need to put that out there, but they have stepped up, they help provide food, they make sure when we said we will provide the water and the electricity for washers and dryers for families, they bought the washers and dryers for us. When we, you know, when we say we need meals for our kids on the weekends, CSA has been there to step up. When we say that we want book bags, Whirlpool has been there to provide the supplies. So there are corporate sponsors that are willing to do those types of things. Whether or not we can move to housing and, you know, whether it's a, in one of our portables that's been mothballed, I don't know how that plays out. But I do know we can advocate and we can provide resources to people that other agencies can't provide because we have a lot more information.

[04:51:53] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So would it be something you would entertain exploring or...?

[04:52:00] Superintendent Rudolph: I can, our vice president's over here nodding, so, um, I, I can, we can look into it and then um, we can bring it back to the board, and I think that's one of the things our board was very clear on Saturday, is to come back with, after doing a needs, similar to what you said, doing a needs assessment, figure out what the true needs are, come back to us, and let's, let's talk about it with a little bit more detail. And I know we'll deliberate, but I think that's something that we can discuss as to how we could potentially partner with you on that.

[04:52:44] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you.

[04:52:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:52:52] Sherry Amling: Sherry Amling again. Um, I think this is very, very wise. I love the way it addresses Mountain View. Because we're talking about Mountain View taxpayers paying for this. And everyone I know would love to get everyone into housing. And I think Community Service Agency is doing a tremendous job, literally working towards getting people into housing. I don't think that just living in an RV on the street really is acceptable. If that's all you want to do. If you're working towards getting housing, I'm all for it. And I think that's what you've done here, and I thank you very much. Um, comment on some other things said. I agree very strongly that there need to be regulations. You need to have fire extinguishers. I think every house should have a fire extinguisher. One of these RVs can go up very fast and spread all the way down the street. So, um, I think your regulations are good, I appreciate very much what you've said, and I hope that you will stand strong on this, because the people are hoping you will. Thank you.

[04:54:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next, please.

[04:54:12] Phil Mastercall: Hello again, thank you for letting me speak. Phil Mastercall, the Winter Faith Collaborative. We um, uh, have been working for over four years. Um, have about 35 faith communities. Um, we have um, operated with our partners uh several overnight shelters, and uh, currently uh, we have 12 faith communities and two school districts that we partner with to do safe parking in five cities including San Jose, Campbell, Saratoga, Cupertino, Santa Clara, and as of the next month, Milpitas. Um, in these, in our experience, we have had the opportunity to do it two ways. When we started four years ago we did as the Councilmember asked, uh, and it was, was shared by David here, that the two sides of our brain uh decided that we were going to work with people who are vulnerable, get them out of the rain, get them out of the creek, and save their lives, especially in safe parks. And we did that. However, we didn't get them exited out to housing, because we focused on that. Through work with the county and some funders, we were enabled to add case managers, and we turned the numbers around significantly. Uh, we went from our first two sites to nobody being housed the first year, to up to now almost 40% of people going into housing. It's been amazing, so I want to support uh Tom's request, any funding he can have should go to that. I also wanted one one little plug uh that we talk about this, uh, shelter by right, to include actual overnight shelters for women, domestic violence, and families. Thank you.

[04:56:04] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next, please.

[04:56:08] Key Le: Hello again. Key Le with the County of Santa Clara. Uh, it's not our custom to make public comments, but uh, given the sort of uh community engagement, the challenges, and sort of some of the opportunities, we thought it'd be good to make an exception. Um, first, I really want to thank the city for its partnership. Uh, we've done a lot over the last few years. Uh, you know, increasing the safe parking and the church shelter. We funded permanent supportive housing programs, and scattered site programs. Permanent supportive housing programs, by the way, countywide, have a 92% success rate. Uh, we funded together a homelessness prevention system that's helped about uh 1400 families last fiscal year. Um, second, um, I want to affirm our willingness to sort of work more closely and more actively with city staff uh to develop maybe a more comprehensive and sort of robust uh plan. You know, while we need to sort of continue to uh advance temporary housing solutions, I really think that we should continue to fund more supportive housing programs and really begin to focus on the production of supportive housing units and extremely low income housing units. Especially since we're beginning to look at um milestones for our next community plan to end homelessness. Maybe we can work with the city staff and City Council to set a set of milestones uh specifically for Mountain View. Um, and finally I want to clarify any misconception about Measure A. Measure A housing bond funds are available, and we have uh no greater desire than to make those uh funds available to um projects in the City of Mountain View. Um, in fact, you have a project called Eagle Park, uh Palo Alto Housing Corporation. Um, that project would have um been eligible for Measure A funds if Measure A was around at that time. It's city money, county money, housing authority vouchers, uh and you may recall that Google donated a million dollars to that development. Thank you.

[04:58:07] Mayor Lisa Matichak: We have some questions for you. Councilmember Kamei.

[04:58:10] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great, thank you. Thank you Key for taking the invitation of coming and joining us tonight. I think one of the things that um I'd like to request is I know that there's so much work that goes on behind the scenes that Council doesn't always get the opportunity to know about or hear all about. Um, and having that a way to convey that to all of us would be really helpful, particularly as we're looking more um towards um being able to utilize those Measure A funds. I think that that's really critical. I I think um some of my colleagues and I are going to bring some suggestions related to maybe some um permanent supportive housing opportunities, as well as some rapid rehousing that I know that the the county has been working on related to you know, motel vouchers, etc. Um, I know that one of the things that you I've heard that you've worked on is um trying to look into how to combat kind of the the predatory practice of of renting out um substandard RVs, and I know that that's something we had talked I'd brought up back in June. Can you share with the Council a little bit about you know, what the county's been doing on that front, and I know obviously there's some state collaboration related to that, but I think that could be helpful.

[04:59:26] Key Le: Yeah, that that has been a sort of uh complicated um endeavor. Um, I don't think that we've sort of uncovered um sort of a syndicate, if you will. Um, uh, we've worked with our public defender's office, our county counsel's office, had some engagement with the district attorney and the the Mountain View PD. Um, I think our approach right now, at least as I understand it, is if we sort of uncover or the Mountain View PD identifies sort of criminal activity associated with uh the RVs, um, then those are addressed at that time. But it doesn't seem to be sort of um any major sort of strategy that we can employ, but I don't want to speak out of turn, unless Mountain View PD had a different sort of perspective on that.

[05:00:20] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I think some of the public comment that we we received earlier was that many of the families that we're trying to serve and get into a safe parking program are paying $500, $800, you know, etc. amounts of money for leased RVs, um that they don't have, they don't have the ability to move, and they they don't really have any say on on where they're moved in those 72 hours either, right, so they can't they can't move it themselves and then it moves and they have to go find the the RV. And so, um I was just curious if the the county had been looking at that because I think that that's one of the the hurdles that we heard about tonight in terms of being able to adequately serve um residents and providing them safe parking opportunity, right? Um, so I was just curious um about that one.

[05:01:09] Key Le: Yeah, yeah, you know, that that is there's definitely not um the Office of Supportive Housing's area of uh expertise. I think our role in those situations is to really um problem solve with that individual or family and develop, you know, service, rental assistance, solutions to sort of get them out of that situation. Um, and then, you know, make referrals to um law enforcement as needed. I mean, that clarity is helpful for us in terms of further partnerships that we can explore um to to make sure people are have more permanent housing opportunities rather than feel like they have to go into that type of situation. Thank you.

[05:01:46] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abe-Koga has questions.

[05:01:48] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you, and thanks for being here. Um, regarding Measure A funds, um, something that I've been I guess trying to understand better is um, you know, we have an obviously an interest in serve serving our Mountain View residents um first and foremost. But when we start to take in funds from the outside like Measure A, I've heard that um when it comes to like who will be housed in those projects, it has to be opened up. Is that the case, or can we prioritize Mountain View residents in projects that we built here with Measure A funds?

[05:02:28] Key Le: That's a good question. Um, let me sort of answer that by sort of putting some things in context. You know, it seems um that when we talk about supportive housing, we sort of focus in on you know very specific populations, who gets prioritized. Um, when some of those standards sort of do not apply to market rate, moderate income, um other affordable housing developments. Um, when we operate a coordinated assessment system countywide, we um prioritize individuals for supportive housing um whether that be scattered site or specific developments, uh based on their sort of level of need, and you know, I think um reasonable people can sort of disagree about sort of how that is determined. Um, second, um sometimes um that prioritization is influenced by available funding. And mainly there, I'm talking about supportive services. For example, um in in the past, um some projects in Sunnyvale have been funded with Mental Health Services Act uh funds. So the individuals going into those funded units have to have uh a mental illness or serious mental illness, for example. So we have a coordinated assessment system, but sometimes the prioritization changes based on the specific uh sub-funding for services. However, we do recognize the sort of need to respond to not just a a city's um needs, but sometimes a neighborhood's specific needs. Um, we try to address that by doing a couple things. Um, mainly, it it is really around sort of the targeted outreach. So first, um, we plan for sort of outreach in that targeted area, so that people um who are sort of assessed in that area have a a greater ability to sort of get into the registry, and have a higher chance of moving into that specific development, when we're talking about a specific development. Two, in the past, and this has happened um mainly in Gilroy, for example, you know, we work with um local agencies, whether that be a a community services agency or um the local police department, to sort of help us identify people who may be eligible but have have difficulty accessing services, so that's again, assessing them and trying to outreach to them and then sort of bringing them to the whole registry. Um, and then um, I think we find that that has been sort of effective at targeting. Um, when the cities uh fund permanent supportive housing, as the city of Mountain View does, then sort of those funding for those services are restricted to sort of Mountain View residents or Mountain View affiliated individuals, live, work, go to school. Um, and and just uh generally, we think that we operate a coordinated system countywide, it's based on need, um we have to recognize that people have a choice, and um there are limited supply. And I think it's better to sort of allocate housing resources based on need and vulnerability than to sort of close off uh sort of each city to the residents of only that city.

[05:05:58] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay. Um, so what if the city were to partner with the county, then could we have preference for our own residents?

[05:06:11] Key Le: Um, for the definitely for the permanent supportive housing, um we would do all of those things I said. Um, but having a sort of restriction um for only Mountain View individuals cannot be done. Um, one is that all permanent supportive housing um units require a project-based voucher, and um the housing authority will not allow, and cannot allow, a sort of a local preference. And and two, um we believe it's sort of not the best practice for operating a community-wide system.

[05:06:45] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Alright. Uh, I have a couple other questions. Um, you heard, and I appreciate that part of this recommendation is a agreement with the county for case management resources. Um, but you've heard that's really a bigger a bigger need. Um, what are there opportunities for increased funding from the county for more case management?

[05:07:11] Key Le: Well, that case management is tied specifically to a permanent supportive housing program. So we match that by um providing rental assistance for every family indefinitely. Um, so that's somewhere between $15,000 and $21,000 per household per year. So I don't know what that works out to. Um, so

[05:07:30] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: That's fine. Is there more, is there more available?

[05:07:33] Key Le: Yes. So, so for example, um you could have Palo Alto Housing Corporation take on um some in in their upcoming developments, permanent supportive housing units, fund the supportive services, and all of the subsidies and the capital that would go into that would be matched to it.

[05:07:54] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So you don't have any funds for the case management that we've been discussing?

[05:08:00] Key Le: We have, for all of the safe parking programs, I think um I'm not sort of keeping tally, but I think we're finding sort of the majority of those services. We're funding outreach services in Mountain View specifically as well. Um, we're funding the shelter operations and the supportive services there. Um, if there is an opportunity to expand safe parking programs and supportive services are necessary, I believe the last time I was here I said that we would, I cannot commit to funding, but we would sort of look at those opportunities and sort of bring that to the the county administration.

[05:08:36] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. Thank you.

[05:08:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[05:08:41] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. So, um, following up from um a concern identified by Councilmember Kamei, the challenge of um people who live in RVs that they don't own. Um, from what I understand, um, the Seven Trees community center safe parking program for families in San Jose, um, is being uh transitioned to a um motel voucher program, because it was, it that program had um I think reasonable success in transitioning those families to stable housing, but there was a strong preference on the part of the families for a hotel or a motel voucher. Is there a countywide program analogous to that um that we could tap into potentially to serve the folks who are living in RVs that they have no control over?

[05:09:35] Key Le: Um, ah, first, uh, we do provide some motel stays for individuals and families who um are sort of on the path to permanent housing. So the housing unit's being built or sort of they have the subsidy assigned but they just, you know, waiting for the unit to become vacant maybe in a month. We do provide sort of interim shelter, interim housing in motels sort of on an as-needed basis. Uh, for example, at Second Street Studios, uh when that was beginning to open up, uh, there was 134 units of permanent supportive housing, uh, we sort of provided interim shelter, interim housing, a lot of motel stays for all of those residents as they were getting to move in. Um, I think countywide, we should begin to maybe look at um motel stays as a sort of a way to provide temporary shelter. Uh, the pros of course are one, it's inside, which is better for everybody. Um, two, it provides sort of more amenities. Um, the real negative there is cost. Motel stays can add up, especially when there's sort of no um outlet, or unless we would have to sort of mitigate that by ensuring that there's sort of some type of outlet, um, either to a shelter program, a shelter facility, or into a permanent housing program. That's why we like to use motels on a sort of an emergency basis and as a sort of an interim housing step. Yeah.

[05:11:14] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So I feel like we're straying quite a bit from safe parking, but. Councilmember Kamei.

[05:11:20] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh, I just had a follow up question on that. I mean, I I was curious if we that could be a resource if we were to go forward with a Measure A project in Mountain View, if we would be able to have some sort of voucher or um interim motel stay for folks before they were going into the affordable housing, or the sorry the Measure A project. Um, yeah. I didn't mean to stray, I just that question popped into my mind as you said that.

[05:11:54] Key Le: Uh, yes, uh absolutely. Providing some type of interim housing whether it's shelter or motel is a sort of a part of the process. I sort of can't commit to saying for six months we're going to put someone in a motel, but the idea is that it's easier to serve them and sort of they're better off in preparation for that housing to well, if they're sort of inside for, you know, a month, two months before that unit is available.

[05:12:20] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: And just to follow up on that, so has the case management um that the county has provided in Mountain View increased? If so, how much?

[05:12:31] Key Le: I want to say that what we recently did was sort of increase the um outreach and uh and case management services uh related to the ah, I'm sorry. The case management services related to the outreach and sort of the long-term engagement services for people that we what we sort of call sort of hard to or challenging to engage. They sort of need this sort of ongoing rapport building before they'll sort of uh fully trust and engage staff. So we did increase that, and that was mainly increased through a sort of a one-time grant from the state.

[05:13:08] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I think that's it. Thank you. Next, please.

[05:13:21] Joan McDonald: Hello again. Um, I have a number of sort of unrelated comments I'd like to make. Um, first of all, this is probably not the first time that you have heard me wonder why we have only cold weather shelters, and at limited dates. Because, and the reason I ask this is that as I recall, many years in a row, the shelter at Hope's Corner has closed and we've had a series of very big downpours for the next two weeks. And all of those people are unsheltered and trying to stay out of the rain in a variety of places. I think a healthy way of looking at shelters is that they should be year-round. Because sometimes it's too hot, and a lot of times it's too wet and too cold. Second point, at least four people I've spoken to who are RV dwellers have told me that they are ineligible for housing through CSA. Now I don't know the reasons for that, I haven't worked on it, but that's important for you to know.

[05:14:57] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

Segment 8

[05:15:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next please.

[05:15:03] Alex Brown: Alex Brown, Santiago Villa, North Bayshore, Mountain View. Uh, I want to say thank you for moving forward on this. It's good to see progress. As someone who shares North Bayshore with fellow residents who live in vehicles, it's good to see more coming even though it's only going to be for a few months before any housing is eventually built up there. It's always good to have new neighbors. The ones that I have already in the RVs are nice. They're great people. I walk by them every day. Thanks.

[05:15:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next please.

[05:15:38] Malia Perez: Hi there. Malia Perez again. I too just wanted to share a sentiment that was shared earlier. I do see that 7.1 and 7.2 are also commingled, and there's a potential and a likelihood for there to be a gap with the number of safe parking spots and limited areas for RVs and oversized vehicles to park. And I am totally a proponent for more space for safe parking, a proponent for 24-7 parking, for more case management, but all that takes time. And what the vulnerable in our community do not have is time. Being a recipient of below market rate rental housing here in Mountain View, from when I applied... now mind you I am number 40. I am one of the first applicants. Being one of the first applicants, I applied right when it opened, and I want to say it was December 2012 or something. I didn't get a space until 2015. And from when my number was called, it took 6 months. So it was 32 months before I even got into a unit having had the need for all of that time, and it took 6 months from when my number was called to actually even get into a program. The vulnerable in our community do not have time. The other point I want to bring up really quickly has to do with the schools, and if you limit the number of spaces on narrow streets, further pushing out access to school, and parents don't have transportation. Transportation is a barrier. If parents have to work at 7:00 in the morning and they have to get their child to school, how are they going to do that? How are they...?

[05:17:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[05:17:20] Malia Perez: Yeah.

[05:17:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thanks. Next please.

[05:17:24] Diego Delgado: Yup. Just to piggyback off what the last speaker was saying, the process to get into BMR housing can be difficult. And as other speakers have alluded to earlier, there's a lot of support for helping people get into housing as part of the program. So one of the biggest barriers would be having to move your vehicle in and out of RVs, probably trying to find places to park during the middle of the day. So the more burden we can alleviate from these families as they're trying to get housed, would probably be better to the intent of the program, which is to get people into housing. So please consider a 24-hour, 7, 24-hours, 7 days a week, implementation of the program to facilitate the goal of the project. Thanks.

[05:18:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[05:18:17] Steve Peters: If you could speak into the microphone. That'd be great. I just wanted to let everybody know that the real solution to the problem, not just for homeless people, but for everybody, is what this woman wrote down in this book, The Village Effect, about the value of face-to-face communication. Anything you do that winds up separating out people, divide and conquer, is not going to solve any problem. What you do to bring things together and to get people to understand each other through face-to-face communication will help solve problems. The curious thing she mentions in this book is that the way Google laid out their campus was not to have people shuttled around and staying in straight lines. They want to have random contacts between people from different departments so that face-to-face communications will trigger new ideas. That's what needs to happen. You need to have people getting to know each other and working out solutions a little bit at a time that grows. This is a very good book. I recommend it to everybody. The Village Effect, Susan Pinker. It was written in 2014. It's all based on research, how face-to-face contact can make us healthier, happier, and smarter. God bless.

[05:19:50] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[05:19:59] Annie Fisher: I just wanted to follow up on a question earlier about the motel vouchers. The people who lived in the motels for Second Street Studios, when you do that, you have to move every 28 days. You don't have residency or 29 days. So it's really hard because it's like getting swept every 29 days. So I just want to make that point. They found that very difficult. It's nice living in a motel, but it's hard going through that. We're talking about this emergency shelter ordinance under this emergency shelter ordinance and there's no shelter. This is just a safe parking program. So I just want to point out that 158 people died last year on the streets in Santa Clara County, and that's one person every other day. And this program isn't going to do anything to prevent that. What prevents that is new shelters. We need a new domestic violence shelter. We need a new family shelter. There's 59 domestic violence beds. Every single night, 2,000 women were denied domestic violence shelter beds in 2018. There's 65 family shelter beds every single night in Santa Clara County. That's it, in the whole county. And I think that we need to change that. We need and you can make that change right now. You can say that the Safe Parking Program only helps people who are in cars and in RVs. It doesn't help the people who are on the streets right now, and those are the people who are going to die. Those are the people who are going to die waiting for Safe, who are waiting for permanent supportive housing, because safe, permanent supportive housing is years down the line. And the only thing that you do waiting for permanent supportive housing is die. And it, we proved that year after year because the rates keep going up.

[05:21:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Just want to remind folks you know before or after you speak to train in a card with our City Clerk. Is there anyone else who wishes to address the Council on this? Okay, we'll bring it back to Council for discussion.

[05:22:07] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: I have a question. I apologize, it's been a long night, so this probably might have been covered, but on item 4 of the recommendations, the $100,000 for safe parking from the $200,000 that was included in our budget, what will the other $100,000 go towards?

[05:22:29] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: Primarily at this time, that will be signage associated with the program. Given the change in the timeframe, we may need to factor that in and do a budget revisement for mid-year or the new budget, but yes.

[05:22:43] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: And then in terms of case management funding, is it just what we're getting from the County, or have we put any City funding towards that?

[05:22:53] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: You have it in your, your current proposal before you. The $60,000 was part of this existing budget year. That is matched by the County as key highlighted. Uh, that is providing services at CSA. Uh, the 125 that's listed there, you previously approved, approved. That's for permanent supportive housing. Um, what we are asking for here is the ability to add another $100,000 to the existing revenue agreement with the County. Um, is key highlighted. That maximizes and expands the capacity with the County, and then the County will work with us to ensure that they get an appropriate service provider for case management. In all likelihood it will be CSA, but it will be someone to ensure that we're able to meet the need.

[05:23:32] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Even though the need is larger than what that amount is.

[05:23:36] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: Yes, it is, is larger.

[05:23:37] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Okay, that was my question is, is that sufficient in terms of our, like, there's a capacity issue too, I'm assuming, so does that max out our capacity or should we be considering more?

[05:23:52] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: I don't know if the public comment was based on what we're doing, what's being recommended, or on top of that. Is there capacity too at CSA, for instance, to be able to do more, is the question. With additional funding, we would be able to do more. There's no question. That said, we are also... you guys know well as well as anybody that we are also the first ones to say no one group does things alone. This has got to be a collaborative effort. If we find we need to enlist additional assistance, we'll be the first ones to say come in and help us, but yeah, right now, if we can get more funding, we can get more capacity. Does that answer your question?

[05:25:23] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Ballpark figure, do you have one?

[05:25:25] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: As far as requesting from the staff or overall?

[05:25:32] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Well I guess both, to be frank. Just would be helpful to have a sense of what is a reasonable, the ideal amount, and then if you want to break down...

[05:25:44] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Well, but let me give you a, yeah, let me give you a good example. Right now, we are not billing for all that has been allocated to case management for this program primarily because there aren't all the lots yet. Once we get more lots, we'll be able to have a better judgment of that, and we start maxing out on what we've already been allocated. Then we start adding additional allocation, which already is being talked about with both the City and the County, and I'm also talking about it with other funders. So, does that help? It's hard to, it's hard to give you a firm and fast figure when we don't know how much we're going to be able to ramp up yet.

[05:26:47] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So this is what, what's being recommended is sufficient for the starting, if we max out on all our safe parking...

[05:26:53] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Absolutely. And as a former development director and fundraiser, I know that it's also, you have to be ready to go out and get the money up from other sources as well.

[05:27:05] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Yeah, and that was my question as to how much bigger...

[05:27:09] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Right now this is good.

[05:27:12] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Because they have a role too and we can do some of that.

[05:27:15] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Sure. Exactly. And right now this is good because right now this already takes into account the idea of having a case CSa case manager who is stationed at Move Mountain View and on the lots right there.

[05:27:28] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Great. Thank you.

[05:27:30] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Sure.

[05:27:31] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: And if staff can just interject, it's the ability to provide service to that nexus of about 80, 20 additional based upon we had existing funding for 60 and then 80. And then should the lots grow even larger to 100, as we highlighted, there may need an additional budget request or additional engagement with the County, et cetera.

[05:27:50] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Councilmember McAlister.

[05:27:52] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, thanks. In the past, you provided us a memo. I hope you could do it again. I'd like to know how our money, where it's going and how many cases that we're working on and their end results and all that stuff so that we can see if our money is going in the right place. So is that possible?

[05:28:12] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: Similar to the data on outcomes that we did in March, um, where we highlight for you, you know, what you funded and then what the, the numbers are coming out. Yeah, we can certainly do so, um, pending, um, you know, other pro projects. Dan. So it's...

[05:28:30] Councilmember John McAlister: It's a memo. So yeah, I know, would you be working with CSA and the County? Because I remember one time that there was not communication, there wasn't, so we didn't all know. So. Okay. So when you do the, you know, we spend the money, you know, let's say we give a hundred thousand, two hundred or a million to CSA. They, they sort of give us some feedback on how many cases, OK. That would be helpful.

[05:28:52] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: They do. They report that information out, uh, yearly and or, um, anytime that we request the data. Um, and so for example right now all the new numbers that were included in the, uh, questions in response to safe parking is based upon new data that's being reported to the County.

[05:29:07] Councilmember John McAlister: OK, great. Thank you.

[05:29:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Hicks.

[05:29:15] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So one of the main things I'd like is to make sure that the lots are open 24-7 if possible. And it sounds like there's some movement towards that, because in answer to a question about that a written one, the answer was the mayor will meet with Assemblyman Berman in October, but any legislation would probably not occur before 2020. In the interim, I'm wondering, I also asked a question about whether hours for the lots could be 5 p.m. to 9 a.m. instead of 7 to 7. And the answer that came back was that that would likely cost a little more, but if we're going to 24-7 then it seems like the additional cost of a slightly different timing is immaterial. And I have to say when I went to East Palo Alto, the East Palo Alto has a safe parking lot, and I toured it and talked to people there, and they said that they really liked it actually. They liked, they felt safer there, and they liked the community. They said the one thing that was really different was, difficult was the 7 to 7 timing. And they, they even suggested that even a few more hours would help with their school and work schedules. Thank you.

[05:30:38] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Kamei.

[05:30:40] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Great. I had some other ideas that I wanted to share. And I don't know if this is the time or did you want folks to respond to what you mentioned, Councilmember Hicks?

[05:30:54] Councilmember Alison Hicks: If there is a response, sure. I was going to put it out there, but if there are some thoughts on it, that would be great.

[05:31:42] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Did you want to respond to that or should I? Okay, great. So, um, I, part of the discussion related to safe parking has been that it's only part of the toolkit and only a short-term response. And so, I, I don't know if this is the appropriate place and kind of look to, to staff and, and Mr. Rich, but I'd like to further explore the housing component. Um, and, you know, one of the things we heard from some of the people giving, uh, public comment, uh, particularly the County, was how we might be able to, uh, partner together to provide some permanent supportive housing, uh, particularly with new affordable housing projects. Um, and I know many of our local communities have moved forward with a housing first model. So looking at a variety of different opportunities, including what we talked a lot about today, case management, um, you know, with the goal of, of moving people into permanent housing. And I also, you know, would be interested in the next time we look at, you know, NOFA and CDBG HOME monies, if we would be able to use any of those funds for rapid rehousing. Um, so those are some of the, the three, I guess, ideas that I would like to go maybe the next layer after safe parking. I know the Vice Mayor has mentioned a couple times maybe the city doing some sort of assistance program, some short-term rental assistance, similar to the counties, EAN, the Emergency Assistance Network that I know that they provide. Um, you know, I, I don't know if this is the place to talk about that, but I, but I would like to, um, work as a Council to further explore that, particularly given what we did earlier in the, in the evening. Um, I think everyone's goal is, is permanent housing. Um, and so what are the other things that we can do beyond just providing safe parking? And I do want to give a thanks for all of those in the audience who spoke and community members who have been working hard to try to get more folks interested in participating in safe parking programs, or at least doing financial contributions so that we can support the programs that we do have in place. Thanks.

[05:33:44] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So in terms of wanting to discuss housing, wouldn't that have to be another item on the agenda at another time?

[05:33:51] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, I mean several, several answers to that. We really encourage you to stay focused on the safe parking issues tonight. I think everyone agrees, we all share the goal of permanent supportive housing and a range of housing options. We adopted an affordable housing strategy about a year or so ago. I think one of the speakers referenced it where we specifically have a target of units and dollars allocated to permanent supportive housing. Happy to provide you a briefing with our housing staff to fill you in, also provide you some background information, all of you this morning kind of on the wide range of housing initiatives we have, both for market rate as well as affordable. But certainly if council desires, we can have a study session or updated memo or something, or briefings for you. But yeah, absolutely, everyone agrees this is not a solution. It's a tool. It's a short-term tool. It's really a band-aid. And we do and will continue to work on the whole spectrum of housing initiatives.

[05:35:00] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Right, and I think that there is a synergy when this topic comes up. It's hard for me to have a siloed conversation and talk just safe parking when I feel like it's an opportunity to highlight the other things that the city can do, or as you mentioned, are already doing, um, and, and find ways to bring maybe efficiencies on, on initiatives we're already doing. Um, and I, I do believe that we heard a lot today in public comment on the collaboration and the willingness of our community partners to go even further and the next step. And I do feel like that should be explored. So, wanted to throw it out there.

[05:35:40] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: We look forward to working with the County to get a Measure A project in Mountain View very soon and other initiatives. Beyond that, yeah.

[05:35:51] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember Ramirez.

[05:43:32] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Councilmember McAlister.

[05:43:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to get this moving along. So I like to introduce an order. Do I need to read the whole thing or just...?

[05:43:43] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Yes, you do.

[05:43:45] Councilmember John McAlister: Oh, okay. Do you wanna use this?

[05:43:48] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Well, that's different than this one.

[05:43:50] Councilmember John McAlister: Well, it will help you. Is this his old... Okay.

[05:43:52] City Clerk Heather Glaser: Thank you.

[05:43:53] Councilmember John McAlister: I like to introduce, make a motion to introduce an ordinance amending Chapter 36, Article 17, 9, 16, 4, 5, 6, and 8, and Chapter 19, Article 8 of the Mountain View City Code related to Safe Parking and Emergency Shelters to be read in title only. Further reading wait. And a second reading for October 22nd, 2019, Attachment 1 to Council Report. Adopt a resolution amending the P39 North Bayshore Precise Plan related to Safe Parking to be read in title only. Further reading wave. Attachment 2 to the Council Report. 3.

[05:44:34] Councilmember John McAlister: Thanks. Approve direction for the Human Rights Relations Commission to have a role in Safe Parking outreach to give us quarterly updates on their progress on Safe Report. Okay? Uh, authorize the use of $100,000 for safe parking from a $200,000 included in the fiscal year 2019-2020 adopted budget originally authorized for homeless enforcement initiatives. 5, authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with the County of Santa Clara for a total not to exceed $285,000, which includes $100,000 to increase the safe parking capacity, $125,000 as previously approved to continue a caseworker for permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless and $60,000 for case management and outreach. And number 6, to come back to Council with language on private parking guidelines.

[05:45:45] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, sorry, just to clarify. So you mentioned item 6, which... so you're adding that in for... Can you say that one more time?

[05:45:53] Councilmember John McAlister: I was adding that in because, to go along with, there was a couple council members that said that they would like to see some language that was a little more flexible with private.

[05:46:03] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: So just to clarify, so the ordinance as proposed and drafted just applies to private parking lots, non-city owned or controlled lots. So that's the proposed ordinance. The city has, based on prior council direction, has voluntarily agreed to comply with the same rules that would be required of private lots. But basically this ordinance as proposed and drafted just applies to non-city lots.

[05:46:30] Councilmember John McAlister: Councilmember Ramirez was concerned about that there wasn't not enough flexibility, but is staff saying there is flexibility within that ordinance?

[05:46:39] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: We're saying we need to know how you define flexibility and what you want changed from this ordinance.

[05:46:46] Councilmember John McAlister: Mr. Ramirez.

[05:46:49] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Are you prepared or should we just go with this motion and then address it?

[05:46:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well I think on the items that have been mentioned are the hours, so I was trying to find that in the draft ordinance to see what we might tweak.

[05:47:05] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: All the operational standards are on page 3 and 4 of the ordinance. Thank you. So bottom of page 3, section A.

[05:47:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I don't mind having some flexibility on that.

[05:47:24] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: If it is...

[05:47:26] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I think Councilmember Hicks had said that, in East Palo Alto they do, was it 9 to 5?

[05:47:31] Councilmember Alison Hicks: No, they wanted 9 to 5. They didn't have it. But it also sounds like you're asking for legislation to make it 24-7. So I don't know...

[05:47:43] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: So the 24-7 legislation we're seeking would actually currently proposed would only apply to city lots, not private lots. It's possible that the state legislature or Assemblyman Berman and the legislature in total could broaden the scope, but as currently requested and the exemption we're seeking would only be applicable to public lots. Or if we make, am I making this more complicated than it needs to be?

[05:48:13] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well, I think we can easily change it to, as I say, the hours change is as very simple if you just want to say from, between 5:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m., that's... yeah. And then the other... the private lots flexibility, but we don't have... this is private lots. So...

[05:48:49] Councilmember John McAlister: So that's taken care of then.

[05:48:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. and...

[05:48:59] Councilmember John McAlister: Let's see if there was anything else.

[05:49:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah, I'm good with that. Okay. Yeah, so I think we need to keep in mind that this is a temporary option until we can help folks get into more stable housing. And again, the requirements can be changed. We've heard the desire for flexibility. If these were not arbitrarily put in here, they were put in here based on best practices in other communities as well as what we believe to be bare minimum life and safety requirements from the Code and health and safety, both of the residents as well as neighboring properties.

[05:49:48] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, we'll just stick with what staff has recommended, with the time changes.

[05:49:54] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Oh sorry. I was just gonna clarify for the record then.

[05:50:00] Assistant City Manager Audrey Seymour Ramberg: So the hours changes would be changes to that Section 36.28.70, subsection F.

[05:50:12] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, F. So I'm fine with changing that to 150.

[05:50:18] Councilmember John McAlister: Thank you.

[05:50:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Although you made the motion, so... yeah, no, I just... okay.

Segment 9

[06:00:19] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: So I I don't know if anyone's interested. I certainly wouldn't put them ahead of the the K through 12, but um but

[06:00:28] Councilmember John McAlister: No. I'd really prefer the community colleges reconsider their stance on safe parking. And that they're considered adults and then the criteria is how many units are you taking what's entitled enrollment so forth they could be itself. I mean that's a good idea but not at this time.

[06:00:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay so any other discussion? Councilmember Kamei.

[06:00:56] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Um I I would be interested in um the city exploring that Councilmember Clark when we speak to the assembly member. So I don't mean to I don't mean to interrupt. I'm sorry. Councilmember Clark would that be amenable to you if we um when the when staff speaks to the assembly member about um the uh timing for public lots if we brought up um the um the the legislation that became the the two year bill and we could use that as an opportunity to discuss it with him and see if there's a way for us to to further support that rather than no.

[06:01:35] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Yeah that's fine. I I'm not if if the maker of the motion doesn't want to accept that that's perfectly fine. I just wanted to just wanted to bring it up.

[06:01:41] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yeah I mean I'm interested I you know I would want to follow up on it and I think that could be a perfect opportunity to do so. So.

[06:01:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: We did send in a letter of support, didn't we?

[06:01:52] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: We sent a nuanced letter um on the bill saying we encourage the idea of safe parking and um maximizing opportunities we were careful in our wording so as to not uh presume what another governmental agency should do, but I think the intent of our letter was was clear. And if council so directs we can certainly be more explicit both with the assembly member as well as any follow up letters.

[06:02:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Okay, so I don't see anyone else in the queue, so let's call the question.

[06:02:28] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Clarification. Sorry. I was just gonna sorry I just thought it would be good to recite what we believe to be in the motion since there's been some round and about my understanding of it is it's the staff recommendation with the addition of quarterly updates from the HRC changing the hours uh the uh possible hours of operation to 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. uh increasing the shelter maximum to up to 150 and directing staff to have conversations with the school district about the possibility of gyms as emergency shelters.

[06:03:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Which is not part of the ordinance it's just yeah.

[06:03:14] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah.

[06:03:18] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yep. Okay uh let's call the question.

[06:03:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: That passes unanimously.

[06:03:29] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Great. Thank you.

[06:03:42] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay we'll close item 7.2. And I think

[06:03:48] Councilmember John McAlister: defer 8.2 to the next meeting.

[06:03:50] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I was going to suggest we table it till the next meeting.

[06:03:54] Councilmember John McAlister: I second the motion to table 8.2.

[06:03:57] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: As long as you don't defer it until Q1 of 2020.

[06:04:03] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So um moving on to item 8.2, adjust compensation for City Clerk and City Manager and uh the presentation is by the Vice Mayor.

[06:04:14] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. And because of the late hour I will read my script uh to hopefully shorten the shorten the um the discussion but but each year the City Council reviews the performance and compensation of the City Council appointees. And the Council appointees include the City Manager, City Attorney and City Clerk. Because the current City Attorney was appointed after fiscal year 2018-19 the evaluation period, only the City Manager and City Clerk were evaluated this year. And as the Vice Mayor I oversaw the process for this this 2019 year. The City Council has completed this process and the purpose of this agenda item is to consider adjustments to the compensation of the City Manager and City Clerk. The Brown Act requires the City Council to orally report a summary of council action on the salaries, salary schedules or fringe benefits of council appointees during the open meeting in which the final action is to be taken. To satisfy this requirement, I am providing this report of the recommended adjustments for the City Manager and City Clerk. One, a 3% cost of living increase for fiscal year 2019-20 is being recommended for both positions. Two, for the City Clerk the following is also recommended: a 4% merit increase and a 3% equity adjustment to bring compensation for the position in line with the market. And a one-time contribution of 21 hours of leave time for fiscal year 2019-20. The one-time contribution of 21 hours of leave time must be used by pay period number two of 2020 or any balance will be cashed out with pay period 2 payroll. The compensation adjustments will be retroactive to June 30th, 2019, which is the effective date for compensation adjustments for the other unrepresented employees. I'm happy to take any council questions.

[06:06:17] Councilmember John McAlister: Could we change that to June 30th 2020 just to toe the line with the other ordinances? Never mind.

[06:06:27] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: That's very funny.

[06:06:30] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Are there any members of the public who wish to comment on this item? Okay we'll close the public comment portion and bring it back to council. Uh is there any discussion? We have a motion by Councilmember McAlister and I seconded it. Need to read the um the motion please.

[06:06:53] Councilmember John McAlister: Adopt a resolution approving compensation increases for the City Clerk and City Manager for the performance during fiscal year 2018 to 2019 and adopt a revised salary plan listed in exhibit A to reflect these compensation changes to be read in title only, further reading waived. Attachment 1 to the Council report.

[06:07:15] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Any further discussion? We will call the question.

[06:07:25] Mayor Lisa Matichak: That passes unanimously.

[06:07:28] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[06:07:33] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next is item 9 which is Council, staff and committee reports. Councilmember Clark.

[06:07:41] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Um so speaking of going round and round on motions, um so it's come to my attention that the motion that was made um at the last regular meeting related to um the sales project was not exactly um super clear. Um and I think there have been some struggles based on at least I'm hearing there were struggles based on watching the video and the debate versus the motion that I actually read and made. Um I don't know um whether there will be um I don't know whether we'll need to take any action, but what I would what I've been um what's been suggested is that um we wait for the minutes to come out and see if everything matches. But um sort of preemptively just in case there is some sort of um mismatch to make a motion to reconsider tonight defer that motion to the meeting when the minutes are presented and then if there is a mismatch and we need to take action then we can and if we don't need to then we don't need to. But because this is the first regular meeting after that one, this is the only opportunity to do the motion to reconsider and then we don't have to do anything tonight, we can just defer that to the meeting where the minutes come back and then if there is um a difference between the debate that occurred and the motion and what was said that we wanted in the motion versus what the motion that I actually made um and we need to make the minutes reflect that and all those things then I've just been advised to sort of um take those steps and then we can either act on them at the next meeting or or not. So um so I would so I'm just making a motion to to reconsider that item. I don't know what item number it was but um but assuming that assuming the motion to reconsider is approved we would just um defer any action on that to the um to the meeting at which the minutes are of that meeting are presented.

[06:09:42] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Um well that's an interesting uh motion there. I'm curious, I thought we were all pretty clear what the motion was. So how did this come about?

[06:09:51] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Um basically my understanding is that the conversation that we had about the offramp trigger, my my an we can't get into this too much tonight, my understanding was um I I think basically when they watched the videos the motion portion um of what I said and stated apparently was captured differently or maybe I stated it differently than what we had talked about the offramp actually triggering and not triggering. So I don't know if that will be the case because I haven't seen the draft minutes, but um I've just I've been advised that this is the best way to sort of preemptively be able to address that if there is a discrepancy.

[06:10:43] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. So we have a motion from Councilmember Clark and a second by Councilmember McAlister. I was in the queue for another topic. Councilmember Hicks did you want to talk about this one? Councilmember McAlister did you? Does anybody want to talk about that one? Okay. Um do we do this by sorry just to be clear for the record it was item 7.2 on the September 10th agenda. Just to be clear. And then also uh if you could request if there's any public comment on this this um that would be appropriate.

[06:11:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Is there anyone from the public who wishes to address this on item 7.2 from September 10th? And the motion made.

[06:11:34] Public Speaker: I agree with unclear.

[06:11:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Could you speak into the mic please?

[06:11:45] Public Speaker: No that was entirely fair. Yeah. Uh I agree with unclear.

[06:11:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[06:11:51] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: So just just to clarify the motion, um the motion is to reconsider but also to defer action on a discussion about it until the minutes come back. Is that correct? That's all one

[06:12:04] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: It's basically a motion to reconsider that item but but um defer it to a time and date certain which is whatever meeting those minutes come back so that we can sort of consider everything all. I don't expect it to be a very long conversation.

[06:12:18] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, just to clarify if it's to a date certain we have to state the date certain I believe we're hoping to have the minutes at the next week.

[06:12:26] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Correct.

[06:12:27] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Which is October 1st.

[06:12:32] Councilmember Christopher R. Clark: Yeah. So I guess we're yeah so we're making the mo basically we'll just agendize that motion to reconsider for um or the the item for the next date.

[06:12:42] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah Krishan can jump in.

[06:12:44] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: I think you have to do the motion to reconsider tonight but you can defer action on the discussion of it to a later date to when the minutes are brought back to you and then you can have the text in front of you and have the discussion then.

[06:13:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Any further discussion on this? Do we use do we show of hands or we can use this? Oh, there you go. Very good. And that motion passes unanimously. Okay, so um back to the rest of item 9. Um so I had a couple things um just wanted to report that um there was a BAAQMD board meeting last week and um it's been really interesting to be the new representative for the city on that board. Certainly learned a lot about the complexities um and I'm sure I'll learn more. But um uh I will provide um regular updates but right now there isn't one. Um and then also based upon public comment on items not on the agenda for HR 763, um apparently Mr. Attinger said he would um look into that, but I think we should make the formal request to um the City Manager to say does staff have time to take a look at that and let us know if that's something we want to weigh in on.

[06:14:18] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah, I mean we always look at legislation that we think might be relevant when it's brought to our attention. Um as you all know we have a policy that if it's within certain parameters the Mayor is already pre-authorized to sign it, so we can look at it and see if it meets those parameters and if Council so directs us tonight if it doesn't meet those parameters we could bring it back to you. Uh certainly um we have a priority of sustainability so the broad brush it meets that, but you know the devil's in the detail of legislation and the exact methods suggested in a particular bill may or may not be consistent with our priorities or may go beyond the scope of our authority to to unilaterally take a position on it. But we can certainly look at it and report back to you or again if you'd like to direct us now to bring it back if it doesn't match we can do that.

[06:15:15] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah I that would be my motion is to take a look at it and if it doesn't meet the policy to bring it to Council for discussion. And yep. Are there four nodding heads? I see at least five or six. And that's it for me. Councilmember Hicks.

[06:15:38] Councilmember Alison Hicks: So I am your representative to the Grand Boulevard Initiative Task Force and I was there um at at their meeting last week. I believe it was last week. Um and you probably know that the uh Grand Boulevard Initiative was started over 10 years ago. I don't know the exact date. It's a meeting of like 19 cities and counties and other local and regional agencies to make to try to improve the uh El Camino Real that runs through all of our cities. Um and they looked at a number of different things. I think they think the most well basically the upshot of the of the meetings this year has been that they've kind of run their course in terms of the their main objectives. They believe that they're so they kind of have summed up this year and they believe that their um main achievement they looked at all sorts of things like consolidating the boulevard, making it into a JPA, other uh more consolidated things. They ended up thinking that the um their biggest achievement was probably coming up with 10 guiding principles to make it more mixed use, have more housing, more walkable, preserve the things that are best about it but move on in a lot of ways. And so now they're moving into a different phase where they're going to be looking more at instead of trying to unify it and come up with guiding principles, looking at some of the they're going to be smaller meetings where you maybe have tours of the most successful areas or discuss um some of the some of the issues that people find most vexing. So people brought up what some of those were. Um they included things like uh making retail more functional, um I think the phrase retail apocalypse was mentioned. Um also uh looking at places where the um where the train stations and the El Camino intersect and there's a nearly intersect and there's some problems. There were a number of different like discrete identifiable um situations that they wanted to have meetings around, but the the um long term effort they feel like it's kind of run its course. So that's my report.

[06:18:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Councilmember McAlister.

[06:18:14] Councilmember John McAlister: Um couple of items. Uh uh so we were talking earlier tonight about bringing back um the uh parking spaces in in lieu fee. If we could bring uh bring that discussion for about bringing it up more current.

[06:18:32] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Yeah you're talking about Q1 2020 for that?

[06:18:36] Councilmember John McAlister: Yes.

[06:18:38] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Or December 19th uh 17th. Yeah I mean normally that would be done as part of the budget process, but um certainly we can um bring it back earlier if that's the desire of the council.

[06:18:50] Mayor Lisa Matichak: We have four nodding heads for that one. Or four hands raised. Yep.

[06:18:55] Councilmember John McAlister: Okay, thank you. Um a couple of things on the transportation side. We had a VTA meeting and we had an SR 85. And on the SR 85 the noise was brought up. Uh there's five pilot project areas and one is in Mountain View. And the discussion was going back and forth that they were thinking about putting an asphalt overlay over the concrete. But then somebody mentioned that if you did that there is regular maintenance on that and who would take care of that. And Caltrain was at the meeting and they said well we're not sure we would want to continue to pay that. The other option of trying to reduce the noise and uh would be a cap on the sound walls which would therefore the sound would go inward, reflect back down. The project pilot project area is over at Lubich over by the high school. And so that's the one that affects Mountain View. But there is $12 million in the VTA budget for the coming years to look at uh actually they're going to go out with an RFP and get this project moving forward. That $12 million also is related to the SR 85 project transit lane. So uh but we are finally making some progress. It was interesting to note that this study was done two years ago and it sounded like they were going to reinvent the wheel. Um again but doing some more studies but the the PAB the Policy Advisory Board said you guys already have the information we'd like to see this done sooner than later. So that's moving forward. Uh at the VTA we had an update on phase 2 of BART. And what was interesting is that they were showing us various funding mechanisms, but that they figured that they had to go for a P3 of $600 million to complete the project. And so there was concern of funding. We were assured that no money would be coming out of out of Measure B that's was already appropriated for the uh various items on Measure B. So we are North County and West County cities are very uh active in making sure that Bart goes along with the funding that was originally approved to them. But it was interesting to say that oh yeah we got a $600 million shortfall plus they're going out for bonding but they didn't know what the debt service was on the bonding gonna be. So um it's uh interesting how they come up with their numbers. And then they also said well we won't know a number better number of the cost of doing it until we're at 30% design. Well they're at 10% design now. So somewhere in there they're going to come up with a final dollar amount with at a 30% design project. Uh so it's it's in limbo. So just pay to pay attention to where the money go follow the money as they say. Uh and that's pretty much it for the transportation side.

[06:21:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Anyone else? Um okay onto item 10, is there a closed session report?

[06:22:01] City Attorney Krishan Chopra: There's no closed session report.

[06:22:03] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. So we will adjourn this meeting to the next Council meeting that will be held on Tuesday, October 1st, 2019 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 500 Castro Street.

Gap between 0:18:32 and 0:45:00

[00:26:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: One or one more Councilmember to return and then we'll get going. I will say I apologize for being late. We had a closed session that went longer than we expected it to. And so I apologize for getting started a little bit late. But we'll get started in just a couple minutes.

[00:27:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, I guess we will get started and he'll be here momentarily. So we will call the meeting to order. And we will start with the Pledge of Allegiance. If you will join me for that. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[00:27:55] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next item is roll call.

[00:27:57] City Clerk Heather Glaser: All Councilmembers are present. Thank you.

[00:28:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next item is 4.0, the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council or audience wishes to remove the item for discussion. The reading of the full text of ordinances and resolutions will be waived unless a Councilmember requests otherwise. Are there any items that a Councilmember would like to pull? Okay, seeing none, are there any items that a member of the public would like to pull? Okay, seeing none, Councilmember Clark.

[00:28:38] Councilmember Chris Clark: I'll move that we approve the consent calendar, which includes item 4.3, that we adopt a resolution of the Mountain View City Council authorizing the application for and receipt of SB2 planning grant program funds to be read in title only, further reading waived. And 4.4, adopt a resolution approving salary plan documents for fiscal year 2014-15 through fiscal year 2019-20 to comply with the public employees retirement law definition of compensable earnings as defined by Government Code Section 20636 and the definition of publicly available pay schedules defined by California Code of Regulations Section 570.5a8, to be read in title only, further reading waived.

[00:29:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So we have a motion by Councilmember Clark and a second by Councilmember Ramirez. Any further discussion? Okay, we can call the question. So the consent calendar passes unanimously.

[00:29:41] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next item on the agenda is 5.0, which is oral communications. And this portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter not on the agenda. Speakers are allowed to speak on any topic for up to three minutes during this section. And state law prohibits the Council from acting on non-agenda items. So is there anyone who wishes to address the Council on items that are not on the agenda tonight? If you could come up to the microphone and be sure to fill out a blue card and leave it with our City Clerk either before or after you speak is fine. Welcome.

[00:30:23] Melise Lieb: Thank you. My name is Melise Lieb and I am a Mountain View resident. There's been a lot of momentum going on in recent days on fighting climate change. Definitely individuals are taking responsibility in reducing their fossil fuels. I know Mountain View for a long time has been instrumental in making the city sustainable. I am so grateful for that, that my city is doing that. But that's not enough.

[00:30:56] Melise Lieb: We need to do more at the national level. And I'm here to give Mountain View the opportunity to do something at the national level. The way that they can do that is to endorse H.R. 763, the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act, an active bill on the U.S. House floor. A carbon dividend policy works by putting a fee on fossil fuels like coal, oil, and gas.

[00:31:30] Melise Lieb: It distributes 100% of that money on a share basis to individuals, and those individuals can spend it, excuse me, not individuals, but households who can spend it as they see fit. This legislation will be effective. It will reduce America's emissions by 40% by 2030 and by 90% by 2050. I support this bill because it's something that we all can agree on.

[00:32:32] Melise Lieb: But we need to do more. Endorsing this legislation will give us a voice at the national level. The city of Los Altos, as well as both California's state legislature and state Senate, have already endorsed carbon fee and dividend. I contacted Steve Attinger, your sustainability manager, last month, and he is agreeable to doing an assessment of this policy. Tonight, I encourage you to officially ask Steve to make a recommendation. I will return at the next meeting to follow up on the progress. Thank you.

[00:33:20] Joan McDonald: Good evening. I'm speaking for myself. Joan McDonald. I know that you are faced with very difficult decisions, particularly the ones on this particular agenda. What I want to say is broader than either of the items on the agenda. And I want to say this in a very heartfelt way.

[00:33:50] Joan McDonald: I think all of us, whether it's through our families, our churches, our temples, our schools, however, have been encouraged to agree that we are our brothers' keepers, and that's brothers and sisters. That there but for fortune go you or I. And especially the golden rule, which is universal.

N/A

[01:06:38] Public Speaker Dave Arnone: Hi, I'm Dave Arnone and, um, I want to continue in the spirit that Ida Rose has set. I want to propose that with regards to, uh, parking restrictions that we go slow. That we resist the temptation to take on the full set of recommendations, but instead we begin some restrictions at a few key locations or hot button locations that have all that have come up over time.

[01:07:06] Public Speaker Dave Arnone: I think if we start with a few key locations we'll allow enough parking flexibility for all of those vehicles to naturally relocate, maybe into some spots that a lot of us will feel better about. Small significant changes is what I want to recommend. I want to recommend that we go slow, watch what happens, learn and adjust.

[01:07:28] Public Speaker Dave Arnone: Those are our brothers and sisters out there. Their lives, they've got families, and they've got homes. And I just want to ask that we go slow. Thanks.

[01:07:42] Public Speaker Mark Lensner: Hi, my name is Mark Lensner. I've lived on Shoreline Boulevard for the past 31 years, and I have been a bike commuter for most of the last 10 years. As much as I appreciate making Mountain View very bike friendly, and I understand and recognize staff's logic in the proposals, I have to say staff could have been directed to find solutions that let the RVs stay and make the streets safe, rather than banning the RVs.

[01:08:11] Public Speaker Mark Lensner: I think these proposals instead will have the effect of displacing 300 of our community's families, and they've already been displaced from other housing options. I think it's unconscionable for us in Mountain View to displace our community's families until we have found and implemented some solution to affordable housing here.

[01:08:31] Public Speaker Mark Lensner: Since the item that follows, safe parking, doesn't even come close to providing 300 stable family places at all, I urge the council to reject these restrictions until Mountain View has a stable housing solution for all these community families. Thanks.

[01:08:53] Public Speaker Remi Goldsmith: Good evening Mayor, Council, uh, thanks everybody for putting up with my kids. Uh, my name is Remi Goldsmith. I've been living in Mountain View for two years. And I'm here tonight because of these guys. I want to raise my kids in a community that everybody is welcome. Not just people who can afford a home, uh, purchase it, not just people who can afford the $4,000 rent that my husband and I pay each month.

[01:09:20] Public Speaker Remi Goldsmith: This is something that, but for the grace of God, most of us are only a couple months away from being just like the folks who are now looking at being displaced from their community and who are right now doing everything that they can to stay in the community that they have roots in. I urge you all to vote against this ban because this is about having a community where all people are welcome. Thank you.

[01:09:46] Public Speaker Arnold Leon: Good evening, my name is Arnold Leon, Mountain View resident. To the Mountain View City Council members, I preface my comments and suggestions with the belief that almost all Mountain View residents, whether property owners or renters, want a safe, clean, and neat community to live in.

[01:10:01] Public Speaker Arnold Leon: With regards to the third goal of a neat place to live, and specifically with regards to the long-standing RV vehicle dwellers causing blight and other problems for Mountain View, I offer the following comments and suggestions. Ban on sleeping in vehicles.

[01:10:16] Public Speaker Arnold Leon: The city of Los Angeles, California, with over 4 million residents and many more RV street vehicle dwellers than Mountain View has, reinstated on August 16th, 2019, by a City Council vote of 13 to zero, a legally defensible total ban on public street sleeping overnight in vehicles, regardless of type and size, as and as defined in the California Vehicle Code.

[01:10:39] Public Speaker Arnold Leon: The full description of the ban can be read in the Los Angeles City Code Section 85.02, entitled Regulating the Use of Vehicles for Dwelling. The code begins with the phrase, 'No person shall use a vehicle for dwelling.' I have given the council clerk three copies of the Los Angeles ordinance. I hope the City Council will read it. It's a short two-page, easy to read ban.

[01:11:04] Public Speaker Arnold Leon: I compared it against the oversized vehicle uh proposal, and I really believe that the Los Angeles ban will resolve the issues that we really uh are confronted with. I thus recommend the Mountain View City Council consider implementing a similar...

[01:11:19] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you.

[01:11:21] Public Speaker Arnold Leon: Thank you.

[01:11:22] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next please.

[01:11:55] Public Speaker Lenny Siegel: Thank you. Lenny Siegel speaking for the Housing Justice Coalition. This is not about traffic safety!

Unknown

[01:25:00] Public Speaker: neighbors do. Where sight lines are a problem, you can daylight the intersection where the lanes are narrow.

[01:25:07] Public Speaker: Please, you know, convert the travel lanes to bike lanes, um, to bike lanes like we've been asking.

[01:25:13] Public Speaker: I'm asking you to reject this ordinance, and um, that's it. Thank you.

[01:25:25] Rachel Gilbert: My name is Rachel Gilbert, and I live in Mountain View. And so we know that there is an affordable housing shortage in California.

[01:25:32] Rachel Gilbert: Um, nationally, there is a shortage of 7 million affordable units. So if you kick people out, where are they supposed to go?

[01:25:41] Rachel Gilbert: Please remember that homeowners are not your only constituents. Renters are your constituents. The people who live in RVs are also your constituents.

[01:25:52] Rachel Gilbert: We are all supposed to be equal in a democracy. If you truly believe that you are here to represent the people in a democracy, that all people have inherent worth and dignity,

[01:26:04] Rachel Gilbert: and if you realize that you too will need help at some point in your life, then please vote no on the RV ban. Thank you.

[01:26:19] Public Speaker: Hi council. Thank you very much for being here. I would like to thank each and every one of you for spending all your time working on this problem.

[01:26:25] Public Speaker: Everybody knows that it's a problem, but your answer today isn't the answer. And you know that this is a complete city-wide ban on these people.

[01:26:33] Public Speaker: These people could be your children or you if you don't have a safety net if should something forbid happen to you and you become disabled.

[01:26:42] Public Speaker: Every one of you have the option of not being or the opportunity unfortunately maybe of having losing your home and getting an RV.

[01:26:50] Public Speaker: My choice of being in an RV, Mayor, was between being on the street and in a parking lot or on a bench or being in an RV.

[01:26:57] Public Speaker: None of these people make choices to be in an RV. It is that or be on the wet ground.

[01:27:03] Public Speaker: And I'd like you to seriously consider the no the ordinance absolutely more than a little bit unfair. Right? Thank you.

[01:27:21] Joe Lopez: My name is Joe Lopez, a resident of Mountain View. Thank God that I have a place to live, but I am here in support of my brothers and sisters who do not have a place like I do.

[01:27:34] Joe Lopez: Um, I agree totally with what Lenny Siegel talked about. And I also want to remind you once again, even if it may sound as a broken record,

[01:27:44] Joe Lopez: that you, each one of you has the moral responsibility, you have the moral obligation to look for the good of your brothers and sisters.

[01:27:56] Joe Lopez: You were elected to take care of each one of us in your community, and in many ways you are not doing that. So please listen to what we say.

[01:28:08] Joe Lopez: I agree that some elements of some sanitary issues, some safety issues, some uh healthy issues have to be taken into account in regards to this whole situation.

[01:28:22] Joe Lopez: But don't go so far down the road, don't be so picky. Don't be wasting maybe thousands of dollars in unnecessary things.

[01:28:31] Joe Lopez: Just having the staff checking and checking and measuring and and deciding, you know, by foot what to do, okay? So please take that into account.

[01:28:42] Joe Lopez: The dignity of each brother and sister is the same dignity that you have. The human dignity. And that's what you have to to take into account. Thank you.

[01:28:58] Conor O'Brien: Uh, Conor O'Brien. I'm a Mountain View resident. And uh I want to speak against uh these restrictions.

[01:29:03] Conor O'Brien: As you've been hearing, uh for a lot of our neighbors, these restrictions would take away the last option that they have for remaining in Mountain View.

[01:29:11] Conor O'Brien: It would rule out most of the streets where RVs are parking now, and the plans for more safe parking will not be enough to cover the new need that this policy would create.

[01:29:20] Conor O'Brien: Uh, a few months ago, it was very encouraging when you all voted to prioritize fighting displacement in Mountain View.

[01:29:26] Conor O'Brien: Passing this ban would set back that fight before, practically before it's even started.

[01:29:31] Conor O'Brien: A real commitment to ending displacement has to start with not doing new harm by passing policies to unnecessarily displace residents.

[01:29:39] Conor O'Brien: There's also, there was some discussion earlier on about opening up uh wider streets to allow places for people to park, which is great, but I think the order's completely wrong here.

[01:29:49] Conor O'Brien: Finding where people are gonna go needs to be a prerequisite to kicking them out of the places they are now, uh, not an afterthought that you'll say you'll look at after passing this. Thank you.

N/A

[04:20:40] Dave Arnani: these families uh be able to participate in the schools. And I just want to say I strongly support the preference for families with students in the school.

[04:20:55] Lenny Siegel: About 10 or 12.

[04:21:41] Lenny Siegel: Good evening, Lenny Siegel again for the Housing Justice Coalition. As you know, I've been arguing for what we call safe parking for years, but I believe that the current plan uh in your ordinance as well as what the city's working on for city-owned lots uh is designed to fail. And I base this on meetings that I've had uh with vehicle residents when I was still mayor. I met with about 30 or 40 uh in late 2018.

[04:22:11] Lenny Siegel: The purposes of off-street safe parking are first, as Mr. Arnani says, to provide short-term humane living conditions for people living in vehicles. Second, as Councilmember McAlister suggested, offer a pathway to permanent local housing for those who want it. And third, uh because you if you if you read the uh Nextdoor or the comment the anonymous comments in the in the Voice, uh there are people in our town who don't want to see the uh people who are living in vehicles. So so another purpose of off-street parking is to to make them less visible for people who think they're a blight.

[04:22:44] Lenny Siegel: The characteristics that I of what I call a lots of sense program, it would be based on the needs of Mountain View vehicle residents, people who are employed, in school, or retired. The conditions should be as safe or safer than on the streets. It should be cost-effective. It should offer flexibility to the service providers and minimize the impacts on nearby properties. But the proposal that you have right before you is designed to fail. Its intent it looks like its intended to drive people out of town, it doesn't meet their needs. You should be listening to them.

[04:23:19] Lenny Siegel: The biggest problem is the requirement that people be expelled at 7 o'clock every morning. Now some lots like the churches, you have to you have to have a a departure time because they're being used for other things. The city-owned lots don't. It's a hardship for people whose schedules don't match the 7 to 7 requirement. Uh it'll generate traffic at rush hour. Um and I cannot find in state law any place that it says that you have to expel people at 7 7 a.m. every day to not be a mobile home park or an RV park. In fact, the definitions that I've found say that it's based upon whether you're paying rent. If a veh if a vehicle owner pays rent, then it can be a mobile home park or an RV park or a temporary RV park. We have the flexibility to do something for 7 days, for 30 days and not be subject to all those extra state state regulations.

[04:24:09] Lenny Siegel: This is the biggest thing I hear, not just from the vehicle residents, but the the organizations that provide them with services. People need to be able to not have to to arrange their schedule around this arbitrary 7 a.m. um maybe they're some you know you locate it in a restaurant parking lot, maybe it'll be 11 a.m. Maybe it'll be at uh the VTA lot where you could be there all day for a week or more.

[04:24:35] Lenny Siegel: There are practical issues. People need electricity not just for the internet, refrigerators, lighting, and other equipment. The batteries run down. The only way they charge their batteries if they aren't allowed generators is to drive the vehicles. So we want them driving around to generate electricity to uh so they can run their refrigerators? Doesn't make any sense to me. There's no provision in this for the people who have associated vehicles. There are people who live in their vehicles and drive another vehicle to work or there are two people who go to work in different places.

[04:25:05] Lenny Siegel: Um by the way getting back to the the 7 o'clock departure time, where are they gonna go if you pass the ban? Where are they gonna go? Are they gonna you know park on somebody's lawn? I don't know.

[04:25:17] Lenny Siegel: Um issues of lighting. The thing that's hidden in the in the ordinance, I don't know how many people have read it, but there are a number of restrictions. People who sign up for safe parking have to agree to no alcohol in their in their um in their motorhome. Why why is that? Do people who live in homes have alcohol? Maybe we shouldn't allow firearms, I don't know, maybe we shouldn't allow smoking. But alcohol? Have you really read all the details in the in the in the participant agreement?

[05:36:42] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, I do have so I I I broadly support the staff recommendation. There are a couple of specific things I'd like to suggest. One is um the emergency shelter bed maximum. Um, I I appreciate staff's um explanation for how we arrived at a 78 bed or person maximum for emergency shelter and the first thing that comes to mind is it's based on quite old data. And I I also agree with staff's uh point that we may not want to use the same methodology for calculating a new maximum, um, but I I think moving it to the range that staff identified um I think would be would be useful. And if for no other reason than that uh if we do have an emergency shelter provided, you know, it it it may be more cost effective to serve more people.

[05:37:39] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, and you know, I I like you know, 150 is at the at the upper end of that range. Um, you know if if there are different numbers, I'm happy to to explore that, but um it's hard to pick the right number, any number feels arbitrary. But looking at 150, um, and uh and focusing on some of the populations that were identified, so specifically a shelter for um survivors of domestic violence and a shelter for families, because both of those groups have very specific needs um that are difficult to serve and um you know, a you know, a shelter that that provides um space for a mixed population like the the one in Sunnyvale I think is important, but you can't you can't then specifically address the needs of of those most vulnerable populations.

[05:38:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So, um, as part of direction maybe to staff, you know, we're doing really good work with modifications to the zoning code, but you know perhaps working with the county, with Destination: Home, with whomever, um if there are ways we can increase our emergency shelter capacity, and in particular focus on those populations, I think that would be, um, I think that I would very strongly support that.

[05:38:55] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, and then the last thing is uh and maybe this is a little bit of a harder sell, I I don't think we should totally eliminate, you know, any regulations for safe parking on privately owned lots. But, you know, as I was thinking about this over the past week, the private property owner and the safe parking operator both have a very strong incentive to make this work. And if there are some regulations that make sense for public lots but don't make sense for private lots, then I'd be interested in providing some flexibility.

[05:39:28] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Um, and that like I I don't know if we need to enforce a hard you know, time frame for private lots. I think if you operate a business you're going to want folks to transition out eventually, and maybe 7:30 a.m. or 8:00 a.m. is is, you know, acceptable to the private property owner. Um, I would leave that up to them, and as long as you the findings can be made, because there they have to go through uh you know once the the shelter crisis um expires they'd have to go through a discretionary process, and so findings would have to be made uh to show that this incidental use is compatible with the existing use.

[05:40:00] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: You know, I'm I'm more comfortable providing flexibility because there are a lot of other things that they have to do in order to make this work. And the overriding consideration is if the process is perceived as too onerous or too restrictive, we'll probably discourage some folks who are maybe at the margin from participating.

[05:40:25] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: So, um, you know, maybe having a different set of a different regulatory framework for private lots that provides a little bit of flexibility, you know basic public health and safety, you know, absolutely, we should we should continue to include that, but um you know, the private property owner will want to make this work, you know the safe parking operator will want to make this work. And so I don't feel the need to be as restrictive as we might be want to be and and should be with public lots. Um, so that's uh that's what I've got so far. Thank you.

[05:40:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Vice Mayor Abe-Koga.

[05:41:01] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Thank you. Um, so I I again appreciate staff and the recommendations. I support pretty much all of it. Um, I would entertain um Councilmember Ramirez's comments about maybe some flexibility on private property lots.

[05:41:17] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: Um, I had a I guess a question um regarding the Human Relations Commission and um I don't know, I guess just oversight of their work towards doing outreach. Um, just because you know our commissioners are really truly volunteers and um take on the role as a volunteer.

[05:41:43] Vice Mayor Margaret Abe-Koga: So, um, you know, on the one hand, I'm happy to um have them assist in this uh effort, but I also feel like there should be some kind of timeline or

Safe Parking Ordinance

[05:50:28] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: that the requirements can't be changed, we've heard the desire for flexibility of these were not arbitrarily put in here, they were put in here based on best practices and other communities as well as what we believe to be bare minimum life and safety requirements from the code and the health and safety both of the residents as well as neighboring properties.

[05:50:54] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Oh sorry, I was just going to clarify for the record then for the so the hours changed would be changes to that section 36.32.10 from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. is the proposal.

[05:51:11] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Correct.

[05:51:12] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Thank you. And so just to be clear, that's 'may', the private property owner and the safe parking operator 'may' elect to have a different time span. If they couldn't do 5 to 9 for instance, they may choose to do 7 to 7. That would be at their discretion.

[05:51:28] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Yeah, they could do it within that time frame and when the parking lot is not in use by the primary use of the site. So it's both of those pieces.

[05:51:38] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you for the clarification. Um, so I'm wondering if the maker and seconder of the motion would be willing to include a couple of other things. Um, so first, we've heard some concerns about requirements to have certain striping on the parking lot and um, a requirement to have folks move around. And I'm not sure we need to micromanage that. I think that would fall within flexibility. The private property owner can figure out... I don't want to have to make them change parking lot striping.

[05:52:17] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Didn't we change the striping and we took that out?

[05:52:20] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Is there a specific requirement for striping in here? I don't recall seeing that in the ordinance.

[05:52:24] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: No, no I don't think that there is. There's just a numerical vehicle, maximum of 30 vehicles, but no parking...

[05:52:31] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: I think you may be referring to some initial requirements for the Palo Alto Housing Corporation site, but that is not part of this ordinance.

[05:52:38] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Okay, thank you for the clarification. Um, two other changes I'm hoping you'd be willing to include. One is increasing the shelter bed maximum from 78 to 150. And the other would be to direct staff to work with the county to identify potential space for emergency shelter for domestic violence survivors and for families.

[05:53:05] Councilmember John McAlister: I think that's a good idea, but I think you're getting off the topic of safe parking. And so that's what we're working on is a safe parking ordinance...

[05:53:13] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: And also emergency shelter.

[05:53:14] Councilmember John McAlister: Well there are some fine lines, so...

[05:53:16] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Well there's part of the motion is to, um, where is it, um, the county plans for emergency shelters, yeah.

[05:53:26] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: There is a section specifically on shelters. I think changing the number is something we can do. The other, in terms of priorities, I'm not sure that necessarily needs to be in an ordinance. I think that's a conversation with the county and any operator of a shelter that we would love to see those kinds of priorities given.

[05:53:47] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Just to be clear, Vice Mayor I thought had a great idea to explore working with the school districts potentially to have emergency shelter on joint-use property, I guess. So just to have a preliminary conversation to see if that's feasible, because that may be space for folks who don't have any alternative right now.

[05:54:13] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: Certainly that could be part of the motion if council desires, just... happy to have that conversation with the school districts. As mentioned, those are jointly used facilities and they're pretty heavily used in the evenings for sports organizations, so there would be trade-offs.

[05:54:31] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So I have a question on what are the implications of changing the number of beds from 78 to 150?

[05:54:43] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: I mean that's something that we can read into the record. Is that what you're wondering? If we can do that now?

[05:54:49] Mayor Lisa Matichak: No, what are the implications, like the operational... not the implications to tweak this, but the operating implications.

[05:54:57] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: Operationally, I don't know if Ms. Williams or Ms. Srivastava can speak to that item? That was responded to by Community Development.

[05:55:08] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Yeah, and I was going to ask the same question actually. My, seems like my preference would be a network of smaller sites, but so I just want to know what are best practices and what are the implications of raising that number, which I guess is the same question.

[05:55:19] Asha Srivastava: We actually probably need to research best practices. Asha Srivastava, Director of Community Development. Um, so I can't say that I know for sure, but I, you know, I think the most I've heard of is a 100-bed facility. I think our idea was more to... the need was much higher, came closer to 500, and so we said it's better to limit it to smaller chunks and we recommended a range of 100 to 150. Um, but I would imagine that the providers who would run the facilities would be the ones who would be proposing the number of beds based on what they could do. So it's not like the city requires a certain size, we just want to limit it to not go above a certain size.

[05:55:59] Mayor Lisa Matichak: So, um, did you want to...

[05:56:02] Councilmember John McAlister: But I'm still trying to understand, okay, if there's no operational... was your reference that there was a code to keep it small or your thought it was best practices to keep it a little smaller? Okay.

[05:56:16] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: There was a, I asked a question about this and the specific reason it's at 78 right now is because that number was established based on the average Santa Clara census homeless population data from 2007, 2009, and 2011. And I was wondering if we were to use the same methodology, what would the number be now? And it would be 511 or something like that. So I'm not suggesting we have a maximum of 511. I think staff's more modest approach, you know, with their maximum of 150 seems reasonable based on, you know, if we're looking at the average number of, or the average homeless population over the past several years, it's gone up pretty significantly. Um, so updating the number to be more responsive to that need I think would be appropriate.

[05:57:16] Councilmember John McAlister: So what, you're just... so the question is, the maximum number of beds would go up to a hundred?

[05:57:21] Mayor Lisa Matichak: 150.

[05:57:22] Councilmember John McAlister: 150.

[05:57:24] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: As opposed to 511.

[05:57:26] Councilmember John McAlister: For what? Per city? Per what?

[05:57:30] Councilmember Lucas Ramirez: Per shelter. And that's a maximum, not a requirement.

[05:57:34] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Right.

[05:57:36] Councilmember John McAlister: That's fine. Where is that in the...

[05:57:39] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Council questions, it was a response to a question.

[05:57:42] Councilmember John McAlister: No sorry, where is it in the ordinance?

[05:57:46] Councilmember Ellen Kamei: It's on page 7, section 36.28.70 subsection f.

[05:57:53] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, f.

[05:58:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Thank you.

[05:58:03] Councilmember John McAlister: That means I've made the motion so...

[05:58:06] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay. Councilmember Clark.

[05:58:10] Councilmember Chris Clark: Um, so I asked this question late and I just wanted to... one thing that I thought of over the weekend was, you know we have a preference for um, families with children in the schools and one thing that I recalled from a prior public comment um was um, some folks um, who are students attending local community colleges and I know that the assembly, Assemblymember Berman actually was trying to address this and it got turned into a two-year bill. And so I didn't know if um, I didn't know if that was just sort of understood to be part of sort of the families um and kids in the school system or if we wanted, if we needed to call that out as a special priority somewhere or if we should just let it go. I mean my colleagues may not think that's worth prioritizing, but it just came to mind just given the legislation turned into a two-year bill and I specifically remember a, you know, some folks providing public comment on that. And I just wanted to make sure that we were at least considering some sort of priority for those folks. But um...

[05:59:10] City Manager Daniel H. Rich: I think the intent as staff interprets it of the current wording is the intent is for K through 12. So it's families with students in local schools. You certainly could add another category for community college students. I would ask that you be fairly specific on how you define that. Um, I think most student...

Call to Order

[00:36:40] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Are, one more council member to return and then we'll get going. I will say I'm, apologize for being late. We had a closed session that went longer than we expected it to, and so I apologize for getting started a little bit late. But we'll get started in just a couple minutes.

[00:37:20] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Okay, I guess we will get started and he'll be here momentarily. So we will call the meeting to order. And we will start with the pledge of allegiance if you will join me for that.

[00:37:35] Mayor Lisa Matichak: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Roll Call

[00:37:56] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Next item is roll call.

[00:37:58] City Clerk Heather Glaser: All council members are present, thank you.

4.0 Consent Calendar

[00:38:00] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Next item is 4.0, the consent calendar. These items will be approved by one motion unless any member of the council or audience wishes to remove the item for discussion. The reading of the full text of ordinances and resolutions will be waived unless a council member requests otherwise. Are there any items that a council member would like to pull? Okay, seeing none, are there any items that a member of the public would like to pull? Okay, seeing none. Councilmember Clark.

[00:38:38] Councilmember Chris Clark: Move that we approve the consent calendar which includes item 4.3, that we adopt a resolution of the Mountain View City Council authorizing the application for and receipt of SB2 planning grant program funds to be read in title only, further reading waived, and 4.4, adopt a resolution approving salary plan documents from fiscal year 2014-15 through fiscal year 2019-20 to comply with the public employees retirement law definition of comprehensible, early, earnings, as defined by government section code 20636 and the definition of publicly available pay schedules defined by California code of regulations section 570.5(a)(8), to be read in title only, further reading waived.

5.0 Oral Communications

[00:40:23] Melise Lieb: Thank you. My name is Melise Lieb and I am a Mountain View resident. There has been a lot of momentum going on in recent days on fighting climate change. Definitely individuals are taking responsibility in reducing their fossil fuels. I know Mountain View for a long time has been instrumental in making this city sustainable. I am great-, so grateful for that, that my city is doing that. But that's not enough. We need to do more at the national level. And I'm here to give Mountain View the opportunity to do something at the national level. The way that they can do that is to endorse HR 763, the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act, an active bill on the US House floor. A carbon dividend policy works by putting a fee on fossil fuels, like coal, oil, and gas. It distributes 100% of that money on a share basis to individuals, and those individuals can spend it, or excuse me, not individuals but households, who can spend it as they see fit. This legislation will be effective. It will reduce America's emissions by 40% by 2030, and by 90% by 2050. I support this bill because it's something that we all can agree on. Liberals like it because it will improve the air we breathe. It will also put money in the hands of low and middle income Americans. Conservatives like it because it doesn't grow government, it's a free-market solution that doesn't pick winners or losers. And everybody likes it, it will create 2.1 million new jobs. I'm grateful that Mountain View has been a champion of clean energy at the local level. But we need to do more. Endorsing this legislation will give us a voice at the national level. The city of Los Altos as well as both California state legislature and state senate have already endorsed carbon fee and dividend. I contacted Steve Attinger, your sustainability manager last month, and he is agreeable to doing an assessment of this policy. Tonight I encourage you to officially ask Steve to make a recommendation. I will return at the next meeting to follow up on the progress. Thank you.

[00:43:10] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to address the council on an item that's not on the agenda?

[00:43:20] Joan McDonald: Good evening. I'm speaking for myself, Joan McDonald. I know that you are faced with very difficult decisions, particularly the ones on this particular agenda. What I want to say is broader than either of the items on the agenda. And I want to say this in a very heartfelt way. I think all of us, whether it was through our families, our churches, our temples, our schools, however, have been encouraged to agree that we are our brothers' keepers, and that's brothers and sisters. That there but for fortune go you or I. And especially the golden rule, which is universal. We wish to treat others as we would wish them to treat ourselves. You have the power to be compassionate and empathetic, and recognize that there but for fortune might go you or I. Thank you.

8.1 Resolution appointing extra help retired annuitant

[00:45:02] Mayor Lisa Matichak: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to address the council on an item not on the agenda? Okay, seeing none, we will close the public input, I'm sorry, the oral communications portion of the meeting. And tonight we have an item, it is item 8.1, which is a very brief item, so with my colleagues' indulgence, I would like to move that to now, and then we will get back to the regular agenda. My colleagues okay with that? Okay, so we will move to item 8.1, which is a resolution appointing an extra help retired annuitant under government code sections 7522.56 and 21224. And we will start with a brief staff presentation.

[00:46:05] City Staff: Thank you. Good evening.

• Next →