Hello, Mario. Would you like to do a mic check? Okay, can you hear me? Yes, I can. Thank you.  All right. I'll put you in the Spanish channel first. All right. It's Pablo with me. Pablo is also here. All right. Good. Pablo, mic check for you. Yes, I'm here. I was just muted, so I... Yeah, that's my mistake. Thank you. You're fine. Okay, great. Rhonda, do you want to have the interpreters make the announcement, please? Good afternoon. I'd like to ask the interpreter currently on the Spanish channel to commence translation of the meeting. For those just joining the meeting, live translation in Spanish is available. And members of the public or staff wishing to listen in Spanish can join the Spanish channel by clicking on the interpretation icon in the Zoom toolbar. It looks like a globe. Once you join the Spanish channel, we recommend you shut off the main audio so you can only hear the Spanish translation. Interpreter, will you please restate this in Spanish? Bienvenidos a esta reunión. Para los que recién se unen a la reunión, interpretación en vivo al español está disponible. Y los miembros o personales, quienes desean escuchar en español, podrán unirse al canal. Para unirse, haga click en el icono de interpretación que aparece en la barra de funciones de Zoom, que ahora aparece como un globo terraqueo. Una vez que se une al canal de español, comiende que apague el audio primario para que solo escuche la interpretación al español. Welcome everyone to our August 8, 2023 Santa Rosa City Council meeting. It is now 2.33 and we will begin our meeting. Welcome, Madam City Attorney. It's your first meeting, correct? It is my first meeting. Okay, so welcome. Thank you very much. Madam City Clerk, may you please call the roll. Council Member Stapp. Here. Council Member Rogers. Council Member Okrepke. Here. Council Member Fleming. Here. Council Member Alvarez. Present. Mayor or Vice Mayor McDonald. Here. And Mayor Rogers. Present. Let the record show that all council members are present with the exception of council member Rogers. We will continue to item 2.1. This item did not appear on the city's preliminary agenda. So as a result, prior to consideration of the item, we need the council by motion to find good cause to consider the item. Considerations for the council is making a good finding of good cause is the fact the need for immediate action on the item came to our attention after the final agenda had been posted. We will now take public comment on item 2.1. Madam City Clerk. Thank you Mayor. We are now taking public comment on item 2.1. If you are in the council chamber and you would like to make a comment, please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via Zoom, please dial star nine or raise your hand. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will appear at the end of that period. Mayor, I'm seeing no one approach the podium for public comment and no hands being raised via Zoom. Thank you Vice Mayor McDonald. May you please make a motion to add 2.1 to our agenda. I'd like to move that we add item 2.1 to our agenda since we are making a finding of good cause. Second. We have a motion made by Vice Mayor McDonald in a second made by Council Member O'Crepkey. Madam City Clerk, can you please call the vote? Council Member Stapp. Aye. Council Member Rogers. Council Member O'Crepkey. Aye. Council Member Fleming. Yes. Council Member Alvarez. Aye. Vice Mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. Council Member Pompeo that passes with six affirmative votes. Thank you. We will now proceed with item 2.1. Madam City Clerk, may you please facilitate public comment. Thank you. We are now taking public comment on item 2.1. Again if you're in Council Chamber and you would like to make a comment please make your way to the podium. If you are making a comment from Zoom please dial star nine or raise your hand. I see no hands being raised via Zoom and no public comments from the Chamber, Mayor. Thank you very much. much we will now recess into closed session. Welcome back seeing a quorum Madam City Clerk may you please take the role. Thank you. Councilmember Stapp. Here. Councilmember Rogers. Here. Councilmember O'Crepkey. Here. Councilmember Fleming. Here. Councilmember Alvarez. Vice Mayor McDonald. Here. And Mayor Rogers. Present. Let the record show that all councilmembers are present with the exception of councilmember Alvarez. Thank you we will now continue to item 3.3.1 interviews for boards commissions and committees. The council will interview applicants for the housing authority to fill one tenant commissioner at large vacancy and one tenant commissioner senior vacancy each to serve a two-year term expiring two years from the date of their appointment. Madam City Clerk may you please facilitate public comment. Thank you we are now taking public comment on housing authority interviews if you would like to provide a comment but have not made your way to the podium please do so if you are providing a comment via zoom please raise your hand or dial star nine you will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. Our first public comment will be from Gregory. Good afternoon. This is on. Yes. Good afternoon. Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Gregory Farron. You all sort of know me as an advocate for low income housing in the city. And once again I'm here to try to watch and observe and support the housing authority and your selection of housing authority members. I don't have to convince you but I think I'm just talking to the public that the role of the housing authority is supremely important to the city. It helps build and maintains low income housing and as such is central to the lives of people in the city. And so I'm here in support of the housing authority and support of those who are trying to serve on it. And I appreciate what you're doing today. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mayor. I see no additional hands being raised via zoom and no one else in council chamber approaching the podium. Thank you. We will start our interviews with Scott Wimmer for tenant commissioner at large and thank you for being here today and expressing interest in serving as the housing authority tenant commissioner. I will start the questions out by asking you to tell us a little about yourself and why you're interested in the position. Okay. How much time do I have? Three minutes? Sure. Okay. Veteran served in the Army National Guard as well for years both lived in Sonoma County all of my life except for four months. Let's see here grew up mostly in I guess the McDonald district. It's actually Monroe, which is a little ways away, but close enough. I went to Proctor Terrace Santa Rosa Junior College Santa Rosa Junior High Junior Santa Rosa. I think it's still called Santa Rosa Junior High, I guess, and then Santa Rosa High School from from the get go all the way through. No one in the military and of course went completely different training grounds there, but came back. Let's see 94 went to school at the JC and started serving on a active shooter board for the Santa Rosa Junior College as well as their safety board. Both implemented a lot of changes. A lot of those changes took we'll just say a very long time to get in. Some of them are still coming not not in yet, but they're working on them. Been on a couple veteran boards, really small ones. Start a help start that connect. Let's see here. As for boards, that's most most of the important ones. Let's see any questions? And Scott, why is it that you would like to serve? Oh why I would like to serve is because everybody has input and everybody has should have a chance to be able to put input and I do talk quite a bit with the community and I'm not really afraid to do that and I do outreach as well at most of the food food pantries and a few food pantries for Empire Food Bank and I chat with people all the time and they come to me a lot and tell me you know this is going on this is going on this is going on. So I'm hoping I can put some of that to use sort of outreach. Thank you. Any other questions from Council? Seeing none, thank you very much and thank you for your willingness to serve. We will continue with Joe Rodriguez. It doesn't appear that Joe is here so we will go to Timothy O'Brien. Mr. O'Brien thank you for being here today and expressing interest in serving as the Housing Authority Tenant Commissioner. I will start the questions by asking you the same questions and that is to tell us a little about yourself and why you're interested in the position keeping in mind that we did review your application so we do know a little bit. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Timothy O'Brien. I was born and raised Sacramento, California in 1955. I'm a United States Army veteran disabled. I've lived in Sacramento and Santa Rosa. I've lived in Santa Rosa for 34 years. I heard a beautiful green-eyed girl here in town. I've disabled overseas and I have a deep appreciation for being homeless as a veteran. My wife and I were homeless for seven months.  So we ended up homeless for seven months. So I do have a deep appreciation for what the City of Santa Rosa and HUD VASH has done to help us homeless veterans. I worked with Chapter 223, Vietnam Veterans. Also, I am vets post 40. I've worked with Redwood Empire Food Bank and to all my brother veterans, thank you for your service. I'm interested in helping on the commission to say thank you back to the City of Santa Rosa and HUD VASH for helping us veterans. I've served my community and my country and its people all my life and will continue to do so. Thank you. Thank you ma'am. Can you quickly tell us and I can kind of pull it out of what you already said, but why you think that you would be the best person to serve on the housing? I don't know that I would be the best person, ma'am, but I know that I'm dedicated and I know that I'll serve you back to the county. Can you come closer to the mic, please? I can't hear you. I'm dedicated, ma'am. I'll give back to the city and the county and the state that helped me and my wife. And I have a very special interest in being homeless, having been homeless, so I know how it feels and I know the despair and the hurt. So I think I might help. It's up to you good folks to make that decision. Okay. Are there any additional questions from council members? Seeing none, again, I would like to thank you very much for coming and your willingness to serve. Well, thank you too.  I think you did a great job. Thank you very much for being here. Is Rachelle Morton here? While Rachelle is making her way to the podium, I would like to go back a second and thank both Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Wimmer for your service. Kind of almost let that pass, but I didn't. So thank you very much for your service. Rachelle, thank you very much for being here today and your willingness to serve. We will start with the same two questions. And that is, please tell us a little about yourself and why you are interested in this position. I grew up in Sonoma County and I ended up moving away in 2017. I, sorry, is that better? I worked full-time, my husband worked full-time, and no matter how much we worked, it wasn't enough to afford housing. I moved to Reading, was able to go back to school. I got my bachelor's in business, graduated with a 4.0, went on to get my master's in education with a focus in counseling and a graduate certificate in restorative justice practices. The fact that I had to leave the town that I love and my family just so I could achieve my goals, people shouldn't have to do that. I ended up moving back here as a single mom with three kids. Having housing was the only reason I was able to do that. I came back here because my brother had terminal cancer. Sorry. And I watched him struggle with housing. I knew there has to be something better. This cannot be it. We have this beautiful, beautiful place that we live and we are not letting people live to their full potential to contribute, to be productive members of the society because of the housing costs. So I want to participate, I want to make changes. I want to not just be the voice for myself but the voice for others. I currently work with people on economic assistance, helping them find employment, and almost every single one struggles with housing. So not only do I want to be the voice for me and every other single parent, but the voice for everyone that's struggling just to survive in this town. Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there any additional questions from council members? Seeing none, thank you very much for coming here today and your willingness to serve. We now have Doug Freeman. Doug is participating via Zoom. Rhonda, can you please promote Doug for the interview? Doug, we promoted you to panelists. You can go ahead and unmute your mic and there you are. Thank you, Doug. Okay, great. Thank you. So I'm in my early 70s. I moved to Sonoma County in 1983 and I've lived in a number of the towns. Much of my living here has been in Santa Rosa, including the last 17 years. I'd like to say I have great respect for those who served in our armed forces and also note that during the Vietnam War, I didn't accept the student deferment that I was entitled to because I felt that my being in college and university was in part a function of class privilege. And so I was drafted and I served two years as a conscientious objector. And so I'm a different kind of veteran. The two years I worked were largely with people who were homeless or at extreme risk of becoming homeless. And at that time, there was a saying going around that if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. And that's one of the things that's guided me in more than 40 years of my subsequent working, both paid work and volunteer work, of which I've done a lot. And around the year 2000, I was working in a program out of the Marin Hospital with long-term homeless people, many of whom needed some additional support to maintain their newly homed status, support with dealing with getting to appointments, some of them with just dealing with getting groceries, and other things that many of us would just take for granted that they didn't have experience with. And I'm wondering, I know that my experience with both the Santa Rosa Housing Authority workers, and I ported in from Sonoma County Housing Authority as a Section 8 participant. The workers that I've had have been wonderful for me, but I'm wondering if there may be some Section 8 participants who might be able to use more support than the workers in the housing authority may have time to devote to them in order to thrive within the program. So that's one of the things, if I have the honor of being selected to be a board member, that I would like to look into more. Also, one thing I'd like to mention is that after I got my voucher and when I was interviewing with different landlords, I was fortunate in that I'd had a good credit rating. It was north of 700, and I'd had a number of interviews with landlords that were going, the interviews were going really well, but at the point where I mentioned that I had Section 8, and these landlords were listed on the list that said that they did accept Section 8. All of a sudden, the interview went south. They were not interested in me anymore, and I tried to frame Section 8 as a major incentive for the landlord. First of all, I framed it as, hey, a large portion of the rent is guaranteed at the beginning of the month from the Housing Authority. Secondarily, the tenant has a major incentive to be a good tenant. First of all, there's a long waiting list to get or qualify for Section 8, and if the tenant loses that by not being a good tenant, that's a major loss for the tenant, and so they have a big incentive to maintain their good status with the Housing Authority, and in my case, I had a good financial record of responsibility, but many landlords were not swayed by that. There are some landlords you're never going to reach because either they have an anti-government attitude or they're unwilling to maintain the level of the standard of maintaining their property at the level that the Housing Authority requires. Thank you, Mr. Friedman. We can definitely hear your passion and why you would be a good choice to work with the Housing Authority. I can talk for a long time, and I'm sorry if I've gone out too long. But you do have some valid concerns. Thank you very much. Are there any questions from council members? Seeing none, thank you very much for your willingness to serve, and thank you for serving our nation. Thank you for the opportunity to speak here, and I hope I get the opportunity to serve on the board. Yes, sir. We will now continue with Angela Conte. Hi. Hello. Let's see. I was born in Santa Rosa but actually grew up in Petaluma. I recently returned to Santa Rosa about 16 years ago now. I have a BA in psychology and fine art from SSU, and I locally, some of the things that I've been working on since I've been a resident of the housing, the local Housing Authority here in Santa Rosa. I was on the board of SAVES, the Sonoma Applied Villages, and I was on a funding committee for United Way for food resources to the community. Spent about seven months with the Continuum of Care, and also another seven months with Catholic Charities, helping them develop their grants department. Also, I was the first ever Marin County Youth Commissioner, not Commissioner, but Commissioner Lysen as a grants department head. Let's see. I was on the Stanford Housing Authorities, Stanford Connecticut Housing Authorities as a non-voting resident member as well, where I read their five-year plan, but I also read, I've read the Santa Rosa five-year plan, but that was probably about ten years ago, so I'm probably a planner to behind. My main issues right now with my life is I deal with a lot of health issues, and I also deal with a lot of social services, social services and SSI and things, but also I interact a lot with the Housing Authority, so those are kind of multiple areas I'm pretty familiar with. Online, if my name looks familiar, I'm pretty active on social media, and on Facebook I have several groups, and I'm actually friends with a couple of you, but one group is the Sonoma County Intentional Living Group, the Center for Collaborative Engagement page, and the Santa Rosa and Sonoma County Public Forum for Affordable Housing, and the Santa Rosa and Sonoma County Public Forum for Planning and Government. Okay, so those are all the things that I've been working on behind the scenes, and I feel like I'm pretty educated knowledge on a lot of the issues, and some experience within, you know, political realm, so what I'd like to see is what I can do with my voice as well, and that's it. Thank you for having me. Thank you. Any questions? Looking to Council to see if there are any questions? Council Member O'Crupeke? Yeah, thank you very much for coming, and thank you to everybody who's applied and for interviewing with us. I'm interested in your experience with the Housing Authority Advisory Board in Stanford, Connecticut. Can you go into a little bit more detail about what you did with that and your experiences? Yeah, I believe at that time the the five-year plan required that they have a resident board and have a head of that resident board that communicated to the Housing Authority Board, so it wasn't a voting position, but it was a communicative position. They did require me to read any of their documents and give a lot of feedback, such as the five-year plan. I did attend some, at that time there was a large grant on the board on the table, a block grant, to demolish a huge housing project and rebuild a mixed income community, and for three years they were fighting it and they were about to lose that money, and they asked me to speak with some of the residents, because I guess the residents were not feeling heard and didn't understand how this was something that was going to benefit them. They thought they were going to be relocated throughout the county or the state and lose their community and both their friends and their housing and be up in the air, and I explained to them that through their lawyer they could document everything, put everything in writing, that they were clearly going to receive, as the Housing Authority was promising, their home would be first dibs on all the new homes, so that they weren't losing, they were just being displaced for a short time to come back to those homes, and once they were rebuilt, and they felt confident enough to let it go and let it pass, and the development did go on, but I left the area, and my understanding was that there was a lot of conflict later on and a lot of fighting where the city and the Housing Authority did not follow through with supporting their promises, that bothered me a lot, because I felt like I stood up for these people, and on both sides, and mediated this conflict, and then one side did not follow through, and there was a lot of legal issues behind it, and a few board, Housing Authority board members were removed according to the stuff that I read. Thank you. Any additional questions? Seeing none, thank you very much for being here, and your willingness to serve. We will continue with Shannon Cabanon. It does not appear that Shannon is here, so we will continue with Lewis Brown. Thank you very much for being here, Mr. Brown. We will go with the same line of questioning that I asked the others, would you like me to repeat it? No, it's okay. That's all right. So I'm here because I hit the lottery, I mean the trifecta. Many years ago, my wife and I went through a really rough patch, and I ended up on the streets, and straight up outdoors, sleeping in a bush by the community college I graduated from. At the time, we had a baby, about five years old at the time I think he was, with cerebral palsy. Being outdoors, and being away from my son for that period of time, was, I think difficult is not the right word for it. Other people here have spoken pretty eloquently about the despair that could hit you when you end up outside like that, with nobody to turn to, no help. But I managed to get to the thrift store at that point in time, get myself a suit that had really badly used the library at the junior college to try and find myself some work, because I was out of work at the time, and also apply for a housing voucher. Well, being a Navy vet, being homeless, and having a disabled kid was the trifecta. That got me that voucher. I got really, really, really lucky. Because of that, eventually my wife and I then reconciled for another 15 years before we finally split amably after my son got to be an adult. But if it hadn't been for that, I don't think I would be able to be sitting here now because I'd be in the ground somewhere. There was no way you could pull yourself out of that pit. And I think at that time I was in my 30s.  No one's going to give you a break. That's just the way that it is.  People always say something about pulling yourself up by your own bootstraps, but they lose the actual origin of that phrase is that it was a joke. If you try to pull yourself over a fence by reaching down and grabbing your own bootstraps, you're not going to get very far. Opportunity comes from people. Opportunity comes from others. And when you are isolated in the community, when you're homeless like that, nobody's going to give you an opportunity. Because for the most part, whether we like it or not, we live in a transactional world. And we help people that we think in some way might be able to help us back. Whether that's materially or spiritually or some way, we always expect to get something back from helping others. Unless it's a bureaucracy, oddly. I got that voucher. We were able to get stabilized and build lives for ourselves. Years later, I graduated from Sonoma State. Some years after that, I graduated from Golden Gate University with a degree in law. Some years after that, still taking care of my son, I managed to pass the bar exam. I can't practice as a maternity because I still take care of my son full-time. He's 25 years old right now with cerebral palsy. But if it wasn't for that voucher, I'd still be screwed. So I understand the struggle that people go through. And I could understand it also from the agency side of things, the limited amount of funds. How are you going to allocate these things? And we use these criteria. Well, okay, that gives you an extra checkpoint. But is that really even the fairest way to do it? I have friends who have lived with me in the past as live-in aides who've been trying to get a voucher for 15, 20 years. Can't get it. And they just survive on social security. Consider that. How does a human being survive in Sonoma County or virtually anywhere on $1,000 a month? How can you afford a roof over your head? How can you afford food? But somehow miraculously, in our community, we do have thousands of people who are getting by on a grand a month. I have no idea how that works, but it works badly for us as a community and for them as individuals. So I do have some passion about this issue. And I've done what I can to help people out in the past to pay it forward, as it were, even though I have very little to throw in there. But what I do have is intelligence. What I do have is commitment and time and the willingness to actually serve my community and help make things maybe just a little bit better down the road. I noticed that there was like $873 million worth of projects that have been approved and are being built in the city right now. That's fantastic. About 10% of that money is coming from, you know, community funds in some way, shape or form. But there's only one project that I saw that had been approved for home ownership. And if we really want to help people, I think it would be a good idea to maybe look into ways of helping people own homes rather than just rent. Mary. Thank you very much, Mr. Brown. And thank you for your passion, looking at the council member staff. Thank you for your application. Could you say a little bit more about your work with Legal Aid? Oh, yeah, yeah. Well, Legal Aid is where I did my internship and then I did a bonus internship with them afterwards when I was at Golden Gate. And yeah, and I worked in the housing department there. So that was dealing with evictions, you know, on a daily basis, day in and day out. And one of the things, one of the big issues that popped up there, and it's a case I really wish had gotten heard, dealt with a mental illness. So you make a reasonable accommodation for somebody when they have cerebral palsy like my son does, and it's fairly obvious what those accommodations might need to be. It has to do with mobility, with getting through a door, with getting up steps, that sort of thing. But when somebody has a mental illness like schizophrenia, how do you accommodate a disability that's behavioral?  And when he went off of his meds, he acted crazy. Weird things. He started yelling in the middle of the night. In this instance, he stuck fish in the wall of his apartment. Terrible, because he thought for sure the person next to him was, you know, doing something with rays in his brain, that sort of thing. I made the argument that the landlord should have accommodated that by simply moving him to another unit, where he was not sharing more than one wall with somebody, and keep him, you know, kind of over there as an accommodation. That didn't fly mainly because of the fact that he had a mental crisis, and he wasn't able to show up at the court hearing. But that's just one of the big issues that pops up for me in regards to this. We have a lot of people who are homeless because they have mental illness. And how do we accommodate that? How can you accommodate that? Thank you. Are there any additional questions from council members? Thank you. Thank you very much for being here. Betty Banda. And thank you, Miss Betty, for patiently waiting. You've been here for a while. Thank you. Even though I got here very early, but that's just my excitement, I guess. My name is Betty. I'm a 61-year-old elder. I am of the native culture. I was born here in San Rosa in 1962. I lived in Guiseville, went to Guiseville Elementary till I was in fifth grade, and moved to Central Valley, went to elementary there and high school. And I also attended Fresno City and got my master's in social psychology, which wasn't pertaining to the city college. I had a professor come in from out of state, from a university accredited. I also studied in behavioral economics and got my cert for alcohol and drug counseling. Right now, I'm working with the IHSS and Home Supported Services with the elders, and I help them with their everyday duties and things that they need done. I also have worked elsewhere, and I've done a little cashering in different parts of San Rosa and Hillsburg. I've worked with, I myself was homeless as well, and I've worked with the homeless, and I've helped them come out of that state of homelessness through helping them go to, referring them to places like the housing vouchers and various programs that San Rosa has to offer. And Petaluma, I mean all over the county actually. And I enjoyed it. I enjoy working with people. I enjoy helping people.  But I help them forget their predicaments and the barriers that we have in our lives and the hurdles we have to jump over. But it became easier as I got to know that when I came back, I came back 12 years ago, I believe, in 2011. And I was struggling at first, but I jumped my own hurdles and my own barriers, broke my own barriers. And I am now housed thanks to also the HUD voucher. And I was living in Eureka at the time. I didn't really, I wasn't homeless there. I was living with a friend of mine and we shared an apartment. And the most times when I was out homeless, so to speak, I started working. I was working the whole time I was here. I was working. And whether I was out and about or whether I was housed, I was working. And I've been working since. And now I'm just working part-time. But I enjoy what I do. And what I feel I can bring is the opportunity to engage in the knowledge and everything else that it has to offer. I'd like to help in any way I can. I'll give back to the city that has helped me as well. And just help out there and see what I can do. And I know I can do a lot. So I hope I'm considered, especially for the seniors. Any questions? Thank you very much. Are there any questions from council members? Seeing none, thank you very much for being here. And again, thank you for your patience. Okay, thank you. So we did have an application that was put in for Lynn Norris for the senior or at large. But she was unable to be here. But the application was reviewed by council members. So again, on behalf of the entire council, we would like to thank you for your interest in serving. And if you're not chosen for these positions, there are additional opportunities to serve the city. So we encourage you to seek out some of those opportunities. So thank you very much. We will now move to item four, which we have no study sessions for today. And we will take a five minute break prior to our regular meeting starting at four o'clock. Thank you, 20. Welcome, everyone, to our August 8, 2023 Santa Rosa City Council meeting. It is now 405, now 406, sing a quorum. Madam City Clerk, may you please call the roll. Thank you, Mayor. Council Member Step. Here. Council Member Rogers. Here. Council Member Krepke. Here. Council Member Fleming. Here. Council Member Alvarez. Present. Vice Mayor McDonald. Here. Mayor Rogers. Present. Let the record show all council members are present. Thank you. We will now go to item six. Madam City Attorney, may you please report out on closed session. Good afternoon, Council and community. We had a closed session on the item on the agenda and no reportable action was taken. Thank you. We have no proclamations on today's agenda, so we will move to item eight, our staff briefings. Madam City Manager. Thank you, Mayor. Good afternoon, Mayor. Members of Council. Item 8.1 is our community empowerment plan update. Seems awful, though. There we go. Good afternoon, Mayor, Vice Mayor and City Council. I'm here Lawn Peterson, Director of Communications, Santa Rosa. I'm here to do the community empowerment update. I wanted to start out that at the end of June, Chief Cregan attended a listening session organized by the Violence Prevention Partnership at Rosen University Prep. This provided an opportunity to gather feedback and really listen to community members on how to prevent some of the violence, as well as working collaboratively to help make measurable differences in that community. As a follow-up on that, the Mayor, Councilman Alvarez and Chief Cregan will be hosting a town hall on September 7th, starting at 6 p.m. Same place, Rosen University Prep, in collaboration with the Violence Prevention Partnership. There'll be a listening session and talk about the recent rise in violence and strategies to prevent violence in that community. Next, during the week of July 10th through the 13th, SRPD held a youth community police experience for 25, 14 to 18-year-olds. It's a hand-on learning experience, teaches teens about what to expect from the police department, as well as it introduces them to the local criminal justice system. July 14th, SRPD hosted its first ever and very successful tacos with a cop at Motote in Rosen, so it was a great opportunity to connect with officers and talk to them about, talk to the community about important neighborhood concerns and enjoying delicious food. Who doesn't love tacos?  Last week, August 2nd, SRPD, the Police Department and Dick Sporting Goods hosted National Night Out with those of partner agencies. That's an annual celebration, enhancing the relationship between the community and local law enforcement. It was a fun evening with positive interactions with family, friends, and neighbors. August 5th, SRPD greeted and interacted with children participating in the Active 2030 Club in the Children's Shopping Spree. It's to aim to get children prepped for their first day of school, to start with confidence, also helps parents struggling to purchase supplies and clothes for their kids. Same day on August 5th, SRPD also participated in the eighth annual backpack giveaway. It also provides supplies and students and family in the Rosalind community. And final one, several times this summer, SRPD officers participated in Top the Cops. If you haven't heard about that, it's an event at Sonoma County Raceway where officers offer alternatives to illegal street racing and give teens a chance to race against local law enforcement officers and complete computing in their official vehicles. So that's the previous lots of opportunities for upcoming engagement I want to highlight. And by the way, I will send this all out. I realize there's a lot of stuff going on from the engagements. I'll send it like I did last time to the council to share with your constituents. So they'll be attending the second annual rosin-ready event Thursday, August 10th, 5 to 7, Bayer Park, West Avenue. There will be booths, emergency signup, evacuation routes, etc. They'll also be participating in a family community resource fair at the leisure mobile home park Saturday, August 12th, 10 to noon, 2581 Oxidone Road. Next, Wildfire Resource Fair. SRPD will be there as well as the fire department and multiple people from the city. Saturday, August 19th, it's from 10 to 2 p.m. in the community center. This is the annual event focused on preventing wildfire and getting information about building community resilience. Next, Summer in South Park. It's at Martin Luther King, Jr. Park. Saturday, August 19th, 11 to 2, and sorry, 12 to 3. It's a community party with live music, lawn games, prizes, raffles, lots of other stuff, free ice cream, fun for the whole family. And finally, Coffee with a Cop, Starbucks, Stony Point, Yuba. It's at Thursday, August 31st, 3 to 5 and 4 to 6. And that concludes the community update. Let me know if anybody has any questions. Any questions from council members? Did you say Stony Point and Yuba? Yes. All right. So, thank you very much for that presentation. We will now have public comment. Madam City Clerk. Thank you. We are now taking public comment on item 8.1. If you are in the chamber, I would like to comment but have not provided a speaker card or your name, please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via Zoom, please raise your hand or dial star 9. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. Please go ahead. I'm Gregory Farron again. I was just going to add to the presentation that the August 19th at Martin Luther King Park is what we all know is the Day and Night Festival and honors Vince Harper. So, if you want to have a great time, it's an all-day event and the South Park community is putting it on August 19th. I think of it as Vince Harper Day. Thank you, Mayor. I see no one else approaching the podiums in chamber and I see no hands being raised via Zoom. Thank you. We will now continue to item 9, our city manager and city attorney's report. Thank you, Mayor. The city manager has no items to report this evening. Thank you. Nothing to report on settlements either. Thank you. We will now continue to item 10, statements of abstention by council members, council member Okrepke. Thank you very much. I'll be abstaining from item 16.3 for perceived financial conflict. Thank you. Any other abstentions from council members? Seeing none, we will move to item 11, mayors and council members' reports. Are there any council members' reports? Council member Statte. I think the only report that really needs to be made this week is the fact that we have the Sonoma County Fair going on. I have been three times so far. I will be going in additional two, including I think with a few of us on Friday from the horse races. The Fair Week is just a fabulous week in the area. And then as a segue, a couple of weeks ago, the Sonoma County Farm Bureau held their Love of the Land event and they must have had about 600 people out at La Cremeau. And a lot of the kids that were out there getting scholarships and helping with that event are showing at the fair this week. So a great tie-in. And then a final commendation to the 100 Black Men who did their second annual golf tournament. And they had about 130 folks up in Windsor for a very successful event. And it was fun to be part of that as well. So that concludes my report out. Thank you. Council member Rowe Krupke. Thank you very much. I was able to attend the wall raising at Mahoney-A-Glen with a few of our colleagues and staff that were celebrating this in Rinken Valley as I believe and staff can correct me if I'm wrong was the first by-right housing built in the city of Santa Rosa providing 99 affordable units to our residents including farm workers. So it's a great project and it was great to be here there for a wall raising. And I can't wait to see that completed. This past Saturday I did a nine-hour ride along with Santa Rosa Fire Department. I'm happy to report that the curse of the ride along is still alive and kicking. In nine hours we had one call and the firefighters wanted me to know that they really are busy. It is a busy firehouse they swear. But it was a great opportunity to see some of the behind the scenes of what our firefighters do including the on-the-fly pretty much algebra they do for for water pressure and friction loss and stuff like that as well as have some candid conversations and I look forward to to do that again in the future. And then finally last week at Lafko we approved the municipal services review contract for the city of Santa Rosa which will essentially break down the the availability and the effectiveness of the services to the city and its sphere of influence as well as its urban growth boundaries and if necessary adjust those. So that is another piece in the puzzle for us to look at South Santa Rosa in a different way. Council Member Alvarez. Thank you Madam Mayor. For myself I had the great honor of attending a gala that was put on by KBBF which was celebrating its 50th anniversary and I'm happy to report that all expectations were exceeded with the amount of money that was raised from the community. Thanks to the community they are now able to purchase a backup battery really invest into infrastructure that hasn't been touched for many many of years. So I want to extend a thank you to all the the volunteers of KBF for really stepping up and just keeping the first national bilingual station alive and hopefully another 50 years here in the future. Thank you all. All right and I would like to make an appointment to the Cultural Heritage Board and that will be for Janice Marzolin and also for the Community Advisory Board and that will be Angelina Vasquez. I would like to thank you both for your willingness to serve our community. On 719 I was able to visit the Disability Services and Legal Center. Thank you Madonna Feather Cruz for the invitation. I was also able to meet with staff from the Conservation Corps of the North Bay and they will be opening a new location in Santa Rosa so we're really happy about that and the services that they will bring. July 22nd I was able to continue my fire station tours and I was only there for less than an hour and two out of three of the fire stations I went on calls. A VA call and a car accident which was a little scary but so I am enjoying myself and looking forward to the remainder of my visits. On 731 I was able to visit Sam Jones Hall. I met with staff. They are very wonderful people. They have great residents that are there that I was able to speak with and I was also very pleased to see that they are implementing programming for the residents so I cannot wait for the day that I can go play bingo but I just wanted to say that and then on August 1st I met with the Council member Special Board of Directors meeting and we appointed a clerk. August 3rd I was also able to attend the KVBF 50th anniversary but Council Member Alvarez has already told you about that and this past Saturday I was able to attend Church Unstoppable's Back to School Drive. Participants were able to play games, get their face painted, they offered food, refreshing lemonade and all this before being offered a haircut and the children were able to go and shop for their own school supplies so I just thought that that was awesome. They had a store and the children were able to go pick out the backpack that they wanted even the pencils and everything else so really great and also a Redwood gospel mission had a Back to School Drive which consisted of multiple booths providing education to both parents and children. Children were given bicycle helmets, the opportunity to play games, the highway patrol was there, there were different church congregations that were there, county of Sonoma staff were there and at some of the booths children were allowed to pick out snacks that they could take home so the children left with full bellies and ready with all school supplies that they needed some with helmets but they all had smiles so thank you very much to Church Unstoppable and Redwood gospel mission for doing that for our community members. We have wonderful events going on in our community and just thank you again to the organizers of the events. Seeing no additional reports. Madam City Clerk. We are now taking public comment on item 11. If you are in council chamber I would like to comment but I have not provided a speaker card or your name please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via zoom please dial star nine or raise your hand. You will have three minutes and a countdown time or will alert at the end of that period. Mayor I'm seeing no hands being raised and no one making their way to the podium for public comment. Thank you. Moving to item 11.2 board commission and committee appointments we were able to have interviews for the housing authority earlier today but we will also have to vote on making appointments to the board of building regulations so we'll start with 11.2.1. Council members are there council member Okrepke? Yeah I'll move to a point. Angela Conte is the at-large appoint tenant commissioner to housing authority. Second. We have a motion made by council member Okrepke and a second by council member Stap. Through the mayor may I make another motion. Yes council member. These these are all or all the applicants at large? No we had senior senior or at large and then we just had at large. Okay I'll let it stand. I would like to make a counter motion and make a motion to appoint Lewis Brown for tenant commissioner at large. Seeing no second Madam City Clerk may you please call the vote on the first motion. Mayor do we need to take public comment on on the motion or on the item on the floor? Yes please do. Thank you we are now taking public comment on item 11.2.1 the appointments for the at-large and the senior tenant commissioners for the housing authority. If you're in council chamber and would like to comment but have not provided a speaker card or your name please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via zoom please raise your hand or dial star nine. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. Mayor I'm seeing no hands being raised via zoom and no one at the podium. May you please call the vote. Thank you. Thank you. Councilmember Stapp. Aye. Councilmember Rogers. Aye. Councilmember Okrepke. Aye. Councilmember Fleming. Yes. Councilmember Alvarez. Aye. Vice Mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. With the record show that motion passes with seven affirmative votes. Thank you. Do we have a motion for the senior tenant commissioner? I'll move Doug. I missed his last name. Mr. Friedman. Yep. All right. Second. So we have a motion made by councilmember Fleming and a second made by Vice Mayor McDonald. Madam City Clerk may you please call the vote. Thank you. Councilmember Stapp. Aye. Councilmember Rogers. Aye. Councilmember Okrepke. Aye. Councilmember Fleming. Aye. Councilmember Alvarez. Aye. Vice Mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. With the record show that passes with seven affirmative votes. Thank you. Moving to 11.2.2. Council may vote to make appointments to the board of building regulation and appeals. We have six vacancies on the board and incumbent may serve a four-year term expiring December 31st, 2026 and new appointments will serve a two-year term expiring December 31st, 2024. May I get a motion? I'll make a motion to appoint Ken Coker to the four-year term as an incumbent and Craig Lawson and Karl Kogrove to a two-year term to the board of building regulation appeals. Second. We have a motion from Councilmember Okrepke and a second from Vice Mayor McDonald. Madam City Clerk may you please call the vote. Do we need to take public comment on this item as well? I thought the public comment was for all of the appointments but yes let's take public comment. Okay thank you. We are now taking public comment on 11.2.2. If you are in council chamber would like to comment but have not provided a speaker card please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via zoom please raise your hand or dial star nine. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. No one approaching the podium mayor and no hands being raised via zoom. Thank you may you please call the vote. Thank you. Councilmember Stepp. Aye. Councilmember Rogers. Aye. Councilmember Okrepke. Aye. Councilmember Fleming. Aye. Councilmember Alvarez. Aye. Vice Mayor McDonald. Aye. Mayor Rogers. Aye. Let the record show that passes with seven affirmative votes. Thank you. Moving to item 12 approval of minutes we have two minutes that we need to approve July 22nd 2023 which was a special meeting in July 25th 2023. Councilmembers are there any corrections to the minutes? Seeing no corrections Madam City Clerk can you please facilitate public comment on items 12.1 and 12.2. Thank you Mayor we are now taking public comment on item 12 both sets of minutes we are if you're in the council chamber would like to comment please make your way to the podium or provide a speaker card if you have not if you are participating via zoom please raise your hand or dial star nine you will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. Seeing no one approaching the podiums and no hands being raised mayor I'll turn it back to you. Thank you we'll adopt the minutes as presented. Moving on to item 13 our consent items Madam City Clerk can you please read the consent items. Thank you Mayor item 13.1 resolution approval of grant of easement 2 and accept of quick claim of easement interest from PG&E and AT&T and summary vacation of a portion of public utility easement along Fountain Grove Parkway. Item 13.2 resolution third amendment to the professional services agreement F002334 with Belinda M Fernandez DBA Studios and pardon me DBA Studio B 13.3 resolution first amendment to software subscription services service agreement F002367 with permit rocket software LLC DBA E permit hub 13.4 resolution ratification and authorization of increased compensation for continued cooperative purchase of computer and server equipment from Dell marketing LP. Item 13.5 resolution approval of professional services agreement with Sloan Sakai Young and Wong LLP. 13.6 resolution extension of proclamation of local homeless emergency. Bringing it back to council are there any questions? Seeing none Madam City Clerk may you please facilitate public comment. We are now taking public comment on item 13 if you are in council chamber and would like to comment but have not yet provided a speaker card or your name please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via zoom please raise your hand or dial star nine. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. Mayor I see no hands being raised via zoom and no one approaching the podium. Vice Mayor McDonnell can you please make a motion? Thank you Mayor. I'd like to move items 13.1 through 13.6. Second. We have a motion made by Vice Mayor McDonnell in a second made by council member staff. Madam City Clerk may you please call the vote. Council Member Staff? Aye. Council Member Rogers? Aye. Council Member O'Crepkey? Aye. Council Member Fleming? Aye. Council Member Alvarez? Aye. Vice Mayor McDonnell? Aye. Mayor Rogers? Aye. Let the record show that passes with seven affirmative votes. It is not yet five o'clock and we have no report items either so we're going to take a break until five o'clock. Thank you. Seeing a quorum Madam City Clerk may you please call the roll. Thank you. Council Member Staff? Is that me? We're doing a roll call. Council Member Staff? Here. Council Member Rogers? Here. Council Member O'Crepkey? Here. Council Member Fleming? Here. Council Member Alvarez? Present. Vice Mayor McDonnell? Here. Mayor Rogers? Present. Let the record show all council members are present. Thank you. We will now be moving to 16.2 which is our first public hearing of the evening. 16.1. 16.1. Oh sorry. 16.1. Madam City Manager? Item 16.1 a public hearing repealing and replacing chapter 11-22 of the Santa Rosa City Code camping on public streets and public property camping ordinance. Good afternoon Mayor Rogers, Vice Mayor McDonnell and members of thank you members of the council. I'm Kelly Kaikendall manager with Housing and Community Services and I have Megan Bassenger here with me as well this afternoon and I'm going to be presenting on the camping ordinance. So the current ordinance was adopted in 1994. It applies to camping on public and private property within the Santa Rosa City limits. It prohibits camping on public property in conflicts with Martin versus the city of Boise, a 2019 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Martin prohibits cities from criminally enforcing camping restrictions on public property if there is no alternative shelter available for those facing enforcement. Since the ordinance was adopted in 1994 it has been amended on three occasions. In 2011 an urgency ordinance was adopted to regulate camping on public property in response to issues that arose during the Occupy Santa Rosa movement and this allowed for camping permits at City Hall. In 2012 the ordinance was updated eliminating the permit option allowed under Ordinance 3977 and restored camping prohibition on public property and most recently in 2013 the ordinance was amended to repeal prohibition on habitation of vehicles. That is addressed under a separate ordinance under City Code which restricts parking for more than 72 hours and it is focused on a time restriction not related to habitation of vehicles. Ordinance changes so Martin limits versus prohibits enforcement of camping on public property and that's an important distinction. It does place limitations but it doesn't prohibit us entirely from enforcing camping. In response to that many California jurisdictions have been updating their ordinances to align with Martin and to adopt time, place and manner restrictions on camping activities. When I say time I'm referring to when you can camp, place refers to where you can and cannot camp and manner refers to how you can camp. Now city practice has been to lead with services and shelter prior to any enforcement action that aligns with the Martin case. The city also prioritized encampments that pose an immediate threat to health and safety and those fall outside of Martin. The city also enforces violations of law other than camping consistently throughout the city regarding of housing status. For example trespassing on private property or violations of the fishing game code violation such as camping along creeks and waterways. There are many health and safety impacts associated with encampments. Addressing encampments has required increased city resources and these health and safety impacts present a threat to individuals residing in encampments and to the broader community so our neighborhoods and businesses. Some of the impacts that we've seen in encampments include fires and fire hazards, accumulation of debris and garbage, hazardous and biohazardous waste, illegal activity, environmental harm and rodents. And many of these impacts also violate state and federal regulations requiring water quality protection and clear paths to travel. The council is aware that the city has engaged a number of efforts and initiatives to address homelessness in Santa Rosa. In 2016 the council declared a homeless emergency and that emergency was updated earlier this afternoon on the consent calendar. That a homeless emergency has provided the city with greater flexibility to address homelessness in the community. The city's established a homeless service division. We invest approximately $5 million annually in program and administration as well as one-time funding. An example of that is the $10 million that was invested during the COVID-19 pandemic. That provided for non-congregate shelter at the Sandman Hotel, the safe social distancing program at the Findlay Community Center and the emergency expansion at Sam Jones Hall to restore shelter bed capacity lost due to the pandemic. The council is familiar with innovative programs such as in response and safe parking. We also have a city encampment team. This team was formed in response to a large encampment on private property at Old Stony Point Road. The goal of this team is to prevent the formation of large encampments. We do so by engaging individuals early and often into services and shelter and by proactively addressing the health safety and environmental impacts of encampments. The team is comprised of staff from fire, police, housing and community services, transportation and public works and code enforcement. And lastly on this slide we also invest one-time funding to address homelessness in the community. Most recently the city was awarded $3.8 million from the state encampment resolution funding program and that came before council on July 11th. In the next few slides I will provide a summary of recent ordinances that have been updated in Sonoma County, so Brunert Park and the county of Sonoma. I want to say that the ordinance before you this afternoon is based very closely after Brunert Park. In Brunert Park's ordinance focuses on location, so where you can and cannot camp as well as the secondary behaviors that occur in encampments. Brunert Park's ordinance was updated in August and then again in September 2022. It's two-part. It focuses on prohibiting camping and storage of personal property in specific areas. I'll provide you a few of those areas but there's a detailed summary provided in the staff report and that includes parks, well ahead and creek protection zones, near facilities, near city facilities to protect ingress and egress and within the right-of-way. And the second part of their ordinance establishes conduct regulations prohibiting certain activities. So that's really the secondary behaviors that we find in encampments and that includes the size of an encampment and proximity to camping next to other individuals. Also focused on fire safety and mitigating environmental harm. Brunert Park's ordinance also prohibits camping on private property without the consent of the property owner and under certain conditions. And violations of the ordinance are a misdemeanor or infraction. Moving on to the county of Sonoma, their ordinance is focused on location so where you can and cannot camp and then time. So when you can camp. Their ordinance was updated in April of 2023. Prohibits camping in specific areas. I'll list a few here but there again there's a detailed summary provided in the staff report that includes in parks in high fire risk areas and in the public right-of-way. And prohibits camping in remaining areas between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. Similar to Brunert Park it also prohibits camping on private property without the consent or permission of the property owner. And violations may be treated as a misdemeanor. So moving on to the proposed seating ordinance before you this afternoon. Before I jump into that I want to talk briefly about why we're doing this. So our current ordinance conflicts with federal law. That's really one of the main reasons why we're updating the ordinance. Also we want to update our ordinance to align with our current practice of our city encampment team and I just spoke briefly about that. And to make sure that we're complying with Martin and you'll hear me say that over and over again throughout the presentation. Our ordinance is two part. It prohibits specific areas where individuals can and cannot camp. And then it also prohibits activities certain activities in encampments. Those are the behaviors that I just mentioned when I was covering Brunert Park's ordinance. So let me jump in here with the specific areas where camping is prohibited. And this is city specific. So all city owned or leased property. That includes city parks. The public right-of-way that impedes passage by pedestrian cyclists or vehicles. So that includes streets bike lanes sidewalks and roadway. Within 25 feet of a driveway or loading dock. A building entrance or exit. A fire hydrant lane connection or equipment and transit hubs and bus shelters. Within 150 feet of a high watermark. That complies with the fishing game code. And within 100 feet of a school. I do want to mention that this ordinance before you this afternoon applies to camping. So that's tents or other structures. It's not vehicles. Moving on to the part of the ordinance which addresses the behaviors or how you can camp. This is for areas not prohibited in the ordinance. So the areas that I just covered in the previous slide. The focus here is on fire safety and mitigating environmental and health and safety impacts. And many of the items that I'll cover in the next two slides are um. Responded to frequently or countered frequently by our police and fire departments. So if alternate shelter is not available. Um and camping does occur on public property. There are conduct regulations prohibiting certain activities in the ordinance. Those include occupying an area greater than 10 by 10 feet. Camping within four feet of another person. Dumping gray or black water. Unpermitted electrical connections. And possession of combustible gas for liquids. This slide continues with the conduct regulations. It includes prohibition on fires except for cooking in city installed facilities. Improper disposal of hypodermic needles. Environmental harm. Damage to public property. Camping near vegetation that could aid in spreading fire and excessive noise. The proposed city ordinance also includes restrictions around private property. So camping is not allowed on private property without permission of the property owner. It limits location and duration of stay. So location is limited to residential areas. Duration of stay is for no more than three days. And that's to align with the 72 hours under our parking ordinance. And then access to facilities that property must provide access to running water. Cooking facilities and bathroom facilities. Unless otherwise allowed under our community homeless assistance program. That's the CHAP program. And that allows for the provision of homeless services on private property that's zone commercial or meeting facility. And violations of the ordinance may be treated as a misdemeanor or public nuisance subject to enforcement. I want to emphasize here that not all violations of the ordinance will be treated as a misdemeanor. The police department will follow its progressive enforcement model which starts with a warning and proceeds to a citation and arrest only if necessary. So this slide I will provide a brief comparison of the three ordinances that I just covered. So Renner Park, the county of Sonoma and Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa and Renner Park are most closely aligned or most similar. So we both have time sorry we don't have time restrictions. We both have place restrictions and manner restrictions. And just as a reminder to the council place is where you can and cannot camp. And manner is the like how you can camp or the activities and behaviors that are not allowed within camps. So let's see. I covered Santa Rosa, Renner Park. The county has the time restriction between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. You will not find that in Santa Rosa's proposed ordinance or Renner Park's adopted ordinance. They do have restrictions on where you can and cannot camp and they do not have the manner restrictions that you'll find in our proposed ordinance or Renner Park's ordinance. So implementation. Implementation of the ordinance will be carried out by the city's encampment team. I talked briefly about them during the presentation. We'll make sure to do so subject to shelter capacity and in alignment with Martin B. Boyce. The ordinance is really intended as a tool to mitigate health and safety impacts of homelessness. It is not intended and we're not proposing that it's a solution to homelessness or a solution to ending encampments in Santa Rosa. You're well aware that there are strategic efforts underway throughout our county to address homelessness including council's recent adoption of our five-year strategic plan in November which was followed by the continuum of care's adoption of a strategic plan in December of 2022. Before I wrap up here I just want to say that I know the council has received public comments about this item today and you'll be hearing more from the public in a few moments. And you're going to hear you know those that are for the ordinance those that are against the ordinance and those that are somewhere in between. I just really want to emphasize that the intent of the ordinance is to keep public spaces safe and clean for all Santa Rosa residents while balancing the constitutional rights of our unhoused community members. With that I'll move to the recommendation and conclude my presentation. It is recommended by the Housing Community Services Department that council introduce an ordinance repealing and replacing chapter 11-22 of the Santa Rosa City Code Camping on Public Streets on Public Property 2-1. Eliminate a blanket ban on camping on public property to align with Martin versus the City of Boise. A 2019 decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and to establish standards for camping on public or private property that protect the health and safety of the community. This concludes my presentations. I'd be my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions that the council might have. Thank you. Thank you very much for that presentation. I will now look to council to see if there are any questions of staff. Vice Mayor McDonald. Thank you and thank you for the presentation. I just have a couple clarifying questions for you. The first one was that came to me from some from some constituents. I've had some coffee. Sorry about that. It from from Oakmont was around bike paths and we want to make sure that we're putting those in and the concern with camping along bike paths and I noticed in the ordinance that it addressed that. Can you just expand on that of what would be allowed specifically in our rural areas as we go to implement additional bike paths and encourage walking and riding throughout our our beautiful county and then my second question is on the time restrictions. Was there any reason that staff didn't implement that to be consistent with the county? Give me just a minute and vice mayor and members of council we do have several staff members here so if you want to go to the podium or if any of you want to come down here that would be great so we can move this along. So the ordinance does address specifically what you raised council member McDonald about bike lanes. It's B section five so it prohibits camping, sitting, lying or sleeping or by storing using maintaining or placing personal property within a street bike lane or other public right away in a manner that hinders or obstructs the free passage, acts or some movement of any person's bicycles or vehicles traveling or attempting to pass along the same right away. So it's not allowed under the ordinance I mean I think if that's incurring occurring or we're going to engage those individuals first offer services that's our you know number one thing we do and then the next step would be to warn them and then move forward with progressive enforcement if they don't comply. Thank you for that and then just for clarification I'm not sure if you heard me was on the time restrictions that the county has in place from 7 a.m. until 9 o'clock at night for certain areas. Did we discuss that and and perhaps why we didn't include that in the ordinance? So we did evaluate several ordinances and throughout California and looked closely at our partners so the county and the city of Runor Park. We did not adopt the time restriction. Time restriction just based on our experience responding to encampments over the last several years we felt that that was going to be difficult to implement and a key component of the ordinance is making sure that we have an ordinance that we can operationalize. Thank you and thank you for the work on the ordinance as well. Any additional questions? Councilmember Rogers? Thank you so much Madam Mayor. Kelly, Megan thank you so much for the presentation. I know this has been a little bit of a moving target for us over the last couple of years particularly as we learn a little bit more about what other cities are doing in response to Boise. I did have a technical question to start with and that's on the ordinance. The section that talks about space that can be occupied and in particular the prohibition from being within four feet of another person. My question really is how is that enforceable particularly given that there's a number of folks in our on-house communities that are families or are partners. Is it a technical drafting error that we have there to use persons as opposed to tents? What if they're occupying the same tent? The intent of that section of the ordinance is really it speaks to fire safety and just fires that have occurred in Santa Rosa, Sonoma County and actually throughout California when people are camping very close to each other. I don't think that as written it would prohibit somebody sharing a tent with a partner but the intent there is that we don't have individuals camped closely next to one another if that answers your question. It tells me that we're not trying to ban people from sleeping next to their spouses or significant others. I'd ask the city attorney to weigh in on that because what it actually says is for the purposes of camping on public property within four feet of another person. It does say occupying a different tent in a different section so I take that back that I appreciate that. The other question that I had was really related to is this enforceable if we do not have room for folks to go in services under Boise? That's a great question so the answer is no. We have to have a shoulder alternative. Sorry can you get closer to the mic please? Sorry I guess you have to be really close. So we cannot enforce the camping ordinance without a shelter alternative. So I just wanted to make sure that we keep that in mind when we have the conversation is that it's not an either or and I've heard from folks who say leave people alone and just put them in services. I've heard people say just move them along. Stop offering additional services that it brings people here. The response here that I know that you've been trying to strike a balance on is partnering both lessening the impact that encampments have on neighborhoods while also partnering it with the services and the programs that we know are effective for trying to get people off the street. So I do want to make sure we keep that in mind as we go to public comment as well. Thank you Councilmember Rogers. Any additional questions? Seeing none we will now open the public hearing. Madam City Clerk. We are now taking public comment on item 16.1. If you are in the chamber I would like to comment but have not yet provided a speaker card or your name please make your way to the podium. If you are participating via zoom please raise your hand or dial star nine. You will have three minutes and a countdown timer will alert at the end of that period. The first speaker will be Jerry followed by Jack. Either podium should be working so you can line up at either one. Please go ahead Jerry. Good afternoon. My name is Jerry LaLongberg. I'm a resident of Petaluma but I've been a resident and social worker in Santa Rosa for at least 25 out of the 40 years that I was a social worker. I would hope that each member of the council has read the document that I sent to you concerning this and I wanted to remind you and point out the irony that exactly five years ago today on August 8th of 2017 the folks in your chairs had this same conversation and yet we're still here. I want to also say what I usually say which is I'm honored to be part of this aspect of democracy where I get to talk to leaders who can make decisions and apply the wisdom that you're gathering. I think the ordinance as it's described has this element of punishment and a severity that although there are aspects of the ordinance that are absolutely necessary so I am in fact one of those in between people that was mentioned. We definitely need to look at that aspect. The other key thing having worked in homelessness one of the key problems in all of what we're doing is the silos that we live in so the silos between the enforcement part and the service part. The city of Santa Rosa and the staff is to be commended for all the work that you've done over the last many years to address some of these things but this ordinance as presented does not integrate with the actual homeless prevention action plan that was adopted in November. I also want to point out that the data which you all have somewhere should be attached to the actual reports so that the public can look at the look at what's there as we're preparing. Doing something but also using threats against people is counterproductive in my opinion. The way that you do outreach and the way that you work with your public-facing staff has a lot to do with having places where sanctioned encampments are allowed and the biggest flaw of the current ordinance as you have it before you is you do not tell anyone where it is permitted under Martin versus Boise to be able to reside if there is no place else to go so there's I would appreciate there being a map to show where it is permitted and as I say I sincerely appreciate what you all are trying to do but I also want you to be kind and compassionate to the people who are without a home which I know that you try to be but remember that hold that foremost in what you do. Thank you. The next public comment will be from Jack followed by Thomas. Madam Mayor, Councilmembers, my name is Jack Cabot. I heartily support this ordinance. A bit of background about me. I've been in the Juilliard Park District for 33 years. I've owned eight buildings there and done much work in improving the neighborhood along with my neighbors and so this ordinance will be much improvement and make our lives much better over there. Thank you. Thank you. The next public comment will be from Thomas followed by Gig. Well thank you very much for the opportunity to speak and I want to point out a few things. The Ninth Circuit, the Federal Court of Appeals ruled on the preliminary injunction from the federal court of Martin v. Boise over 13 years ago so that put in place the authority by which you could not take property or arrest these people. You were supposed to follow that 13 years ago, not four years ago, not this year. Your ordinance does not appear to address Martin v. Boise's private property takings. Much of Martin v. Boise's ruling is directed at takings and the threats of taking private property. The Supreme Court did not take up the issue when Boise and the City of Los Angeles and others actually appealed to the Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court, they did not take up tertiary. They did not even put it on what's called the dark calendar or whatever. Not one person on this Supreme Court accepted a review of the Ninth Circuit's ruling on the private property issue. That's the center of the case was the taking of their properties because they could not sleep in the Boise area without sleeping bags, without tents, without any of that. That was the thing that prompted the case is the private property and that's the thing that the Supreme Court would not touch with a 10-foot pole. They don't want any agencies, any state governments, any local governments taking anyone's private property whether it's a tax or a taking. They consider them all the same. Do forgive me. I believe you, the city and the Santa Rosa Police Department are enforcing your no camping ordinances without offering services to RV residents currently. So you're currently in violation of our versus Boise, separate from creating an ordinance that tells people what you really want to do. And I know you want to do it. How can we not be, how can we be like Jerry said five years ago, 13 years ago? There's some obfuscation here. So please develop the resolve, come up with what you're going to accept as a solution, but also take into consideration private property. Thank you very much. All right. The next public comment will be from gig followed by Terrence. Thank you. Mayor Rogers, member of city council, gig hideout, president of Santa Rosa, homeowner, business owner and also part-time city staff. I'm not working right now. These are my own opinions. I thoroughly support this ordinance and urge you to adopt it. However, I found, I read the entire thing carefully and I found a little loophole, which I think is a big problem, which can very easily be fixed by adding a few words. And I would suggest that the person who makes the resolution just add these few words to solve this problem. And the issue is under page four under section 11.22.020 and section C. In the event, alternate shelter is not available. The issue is, is not available. That's not really defined. And here's the issue. There are people who are homeless who go to our services, they get intake, they may reside there and so on, but then they break the rules or they get in trouble, assaults, sexual abuse, drugs, pets, all kinds of things. They get kicked out, all right? Then they come to our parks and we say, oh, there's no camping here. And they say, maybe you should go to Caritas house and they say, oh, I've been kicked out of there. I can't go there. So does that mean it's not available to them because they're not allowed to go in there because they got kicked out for breaking the rules? Well, that's not really defined here. So what I'm suggesting is that you add the words through no fault of their own. So it should read, in the event, alternate shelter is not available through no fault of their own. So if there's no more beds, then yeah, everything that follows on C should apply. You can't, you know, be close and all these harm reduction things which are great make sense. But if they haven't, it's not available because they got kicked out because they were abusive or whatever the reason was. Well, it's still available to the public if someone's homeless, but it's not available to that individual. So should they be allowed to camp or not? I'm saying no. It's through their own fault that they got kicked out. Therefore they blew it. They've given up their availability and they're still not allowed to camp here. So other than that, I love the ordinance, all the harm reduction, the whole thing makes sense. Please approve it, but please add those six words, which actually my wife came up with, through no fault of their own. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next public comment will be from Terrence, followed by Joe. I want to first thank staff for the fantastic work they did on this ordinance. You guys always do a fantastic job. Thank you so much. Council, I really am hoping that you will adopt this ordinance. It's extremely important just for the health and safety of everyone who calls Santa Rosa home. One thing that kind of came to me when I was reading this, similarly as the last speaker, on page four of the actual ordinance under 11.22.020, section B, you notice that there are six criteria here. I'll skip to the second one. No camping, basically lying, sleeping, and so forth. Within 25 feet of a driveway or a loading dock, period. The next one, 25 feet of any commercial entrance or exit, period. 25 feet of a hydrant, period. Number six in this bus shelter is 25 feet, period. It's only the first bullet and the fifth bullet where we start talking about camping, sitting or lying in a manner that impedes pedestrian passage on sidewalk or walkway. And I guess what my question is, and maybe one that you can think about as you're ready to pass this ordinance, are we creating language that's not clear? Are we saying that you can camp so long as the manner does not block the sidewalk or repeat the sidewalk? When we're talking about 25 feet to the loading dock, it doesn't say that you can't block it within 25 feet of any driveway or loading dock in a manner in which trucks can't get in. It's just a very definitive statement. You can't do it. And yet in number one and number five, we're talking about a manner. And I might think that I'm blocking it. Someone else might not think that they're blocking it. So basically in an effort to create language in this ordinance that's clear, maybe we should be looking at whether or not in a manner in number one, number five in that section is creating language that is not as clear as it could be. Thank you. Thank you. The next public comment will be from Joe followed by Gregory. Thank you, Mayor Rogers and City Council. I am Joe Deetson and I'm currently the treasurer of the downtown action organization. And I first want to thank staff for the time and effort in the preparation of this ordinance. I support the ordinance and I urge the council to support it as well. And let me tell you why. Now I have lived and worked downtown here in Santa Rosa for 35 years and I've experienced these camping sites within a few blocks of my home in the St. Rose area when they were under 6th Street and the 9th Street underpasses. I've also experienced them when the camping took over Fremont Park between 4th and 5th Streets and I see campsites regularly in my walks up and down the Prince Walkway along Santa Rosa Creek. And let me talk on a business level. I've seen tenants relocate out of downtown because staff and customers feel unsafe in the downtown related to camping. My wife and I have had visitors tell us that they no longer want to come to town due to these freeway camp outs and what's the impact? Well, there are a few retail cells in Santa Rosa and there's an increased hotel vacancy. Well, that's lower sales tax and TOT to the city of Santa Rosa. So I realize we're talking about safety and soundness but this has a business impact on the city of Santa Rosa as a financial impact. Last I'd like to say that we want to get our city under control again so please support this ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. The next public comment will be from Gregory followed by Victoria. Good afternoon Mayor and members of the City Council. My name is Gregory Farron. I hope that you all know me well enough to know that this doesn't surprise you that I'm here to talk to this ordinance but I think it might surprise you to know that as Kelly indicated, I'm on the fence. I'm in between. I support the aspects of this ordinance that bring it into compliance with the Martin versus Boise. As some of you know, I was one of the original plaintiffs for this lawsuit against the city and the county. I believe that Kelly and staff have done an admirable job of bringing to you an ordinance that addresses many of the issues that were raised then and that you and your colleagues have done in the last 10 years an enormous amount of work and success in resolving some of the issues that lead to encampments. You can just look around you to know that there are alternatives for people with outhouses that didn't exist when this ordinance, when the battle took place, when the lawsuit was filed. Many of you can remember it being a lot worse for the business downtown. It being a lot worse for the people who were living downtown. So I guess what I'm here to say is that sure I have real issues with some of the aspects of this ordinance. Nothing is perfect. I've served in legislative advocacy and legislative positions like you have and understand that the tweaks that you've just been offered by the last couple of speakers are the kinds of tweaks that really deserve to be in court. Whether a person who has been kicked out of some place has fully exhausted their rights is an issue for the courts not for you to write in an ordinance. The kinds of things just suggested about whether or not something ought to be added in order to be able to make it more palatable also to me seem to be judicial and not legislative. Your staff have presented something that you can defend and that I can't heavily attack. That's what as I just discussed with the police chief is probably the best of both worlds from a legislative point of view. A lot of people dislike this. A lot of people like it. You're probably doing something right by being right in between and I would urge you not to mess with it. There's still going to be things that we're still going to be working on the retention of private property. As you remember a lot of people lost a lot of stuff and we're still working on trying to make sure that if ever happens again no one does. But you have every right to be able to dictate what this ordinance says and I think your staff has presented something to you that like I said I can't oppose. Thank you the next public comment will be from Victoria. I can't see anybody. On the right of the podium there's a switch to lower the podium. Thank you Paul. Thank you because I'm dressed so fantastically. I want everybody to see. Thank you very much for this opportunity to speak. My name is Victoria Yanez and I don't believe I've spoken very much before this city council but I have spoken many times before before the Santa Rosa City Council in office at the time. The time I'm thinking about was when five activists got arrested for not leaving. The podium was down below at the time and they wouldn't leave the podium. They got arrested and went to jail for homeless people because the city at the time the only response that we could get out of Santa Rosa was the criminalization of homelessness. I remember I testified back then that the last time I checked Santa Rosa was still in the United States and the Constitution of the United States is the ultimate law the supreme law of the land. Did I mention I'm with homeless action volunteer attorney? Sorry I meant to say that because homeless action exclamation point is still working. At the time we were working on fighting all the infractions that people were given when they were criminalizing homelessness in the city of Santa Rosa because somebody slept or sat on the sidewalk. This is horrendous for the city to always be looking for a way around the constitutional law that has established rights for homeless persons or for persons experiencing homelessness if we want to be politically correct. Now we've got Sam Jones and yes I'm sorry but that cannot be taken out of the law that there has to be an alternative and that is shelter, housing. Why have we not discussed the new shelter that will be put in place to cover though all these people that are rejected from Sam Jones thrown out of Sam Jones. I'm on the LEAP board the living expertise advisory panel to the COC on how to spend the money that HUD sends over here for the homeless and we have been looking at the lack of viable grievance procedures in the various places that provide services to people experiencing homelessness. We need to buckle down on that the city council needs to make sure everything is working fine before they criminalize homelessness again. I'm ashamed to be in the city of Santa Rosa. Thank you. If there's anyone else in council chamber wishing to provide public comment on this item please make your way to the podium. Thank you please go ahead. For the record Hugh Futrell here as chair of the downtown action organization we want to thank staff for its hard work on this very much. The position of the DAO which represents as you know several hundred businesses and property owners is that it is appropriate that the public spaces of the community be safe secure and available to the public subject to the requirements of law including Boise including if shelter is not available for camping on some appropriate regulated restrictive basis to be available. All this seems to be common sense quite honestly and to the degree this ordinance accomplishes that we certainly support it. Time will tell but we do support it and we urge your approval of these changes. Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no additional public comments from council chamber I'm going to turn it over to our Zoom host. Thank you. First up will be Michael O'Toole followed by cadence. Michael I'm allowing you permission to talk please go ahead when you're ready. Can you hear me? Yes we can. Hello my name is Michael O'Toole. I'm the host of homeless past. I'm amazed that we're at a point where we're trying to find ways to criminalize homelessness again. It harkens back to Mayor Sawyer's nine ordinances he wanted implemented downtown with the downtown business association. When are we going to stop criminalizing homelessness and start finding resolutions to address it? I'm currently doing a petition that I'm forwarding to the state of California where they're auditing where homeless funds are going because the state of California is kind of upset that so much money has been spent and so little has been done. And I think Santa Rosa and Sonoma County is some place that needs to be looked at when you spend $2 million for a parking lot with 75 tents when Sacramento County get 100 tiny homes for a fraction of that price. How can you justify $2 million? Then we talk about how homeless people are unsanitary. No what's unsanitary is when the city permits an encampment to get to the point that these campments get to. Stony Point, I live a half a block from the Stony Point site and I watch that place go into devastation and I didn't see the city or county do one thing to help those people.  If you help in the beginning, you have a good outcome. Back to Makayla, I created Makayla. With Makayla, we had support. We were clean. People respected us. For the life of me, I don't understand why you can't do that. Why you can't find areas where you say you can camp here? It has to be less than 30 people and we will help you. But you don't do that.  Like somebody said, police are still attacking the homeless. You're not rectifying the problem. And sure, the downtown business administration and property owners, they want this ordinance to pass because they don't care. And I'm pretty sure the city council is going to pass it because that's where your donations come from. That's where your campaign funding comes from. You need to do something. You need to do something realistic. Thank you. Thank you. Next up is Cadence, followed by Maria. Cadence, please go ahead once you're ready. Thank you. Good evening, Mayor Rogers and Vice Mayor McDonald and members of council. This is Cadence Hingle-Allinson with the downtown action organization. I'd like to start just by acknowledging and thanking staff for their time and the effort they put into thoughtfully drafting the update to this ordinance. The DAO and our downtown street team dedicate many hours each week to working closely with Catholic charities and with host and city staff to support the unsheltered population in the downtown, help them get enrolled in services and find access to housing. And we're incredibly grateful for all that the city has done to support our unsheltered neighbors over the last few years. And we're eager to remain partners in doing so, which is why we're asking you to support this ordinance today. While we dedicate time to outreach, our team also spends hundreds of hours a month addressing health and safety concerns as a result of camping at downtown park sites and in front of businesses cleaning up human waste, abandoned belongings, drug paraphernalia, dispersed trash. And even though our street team and our business owners work daily to mitigate these concerns, the public perception of downtown has definitely become negative as a result. And our goal is to ensure that downtown remains a viable place for new investment, for businesses to operate, and for the community to want to spend time. So we urge you to adopt this ordinance today as it will be an important step toward that goal. Thank you all for your time. Thank you. Maria is up next, followed by Sonoma County Tenants Union. Maria, go ahead when you're ready. Good evening, everyone. My name is Maria Barracat. I am a Sonoma County resident and have worked with the UCSF Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative. First, I want to say I oppose the ordinance. And second, why is the city not addressing the root cause of homelessness, which is lack of affordable housing and wasting time and resources to criminalize poverty? I have several points I'll make. First, the unhoused folks in this community should be included in the planning and discussions of this issue. Second, I raise issue with the language of the camping. Folks are not camping. They are living on shelter. As we know from study after study, and most recently from the UCSF homelessness landscape that has just been enrolled, people are unhoused because they cannot afford housing. And the number of units available does not meet the needs of California communities. Third, we know from study after study that criminalization, law and ordinance is only further the economic and emotional hardship experienced by unhoused people and make it more difficult to attain financial and social stability and attain long term housing. Fourth, there cannot be logically punishment for living on sheltered when no shelter is available. It is a grave disappointment to me and to others in this community that the city and county continue to invest resources and energy in punishing poverty and disability when what is needed is affordable housing. And last, police should not be involved in the outreach and especially the unconstitutional displacement of people with nowhere to go. The city can do better. This is a policy choice. And policies like these perpetuate the status quo. That's all. Next up is Kirsten, followed by Denise. Kirsten, go ahead when you're ready. Good evening. My name is Kirsten Land, I'm president of the Santa Rosa Sonoma County branch of the NAACP. I want to first start by saying how disheartened I am to hear community members speak about other community members in such a way. The root cause as mentioned by the speaker prior to me is poverty, the lack of affordable housing, access to mental health, resources and supports, and the unavailability of shelter in this community. As a leader of this branch, I have fielded numerous calls, walked streets, sat in focus groups, and held conversations with a number of our community members who are facing chronic, chronic unshelteredness. And when you look at the data even further, you can see that the overrepresentation of Black, Brown and Indigenous community members is alarming. And in that alarm, as it was noted earlier, to just those of those people's faults. Well, if you're being racially discriminated against in a shelter and banned from retiring, you cannot help that. And from staff putting this ordinance together, failed attempts at communication and conversation to impart on to that empathy that is lacking from that. And for the downtown districts resonating around health and safety and businesses leaving, it is quite a privilege. And you have to have the resources and economics sustainability to be able to pick up and move your business out of the district. But let me tell you, as a member of the Stomach County Tourism Board, the data shows that the numbers are not dropping because of concerns around safety downtown. They are dropping because people are finding that there's nothing to do. You cannot go dance anywhere. There's no social activity. So blaming folks who are experiencing unshelteredness is not the way to go. This ordinance criminalizes folks who do not have a place to lay their heads at night. I think all of us who've spoken in some capacity have an option and a comfortable place to do so. The shelter availability is not there. The waiting lists are long. We advocated for five black men last summer who in turn never received shelter. So while the outreach and the work is happening, the turnaround and the disproportionate treatment that folks are facing are not allowing them to move through systems and have a safe place to lay their head. One gentleman had his paperwork tossed and thrown out by a center as a police department officer several weeks ago and after reaching out to the chief, those folks should not be engaging with some of the most vulnerable in our population. We need more resources and it is very unclear from this ordinance where people are allowed to camp. And that's the biggest question I got today from the community members that I'm in communication with because it was important for me before I spoke today that I asked them what they needed and that's definitely missing from this conversation. We need to understand what people need in order to help them thrive because no matter the circumstances and no matter their access to monetary gain and having a place to live, we are all people that live in this community and we believe it is a beautiful place and everyone should have access to it. I yield my time. Next up is Denise, followed by Ananda. Denise, please go ahead when you're ready. Hi, my name is Denise Hill and I'm in the St. Rose neighborhood as was another speaker and we have definitely had our impact from encampments over the last 10 to 15 years and while it's better, it's still happening and I feel like I'm listening to speakers who are really lashing out at the city and I want the city staff, the city council members and mayor to know as far as I'm concerned, the city has done an incredible job. I've stood next to the police in homeless encampments and they are more compassionate than I would be capable of honestly in the situations they have to deal with. We're a very compassionate neighborhood but there's a point where your compassion starts to weaken and I would say that it's really necessary to acknowledge that the city of Santa Rosa has the most homeless services of any city in this county and including the county. The county itself does not have the same number of services that the city of Santa Rosa does and so I'm 100% for this particular ordinance getting updated. I do believe that or what I would like to see is these people that want to shame everybody and claim that the city is criminalizing the homeless, really acknowledge what the city has stepped forward and done over the years and they're almost a leader although there's always room for improvement. They're almost a leader as far as this county is on how to address homelessness and if you want to rail against something I would say you really should put your energies behind the number, the lack of mental health and addiction beds that are in this community including that's the county and all the cities in the county. That is where we fall short and why we still see people on the streets but you cannot look at Santa Rosa to deal with the entire county's homeless situation and we probably have more homeless residing in our county or in our city because we offer the most services. If it was spread out across the other cities it would definitely drop here I think as far as the number of homeless in our city but anyway I just wanted to say thank you to everybody involved for bringing this to the table it's another step forward and hopefully we can do some other step forward like not having private property have to renew a no trespassing letter with the police department every single year and maybe streamline some of those situations as some of the next steps with the effective way the city is addressing homelessness. Thank you so much. Next up is Ananda followed by Allegra. Hi um it looks like I'm being asked to unmute but I'm Allegra. Sorry don't get Allegra and then Ananda will be next. Okay thank you um hi thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak up tonight um I wanted to say that I oppose this ordinance I think there have been other people who have said this much better than I can but it is cruel it is the criminalization of poverty and it definitely doesn't address any of the root causes of people being on the streets um the previous commenter said how great Santa Rosa has been as far as homeless services go but yet she's calling because she wants more ordinances against homeless people so I don't really understand if it's not a problem why we are ordinancing more around it the logic isn't there um and more to the point the logic of this ordinance isn't there it's simply cruel if people had somewhere to go they would not be camping um quote unquote camping um they would be sheltered by definition unsheltered people don't have anywhere else to go so why are we shuffling them around and just um giving them like legal impacts that will continue to affect them instead of helping them this doesn't make any sense it doesn't help anyone it just gives the police more power to bully people who have nowhere else to go um so I strongly oppose this ordinance like I said I think other people have really made the case much better than I can but I wanted to add my voice because this is really um disheartening and disappointing um and I hope that the city council does not pass this ordinance thank you Ananda go ahead followed by Michael Ananda are you am I muted yeah go ahead you're okay perfect thank you so much uh good evening Mayor Rogers and council members this is Ananda suite with the Santa Rosa Metro Chamber of Commerce uh first thank you very much to city staff for your time and hard work to draft this ordinance update and thank you to council as well for your work to support critical services and interim programs such as safe parking to support our community members experiencing homelessness we stand ready to work with you on meaningful supports and upstream solutions like these and don't see that as contradictory to supporting health and safety standards we urge you to support this camping ordinance as critical to addressing the health and safety concerns of the entire community unsanctioned and unmanaged encampments are bad for the entire community businesses tourism and all of our residents whether housed or unhoused there are public safety and health hazard for all Santa Rosa residents regardless of housing status certainly including vulnerable out unhoused individuals uh this ordinance provides needed clarity and structure to city policy alliance policy with current law is required while taking a critical step to protect the safety and livability of the city of Santa Rosa thank you for your time on this next up will be Michael followed by Pauline hi there this is Michael to tone um I spend a lot of time outreaching to uh homeless encampments around Santa Rosa and I'm here to tell you that this ordinance is completely shameful this is going to be enforced like a camping ban and it may based on the way the counties use this be used to skirt having to actually offer people services um this is very simple this is about people versus profit and to me human rights should always take precedence especially when you're talking about elders when you're talking about disabled people we need to take care of people in this community and not force them around and not treat them like garbage um people talk about the balance of equities my rights versus an unsheltered person's rights but it's really hard to measure someone's right to exist versus someone's right to be sheltered from your existence or to be sheltered from having to be around poverty um I can't imagine how it would feel for an unsheltered person and most of the people I talk to have no idea where they're supposed to camp because it hasn't been revealed to people where they can go they're told where they can't go there's a long list of restrictions it seems to apply just about everywhere and no one has any idea where they're allowed to camp under this ordinance um so how would it feel to be told by a police officer you can't be here because you're by a bunch of tall grass and you know what you can't be over there because there's a school over there oh and over there you got a waterway so you can't be over there either hey and you know what maybe we don't have to offer you services because we're not banning camping we're just not telling you where you can and can't be so and this actually happened on the Joe Rodota trail during a sweep last week where and I know that this is the county's ordinance but rangers argued that there were folks who weren't offered because there are folks that weren't offered placements um they didn't have to offer them any placements because they don't have to under the new ordinance um so this could just be a way of getting around having to actually provide people's services what we need to know is where can people go where are they allowed to camp and what non-congregate shelter options are available for people because not everybody is okay to be in Sam Jones some people have disabilities they have PTSD that's what i'm hearing a lot um and we need to stop throwing unsheltered people's belongings away claiming that it's a fire hazard when it's people's documents things they need to get ahead in the world and get out of their situation their phones it's not garbage this is what's getting thrown away there should be notice there should always be services offered there needs to be permanent supportive housing and there needs to be actual street outreach and not just outreach to people you want them moved you know people need to actually have someone to talk to who's trying to help them and not just trying to get them to leave thank you next up we'll be Pauline followed by cashmere Pauline go ahead when you're ready okay good evening Mayor Rogers general city council members i'm Pauline block the cornerstone downtown i also serve on the downtown action organization in rural square association boards um so i just want to express my appreciation for the dedicated stock time and effort into tracking this ordinance um this ordinance holds significant importance for our community specifically in addressing critical health and safety concerns um although i serve on both downtown organization boards there's also significant impact um in other areas of city of Santa Rosa we own multiple properties throughout the city um and specifically for our business we have countless recurrences of major employee time spent on the cleanup of unregulated camping and multiple of our properties throughout the city as well as safety concerns from our current clients on the growing issue i acknowledge that addressing the health and safety of our community is a complex endeavor requires collaboration a comprehensive approach and this is just one tool um but as part of that approach um to address and improve the public health and safety of our community i urge the council to please support the ordinance tonight thank you for your time one final hand cashmere to you please go ahead when you're ready hi can you hear me yes we can yeah my name is Jackie i don't know why it comes up this cashmere um my name is Jackie and i'm a downtown resident a long time downtown resident i lost my home in the Tubbs fire and um i would just like to say that i was skeptical of the ordinance because i wasn't really um sure what was in a bit after hearing several speakers on the presentation i'm wholeheartedly for this ordinance and i thank the city council and um everyone who's involved in drafting this ordinance because homelessness has been such a a heartbreaking issue for all of us who live downtown and um i'd also like to point out somebody knows is not very often pointed out that um i'd like to point out that martin versus boise only prohibits uh moving people along who are actually sleeping on public property it does not sanction permanent camps on public property it never has done that and yet many times cities will behave like martin versus boise prohibits them from breaking down a permanent encampment that's been there day after day week after week month after month and that's simply not the case it only prohibits you from moving homeless people along who are sleeping in public because they have a right to sleep somewhere and if they do not have a shelter then a public space is the only place they can sleep they have a right to sleep there but they do not have the right to stay there throughout the day and make a public and make a home there and i would also like to say that i'm very disheartened by the tone that some people took with the city council i support this ordinance i support the city council and i hope that you guys pass this ordinance and thank you for giving me the podium thank you we have additional hand raised by luth miller please go ahead when you're ready hello and thank you all um i know that an incredible amount of hard work has gone into this and um and uh and many people have the intention to make things better for homeless people and people currently experiencing homeless as well as the house community um i do need to say that overall um in this world not just in center rosa we do live in times where violence and avoidance of people and things that is is much much too prevalent i'm deeply concerned by the undertones of stereotyping of blaming of of of really putting uh people home with people who are experiencing homelessness in the same category as the people like the yellow peril the you know the the attitudes about the irish the attitudes about the chinese the various other things about this that othering that really are very difficult um there is an increasing amount um in many many communities of of hatred and dislike rejection um um that's so thick it's dangerous um the threat the threat to a homeless person from people who think that they are the something something something is actually much more dangerous than the threat from other homeless people or the threat from poverty or the threat from other situations and i i would really hope that we can change that around as a society um the biggest flaw is that there are very very few so many too few um what you can do what where can you go where can we go when we are in the process of fleeing uh an economic situation or domestic situation something we need to move on from um not hearing where you can go um the essence of nonviolent communication is not just telling people no no no no no no you can't do this you can't do that you're wrong because you do that la la la it's what can you do what are you invited to do and where are you welcome um it's very important that the public spaces and our world and the beautiful trees that we have are safe secure and available to the public and that includes people who are homeless we are also the public thank you includes our speakers on zoom i do have several prerecorded messages that i will bring up hi everyone my name is tracy ayag and i'm calling in reference to the camping ordinance being presented in the san rosa market as a downtown employee of a local merchant i am faced with homelessness daily of the housing challenge sleeping on sidewalks personal belongings and trash scattered all over our sidewalks feces and sometimes cooking meals and paraphernalia being left all over our sidewalks um and the signs of mental illness and outbursts as i and others walk by just to try to get to our employer this is very scary and it does happen on a daily basis and it truly is a huge deterrent as to why we lack visitors to our downtown area and we are demanding an immediate fix thank you so much hello this comment is for the camping ordinance that the city is reviewing my name is cedens thank you i am part of the dao as well as the general manager at san rosa plaza we are calling to voice our support for this new ordinance we really appreciate everyone's time and dedication with the city and drafting this ordinance to address the incredible public and health and safety concerns of the entire community many people feel unsafe after hours in downtown including around the mall due to a number of homeless as well as other individuals that litter the street and are providing unsafe conditions for others we really encourage the city council to adopt this ordinance that's similar to other cities including runner park in the county to ensure the health and safety for everyone and to create a vibrant and inviting downtown for everyone to enjoy thank you so much my name is nicole gattis i manage california luggage and i'm a member of the dao i am calling in regarding agenda item 16.1 camping ordinance first i would like to thank staff for the time and effort in drafting this much needed ordinance i asked the council to support this ordinance as it's a good step towards creating safe sanitary shared public spaces and also protects private property council's done so much good work towards supporting persons experiencing homelessness and reducing the impact on the community this ordinance is the next step towards those goals i know this is important to us all this ordinance does not limit support for those experiencing homelessness what it does is create a path to protect the health and safety of our entire community camping in the downtown core has greatly impacted our community's ability to enjoy the beautiful spaces we have created i have customers who don't want to come downtown but it is not safe or sanitary daily you will find great amounts of debris and garbage thrown throughout downtown this even includes human biohazardous waste a huge health concern there have been times when i myself have avoided my store early in the morning because someone has chosen to sleep in front of my doors and i don't want to risk the possible confrontation we're not only losing potential customers but the loss of enjoyment of our public spaces due to unregulated camping and to the many safety and health concerns that it brings i ask that you support our entire community by supporting this camping ordinance thank you this is chris wilson with the historic railroad square association as executive director i'm commenting on the camping ordinance the city code camping public streets and public property ordinance and first of all really appreciate staff's time in in drafting the ordinance and i'm urging the council to support it i'm very concerned about the health and safety in our whole community and we can't ignore or allow to continue the fire hazard the trash along our streets parts and public areas the pollution to our creeks and drains our public spaces have to be kept clean and safe and i believe we can show compassion by keeping our homeless safe and protecting their health i've witnessed fires being built in the alcoves of businesses and along the print screenway refrigerators plugged into park electrical outlets it's simply not safe we need these regulations in order to address the negative impacts of these encampments throughout our community i urge you to support this ordinance thank you hi my name is bisha wayland i am a resident here at santa rosa calling for the agenda for 16.1 for the use of camping with tents in the santa rosa market i want to say thank you so much for even taking the time to even draft this or even consider this as a resident and employee of the downtown area we do face a lot of camping in and around our employee doors our main entrances they we have seen all kinds of drug use potty breaks and just overall just that behavior that is deterring our customers to coming into our store so thank you so much for again taking uh considering this as a motion to eliminate the tents in our market and again this is nisha for 16.1 hi this is my cook marina was in santa rosa and i'm calling regarding item uh 16.1 and camping on public streets and public property ordinance i wanted to just say thank you very much for the staff that worked on this and wanted to appreciate the city for taking steps towards addressing this issue and also making sure that we're compliant and want to just congratulate the city and support the ordinance and as a business owner in santa rosa appreciate the the the ordinance and also the efforts of staff please vote to approve this thank you good evening council members community and staff my name is lana kane my family owns offfield fifth street grill downtown and i serve on the da or boat board as well i was i first wanted to express gratitude for the staff in drafting this ordinance i understand the changes presented is not a solution for homelessness but a starting point in addressing the health and safety of our residents speaking as a business owner for over 20 years downtown i could add to the redundancy and overload you with the time and money spent to keep our property as well as the surrounding areas clean from debris and feces like a broken record on the daily i can only stress this these changes are overdue there is no misunderstanding here the need to address unregulated camping on public property and establishing standards when conditions change is imperative to making progress and cleaning up and revitalizing our downtown i asked the council to support this ordinance please make the steps forward thank you hello my name is dong tamasi i'm a says santa rosa resident and principal tlc architecture in downtown santa rosa i'm also a member of the downtown action organization i would like to address like in 16.1 repealing and replacing the camping ordinance first i'd like to express my appreciation to staff for its efforts to draft the ordinance i strongly urge council to support this new ordinance it addresses important health and safety concerns in our community without being overly restrictive on multiple occasions unregulated camping has caused major problems among children without a trail depraving others of their ability to safely use the trail unregulated camping has also negatively impacted businesses and has fostered a negative perception of downtown in other areas of santa rosa i'm very committed to keeping my business downtown i know many other business owners who have chosen not to locate downtown in the southern cases to relocate out of downtown thank you hi my name is craig winne i am a resident employee in santa rosa california i'm calling on agenda item 16.1 again at 16.1 i am calling to ask that the council support this ordinance i do have to walk through downtown i do support uh i do business in downtown um and i do have some health and safety concerns with the encampments i often find paraphernalia uh around that i have to walk through and i don't really feel safe uh walking through the kind of intensities that are building out plus um overall it's um kind of makes for a disgusting place to live so we will now close the public hearing and i'll bring it back to council for additional questions and final comments council member step i was really impressed with the close reading that that some in the audience gave to this ordinance uh and so out of respect for that i want to bring up two points that were asked and and went to our new city attorney i think i'm directing directing your way we had some we had some wordsmithing going on some thoughtful wordsmithing and the two phrases that i wrote down were um the through through no fault of their own towards the beginning um and then also a phrase or the phrase in a manner that that appeared with some of those items or with some of the lists of um of new restrictions and so my question is are either of those suggestions material would that change the impact of this ordinance thank you council member can you hear me am i good okay thank you i noted those as well and i'll go through both of them and i'll invite staff to jump in i know that they've been working on this much longer than i have um although these are uh some more issues that come up with ordinances that are being adopted across the state so in terms of the first one i wrote that down as a suggested addition i believe to section 11.22.020c um and so the section would read um let's see in the event alternate shelter is not available through no fault of their own and i think that there refers to the person against whom the city is attempting to enforce the ordinance the following health and safety standards apply i i understand the intent behind that suggested addition i don't think it's necessary and the reason is that boise already addresses this issue boise actually requires that the shelter that's available as the shelter that's being made available be a shelter that can house the person against whom the city is attempting to enforce the ordinance so for instance if it's a shelter that only allows men or vice versa shelter they only allow well let's take that one the shelter that only allows men the and that is the only shelter space available um the ordinance could not be enforced against a person who could not go into a shelter they only allow the men the i think the example they actually used in boise was religion that there were some shelters that the city of boise was making was saying were available to people experiencing homelessness but those sheltered and shelters enforce strict compliance with religious requirements and the people against whom boise was attempting to enforce didn't adhere to those requirements and so the court uh said that that shelter could not be considered appropriately available so i actually think boise addresses the issue already and so that that's so that is baked into the ordinance so i don't think i would not recommend that we include that language again i'd like to hear from staff as well and let me go ahead and address the other one and then i'll turn it over to um staff the in a manner i did not write this ordinance but i suspect that is a nod to the time place and manner restrictions that are permitted um that's a term that's a legal term of art um and it's written throughout that section so i would suggest that we keep that as well um i'll welcome any additional comments from staff did i answer your question council member you did thank you thank you vice mayor mcdonnell do we want to allow staff to answer these before i ask next question thank you just thank you mayor thank you mayor darryl duneson assistant city manager um to the second point city attorney zutler uh is correct uh that is a legal term of art that was uh suggested uh by the team that we were working with in the city attorney's office um and to the first question um it's an excellent point and you see other jurisdictions addressing this differently uh the city of oakland for example has a similar has similar language but theirs reads uh in the event alternate shelter is not accepted um and so again it's really a matter of getting at when a shelter provision is is offered and declined uh then the previous sections of this ordinance applies those are top-notch and thorough answers from being put on the spot next to you both thank you mayor so just for clarification i understand that the city attorney is saying that to add through no fault of their own could be a risk for us because of the way that it's written and that's what staff is advising can you tell me a little bit about what we do in the event that somebody is um unable to be housed and and what what our process is around that i think that might provide some more clarification on the ordinance for us and then i have an additional follow-up as well thank you for that question so it's really on a case by case basis i'll figure this out by the end of the meeting um and so prior to enforcing for camping specifically right we have to offer an alternative um if that alternative is not available then we would not enforce for camping until that individual could be placed in shelter i hope that does that answer your question sort of but yes thank you and um so my my second question was exactly what councilmember staff actually brought up around is there any um will for council to actually edit number five and eleven point let's see eleven point two two point oh two oh around um clarifying in a manner that hinders and the reason that i i look for maybe clarification is not just for enforcement but actually for our unhoused community because if it's not clear to us um or enforcement how is it clear to those that are unhoused about what the manner is it seems like that could be interpretive and maybe that is perhaps how we want it to be um so i'm just looking for um maybe some more clarification around that if there's any will to provide more clarification on that bullet number five we're not bullet but actually number five yeah so again uh this language is the language that uh was was workshopped with the city attorney's office if it is the will of this body to amend that language uh that is your prerogative city attorney i think that you could i don't think you're suggesting that the substance be changed or even the intent you just want it to be more clear agree that's that would be the intent and i'll turn to staff on this it i i think that you could keep the substance and the intent behind that provision the same if you changed in a manner to in any way that would be that could be clearer yes i believe if it said in any way hinders or obstructs the free passage access or movement of any persons i i think that would provide more clarification not just for enforcement but also those that are are looking to camp in a specific area so if if the body would be acceptance i would put that as a motion to amend number five to say that vice mayor mcdonnell through the chair are you suggesting that we replace in a manner in both sections so uh section 11 point 22 point 020 section b subsection 1 and subsection 5 both use the term in a manner and so i just want to be clear that we would be replacing in a manner thank you for that clarification so in number one we would strike in a manner and put in any way and in section five strike in a manner and insert in any way yes again assuming that that is the will of this body we're happy to make that change i will place that as a motion on the floor now to see if it's seconded and then we'll know if there's any will of the body we can continue to have our conversation and this is a council member flimmings um so if she picks it up with the changes that we all make her out our conversation then we don't have to do extra thank you pardon me thank you do you have any additional questions vice mayor council member alvarez thank you madam what is the reason why we don't provide dumpsters needle collection boxes or bathrooms for for for different areas where we know there are homeless council member alvarez through the chair um the decision to sanction an encampment is a decision of this body we receive policy direction from you all and so if it is your will for us to have sanctioned encampments at certain locations with certain provisions then we will take that direction from you thank you why is it that we refrain from improving the time frame such as the county did thank you for that question so again um we looked at a number of ordinances throughout california and closely with the county of sonoma and um the city of robert park and it's the county of sonoma that has the the time restriction based on our experience managing and responding to encampments over the past several years um we felt that that that time restriction would be a challenge to implement um and we wanted to make sure that we had an ordinance in place that we could implement thank you for that answer uh my last question where specifically can a person exist if this ordinance would be put into place would we expect our transient community to be on foot throughout the day or or is there maybe and again this is possibly the will of the the council itself but specific areas where they could exist during the the the day thank you for that question and I looked at my colleagues for any additional comments but uh folks are welcome to visit uh caritas dropping center um t