Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - 11Ar r CouncilCity •Correspondence 10/17/2017 Item No. 11A SECOND READING ORDINANCE: ADOPT AN AMENDED ORDINANCE RELATED TO STORAGE OF PROPERTY, PROHIBITION OF ANIMALS, VEHICLE ACCESS AND VOLUNTEER SERVICES IN THE CIVIC CENTER AREA Date of Name Representative of In Favor In opposition Correspondence of RA*. of RA*. 1 10/17/2017 Tim M. Johnson CPA JLK Rosenberger Yes 2 10117/2017 Jayson C Santa Ana Resident Yes 3 10/1712017 Maria Same Yes 4 1011612017 Tish Leon President, HOA, Town Square Condominiums Yes 5 1011712017 Janet Pekarek Yes 6 10/17/2017 Dallas Augustine OC Needle Exchange Board of Directors Yes 7 10/17/2017 Ameena Qazi Yes g 1 011 7/2 01 7 Sarah J. Gregory Legal Aid Society Yes g 10/17/2017 Morgan Denges Provided 233 electronic signatures collected Yes in opposition of item, 10 10/1712017 Brendan Hamme ACLU, Staff Attorney Yes 11 10/1112017 Courtney Thompson *RA - Recommended Action Thursday, November 2, 2017 Page 1 of 1 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Magallon, Becky Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:31 PM To: Huizar, Maria Cc: Mitre -Ramirez, Norma; Flores, Rosa; Cruz, Yesenia Subject: FW: Homeless Ordinance- Bicycle Aspect Maria, Forwarding an email the City Council received regarding an agenda item. Thanks, Becky Magallon I Secretary to the City Manager City Manager's Office bma¢allon(tasanta-aR&M 714,647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received, From: Tim Johnson [ Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:36 AM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Martinez, Michele; Subject: Homeless Ordinance- Bicycle Aspect Solorio, Jose; Benavides, David; Villegas, Juan; Tinajero, Sal Mayor and SA Councilmembers... I have met a few of you on occasion, however I have no expectation of you knowing who I am. I am a resident of W. Floral Park and have been active in our neighborhood association through meetings but not leadership. I am also an avid bike rider using my bike to commute to work on an almost daily basis...I work in Irvine, so I end up going from our neighborhood in W. Floral Park, through downtown and Civic Center area, and then all the way down Main to my office on Jamboree and Main. I also have 3 kids who love riding bikes. I also know that some of you also like riding, so hopefully my suggestion as to bikes maybe hits home (Ms. Martinez, I understand you especially love riding). Anyways, I know that you will be considering the homeless ordinance tonight. Overall, I support the ordinance. The City has done some great things with regards to housing, services, and coordination for the homeless- likely far more than most any other city in Orange County. Thank you for doing that ... we are bearing more than our fair share, but as 1 tell my kids, sometimes that Is just the way things go. My issue is that my kids & my wife do not feel safe going down to Civic Center to access the services available to us as residents of the City. Primarily, the Library. The situation at the Plaza of Flags and surrounding areas is unacceptable if the goal is to have kids access the library. The smell, the visual distraction, the filth and the overall atmosphere is not appropriate for children. Unfortunately, my family visits the City of Orange library which does not seem to have these issues. I feel myldds and family should be able to go down to the Plaza of the Flags and the Library without feeling harassed, whether actual or perceived, and have a pleasant experience that reflects our great City. Having shade structures, which are likely yet not guaranteed to be stolen, along with dangerous gas containers (LP and gasoline), noise from the generators, furniture, cooking stations, human fecal and urine buckets around, etc ... all provide for a poor situation. As far as bikes ... I understand that 10-551(a)(18) will prohibit non-functioning bikes and bike parts. I support this section also. As a biker, it pains me to see the number of bikes that most can surmise were illegally stolen at one point. The problem is that these bikes are stolen, then stripped down and repackaged as other bikes, or sold and then stripped N down- ultimately ending up in someone's hand who actually purchased the bike. The key for those involved with this is to be able to say "I bought this bike for $XX, I did not steal it". That maybe true -the one who has the bike paid for it but they bought stolen property... it could be my kids bike or my bike. Something needs to be done to stop the transfer of these stolen bikes. The serial numbers are removed so that those who have their bike stolen cannot provide a legal identification to them. This puts us in bad situation. Our bikes are being stolen, dismantled, serial numbers stripped off, and then repackaged, sold, and sold again. I propose that the City should also impose a city wide ban on possession of or working on bikes that have their serial numbers removed. Or at a minimum, maybe only have in possession at most 1 bile with serial # removed solely to allow someone who has had a bike for a long time to keep it. This is similar to how it is illegal to sell/possess an automobile with the VIN removed or a handgun with the serial number removed. Some of these bikes are more expensive than both autos and guns. They obviously do not do the damage that guns do but they are a major part of the theft rings in our city. The theft rings lead to and support other bad behavior in the City. To turn a blind eye to this is an insult to all of us with bikes. I know that I cannot leave my bike down by Civic Center or Downtown, even with a lock on it...it will get stolen. It will get stripped of its serial number, it will get resold, and it will be part of the problem in our city. Please, I urge you to consider this. I have sent this proposal previously to Mr. Soloro and he indicated that he would check with the city attorney on this- I do not know the result of those conversations. I have also mentioned it in passing to Mr. Villegas although no follow up was taken on my part, Removing one aspect of the underground stolen goods economy would not only in my opinion remove the visual trash of seeing a bunch of bikes being worked on, the environmental issues Involved, but also allow residents to feel safer having bikes AND also lessen other bad behavior in the City. They are getting stolen and it is not right. We need your help on this. Additionally, if they are selling bikes, they need to have a city business license which I doubt that they do at this point. We need to enforce the rules of the City... have to imagine they were put in place for a reason. Thanks for listening and for your service, I am available to discuss via email or phone ( if anyone wants to further the conversation. Best, Tim M. Johnson, CPA Partner �nr.m Office: (949) 860-9892 Fax: (714) 844-9435 1 Cell: (714) 743-1065 1 EoLhnsoqi rllp.com 2601 Main Street, Suite 580 1 Irvine, CA 92614 This message, (including any attachments) contains confldential information intender! for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. 11 you are not the intended recipient you.shouid delete this message. Any disclosure, copying, or disalbutinn of this inessagc, or the taking of any action based on it, is strictly prohlblted. Al(Rosenherger Ls o California Limited Liability partnership. !+✓litre -Ramirez, Norma From: Huizar, Maria Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:05 PM To: ecomment Subject: ECOMMENT - In support of Item 50A For the record, From: Jayson Cowart [mailto:jayson c_sponger@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:16 PM To: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.org> Co: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Jn support of Item 50A Please put the following comment on the record for tonight's City Council Meeting: Dear Mayor and City Council Members: I am writing to support Item 50A — Emergency Ordinance for the Civic Center. I am a long time resident of Santa Ana and I have witnessed the homeless situation escalate substantially over the last few years. The homeless encampment at the Civic Center needs to be dealt with immediately. It is unsanitary and unsafe, and not fair to the taxpayers of this city to allow this deplorable condition on property that is meant for public use, If it is not dealt with now, then when and how? I am appalled that there was not any action taken sooner by ;public officials. I was not aware that camping on city property was legal. By not taking action you are setting a precedent and soon homeless encampments will spread, just as it has with the SA River Trail. Also, I commute via Main Street everyday and have noticed an increase in homeless on the street from Downtown Santa Ana to the Warner Ave intersection. Something needs to be done. This city has so much potential to be great, but that cannot happen until the city is clean and safe, and this should start with the encampment at the civic center. Jayson C. Norma From: Soto, Daniel Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 20174:13 PM To: Huizar, Maria; Mitre -Ramirez, Norma Subject: FW: Homeless Categories: Correspondence Good afternoon, Below is correspondence sent to the City Council regarding item 11A. Best, Daniel A. Soto I Management Aide City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 (714) 647-5219 1 dsoto@santa-ana.org -----Original Message ----- From: M Serna [mailto:serna714@sbcglobal.net1 Sent: Tuesday, October 1.7, 2017 4:03 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@santa-ana.org> Subject: Homeless I see the issue of homelessness will be the topic fox tonight's meeting Again I will like for all the council to be aware of the problem with the homeless by the river between 17th street and Fairview nothing has been done to protect the safety of the children walking through there every morning and afternoon There are a lot more now on the Fairview side if something ever happens to one of the children it will be the city Council fault for no correcting the problem specially on Amezcuas side because she always comes across as being about the children If anyone of the council people will like to talk to me please have them call me Thank you Maria Del Val -Serpa 714-478-1198 Sent from my Whone O Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Huizar, Maria Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:24 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: Homeless From: lety.leon1951@gmail.com imailto:lety.leon1951@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:12 PM To: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.org> Subject: Homeless HI Maria Sorry I didn't submit this earlier I am in favor of the Council passing this ordinance I live at Town Square and we are constantly having to deal with the homeless on our property. We are a gated community, but they manage to come in. The police can only do so much, when our security calls them. We have homeless trespassing, sleeping in our laundry room, scaring our residents and children. They leave needles everywhere, have sex in our stairwells and laundry rooms. The needle exchange program was a huge mistake, that has to go & the druggies will go away. I empathize for the homeless, a solution is more affordable housing and a permanent shelter, Not the temporary Court Yard, which has to go. I believe that is causing many of our problems. I am not in favor of having their pets removed, for some this is their sense of security and family. Sincerely Tish Leon President, HOA Town Square Condominiums 714-401-8312 11 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Sent: To: Subject: Comment just received. From: Castro -Cardenas, Julie Huizar, Maria Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:52 PM eComment FW: SACC Mtg tonight, 10-17. Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:49 PM To: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.org> Cc: Soto, Daniel <DSoto@santa-ana.org>; Magallon, Becky <BMagallon@santa-ana.org> Subject: FW: SACC Mtg tonight, 10-17. FYI All the Best, Julie Castro -Cardenas (714)673-3619 City Manager's Office - City of Santa Ana From: Janet Pekarek [mailto:amapekPlive.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:47 PM To: City Council <CitVCouncil(@santa ana.ore> Subject: RE: SACC Mtg tonight, 10-17. The Homeless item: We can spend the rest of our lives attending these meetings and/or sending emails to voice our opinions, but it probably won't do any good. The homeless has been a continuing problem for several years and the City doesn't fix it. What we need to do is VOTE THE CITY OFFICIALS INCLUDING THE MAYOR OUT. Our city officials area complete joke to have allowed this issue to grow to such a horrible position. We, the Santa Ana taxpayers and voters, need corrective action immediately. Santa Ana continues to bean embarrassing city to live in. The direction the city is going is horrible. The Salary for City Manager item: $500,000 a year is ridiculous. Q r city officials are paid far fore than theirjob performance warrants!!!!! 4 6, I grew up in Santa Ana, have lived in Washington Square for 50 years. SA used to be a nice city; however, through the years the focus has been catering to people who have turned our city into a dumping ground for the uneducated, the homeless, persons with lower ethics who refuse to follow the laws of our country. IT's embarrassing to see the negative changes taking place while our city officials do little to correct the issues and expect to be compensated at their salaries. 0 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Dallas Augustine <daugusti@uci.edu> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:01 AM To: eComment Cc: sscwarzmann@santa-ana.org; Jemma Alarcon; OCNEP Steering Subject: Comment in Opposition of Strategic Plan No.5,3 & Sec 10-551, Item 23 October 17, 2017 Orange County Needle Exchange Program 1605 N. Spurgeon St. Santa Ana, CA 92701 To Whom it May Concern: We, the Board of Directors of the Orange County Needle Exchange Program, are writing in regard to the Santa Ana City Council's amended Emergency Ordinance: "Amending and Adding New Sections to Santa Ana Municipal Code Chapter 10, Article 10 Related to Storage of Property, Prohibition of Animals, Vehicle Access and Services in the Civic Center Area {Strategic Plan No. 5, 3}." We stand in opposition to the ordinance as a whole but are especially concerned with and opposed to Seo 10-551, Item 23 ("Item 23"), which prohibits "possession or storage of any uncapped hypodermic needles, unless within a medically approved and sealed container." The described possession or storage of personal syringes is protected by state Jaw. Specifically: California Health and Safety Code §11364(6):, Allows unlimited possession of syringes for personal use when obtained from an authorized needle exchange • California Health and Safety Code §11364(b): Allows possession of needles from any source for any reason that are containerized for disposal We recognize that Item 23 is the result of concern regarding needle litter in the Civic Center. However, based on hundreds of interviews with OCNEP olients, a primary cause of needle litter is fear of being improperly cited or detained by law enforcement officers for possession of clean and/or properly containerized used syringes. Despite being protected by state law, our clients continue to be cited. When encountering local police officers they may suddenly abandon needles in hopes of avoiding improper citation, detention, or arrest. Thus, rather than ameliorate this problem, Item 23 will only exacerbate the likelihood of needle litter by further criminalizing and stigmatizing syringe possession and storage. Rather than making proper storage and disposal more difficult for OCNEP clients (as will occur should Item 23 be instituted), we propose the following alternative solutions: 1) the installation of additional permanent sharps disposal units throughout the Civic Center and surrounding area; 2) supporting OCNEP's safe, no -cost disposal of syringes on Saturdays at 20 Civic Center Plaza and supporting additional days of operation to improve disposal. Sincerely, Orange County Needle Exchange Board of Directors Dallas Augustine Kyle Barbour Nathan Birnbaum Kelley Butler Christleen Casem Po Hsu Sofia Laguna Thao Le Miriam McQuade Meg Munoz Mahan Naeim Carol Newark Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: geo <Ieemer75@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 3:44 PM To: eComment Subject: Opposed to ordinance 2926 I am opposed to ordinance 2926, I believe the solution is to create more housing, increase services, and not criminalize homelessness. Ameena Qazi Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Sarah Gregory <sgregory@LEGAL-AID.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:48 PM To: eComment Cc: Lili Graham; Schwarzmann, Sandra Subject: Comment Letter re October 17, 2017 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 11A Attachments: 10.17.2017 SA Council Ltr re Ordinance NS-2926.pdf Please see attached regarding October 17, 2017 City Council Meeting Agenda Item 11A, adoption of Ordinance No. NS - 2926. Thank you, Sarah J. Gregory I Staff Attorney, Complex Litigation Legal Aid Society of Orange County & Community Legal Services in Southeast Los Angeles County Est. 1958 Main/Hotline: 800-834-5001 714-571-52541 714-571-5270 (f) sgr,%gory@l al -aid o,m I www.t egal-Aid com The information in this transmittal (including attachments, if any) is privileged and confidential and is intended only for the recipient(s) listed above. Any review, use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this transmittal is prohibited except by or on behalf of the intended recipient. If you have received this transmittal in error, please notify me immediately by reply email and destroy all copies of the transmittal. Any inadvertent disclosure does not waive the attorney-client privilege. L E GA L A I D SOCIETY I'll It, 3111 1 y 1-n C; A 1. 0J., "S Ot:*] 1:11 A S 1 1. O'S 4\ ;(If 1 4:11 October 17, 2017 Council meml-ter Jose soloxio Council Martinez council Me'llibel, viceme Sarmiento Council A/lejutter Migucl PLIHdO Comiiizi'l Atrmhey David Benzvidts Council Member Sal Timaijzvo COU'Vil Vilteg- Mtmiher,J an U, as City af-Santa Alan 2',0,C.i-vd,c Center Plaza„ .8th Flney 'Saula Ana, CA,927,02 'R tc: Sauto Ana City C"OtEn"cl! Meeting, October 17, 2111"7, Agen& Item I IA - 0x(EI-mvirce Na. NS -29M6 Aimencling MmiMPAI Code Section M-551 .and Adding S'ectimtivs I thy' 2, 4 0 353, aired 1,10-554 Deal - We sull-y111it this jette.l. '011 behalf of our clients, homeless avul disabled Tzsidzuts of the City of Samta,Ana(die Cit) znd the Ptupte4s Homeless Task Force, a igrassnoot3 assaciatian formed to " adv,cfeateon lbehalf of homeless residents of Ora:nge CGIU11Y. We Wrik l!cgmIdjmjj,AgenA:N Item I 1A ,on thel0clober 17, 2017 City Catmell M=fing Agenda, which proposes a sewn dreading of 0 ' R"IendiligSanta Ana Mtmicpal Code Section 10-551 and addh-lg Sections 10-551 '10-553, and 10-554 related to the storage oj'.property, vehicle acress-incl volunteer servi cc's im the ,civictCenter .m -,ea ('IDxdihimice No, NS -2926"r). Wcurge yon to vote NO on 01-dinzoice No, NS -292& 'Ile Cittyotutc'i➢ 131'easuile,clujing the October 3, 2017 City COD'161 "',eeting,("Gewbu 1, 2,01 710rdimallue"), On the October i, 2.017Ordinanceas Violative of homeless zesideots' rights to Act pon rwenth Amendments, ,to the United `States Constitution. Eve Ex,A. passage ofthe Okluker 3), 201 TO rclinalicers bill cluica-gency meastire pursnalit U) 11mvecluirenirnts of Santa Ana Cluuted- -Sectiotts 413,&md,415- Numerous other advacaues and 11,01ne'less'l-esi'dLills aiso submillad In light 'ol"these s gnrCc let coarct rs, the City' Counril dill nai,acicypt the October 3, 2017 bastead,Conneil set the tan asilre for a second Tkeading on 21,01 North Tustin AeqjLje, SlmIa AmaCali-arnln92705 Lottorto Santa Ana reOndillancQ No. NS -2926 October 17, 2017 Pauge 2 of 3 October 17, 2017, vviiich would give the City ti'lle to revise the October 3, 2017 Ordinance and incorporate:public and Counciblielliber concerns. On October 12, 2017, at the City's request. LASOC and other IcipLI acjvk)cQtLs n, ttelitlec.1 a ineeling wiul 'C"Ity sudTw "Chil"Cuss concerns with the October % 2,0 I TOrdinanco. Al the mecting, flie City p-,ovidID(I 'advocates with revisions le the Octobel-3. 2017 Ordinance, made alter the Octobei- 1, 2017 meeting (" Revised 0rdhiance"). The Revised Ordinance mademinox cliariges :ten the Oeluber '). 2017 Ordinance but contimied wcrinlillalin, hornlessness by restricting homerless 'Scrvkes and Inaking it :illegal w possess err use basic necessities. including lents. Over . the , tjl,S 0 , OD e of Inecting—LASOC' and other advocates leviev"edetach provision ofdic Revised O'l-dimance wiffiti,ty suff. discussing the legal and pi"acticol problems witli its adoplioll and C11,1,01cemeat. City st-affslated it pintended to raiRc aill cellaerns wfth 'City'Coxi'llcil foropus sfera�tian. 1-1mvever, the very next day, Dn t0clotlar 1 3), 2017, the,C:iLY released anA,ganda and Staff porl ll,,eco.niiiieiieizill'&',tllat um Oily ,council mlo-pt the Remised Ord-buirloc as Ordinance No. N.S- 29Z0,,even :though Ilic City had not addressed anyof LASOCIS or the other advocates' zallcertl & The,cilly, change the )City made to tile Revised Ordinance after the October 1"2.2017 rneeling was to sidd aprovisian restriming the amber ani snal-s -permilted at the Civic CellIer. Accordingly. LAS OC opposes adoptioli of Ordilla nce No. N S,2,926- Like tIleearlier drafts, OrAiliance No. NS -2926 u1justly restricts scjwlioes to [hp honaclesssonnnn unity anal Zrinlimlizes zholnel'o"nics's by,making it illegal toposseis.trms.-and other basic necessities, in -toialclisreguld for 11,0111zles's resi'dents, inAcTeSIS illp.ri-vacy. Cree'doln"Of I'llovellmit. and basichumandignity. Allfbough the City lois stated the purposeofOrdinanze No. NS -292,6 is to pmornale health and salty, the ordjjlauue -4leldrassil-I.&I dais concern because il prohAmits items ill -ell homeless residents .use to survive. Th.m. courulylo the City'-sstated inbeuL Ordinance No. NS -22,92,6 would actually w0l!sell he dlh end safety conditions forhounaless residents. Ordinance M,). N5-2926 would also creatca signifltcanl nncl.clisinropartionate impact oil pyeoplevvit1h oisabifilits, vdin'rely -heamfly oil hormelebs services ailchvlluse disdbiTilics may be h exacetued -without -access wnl sane of the items probib—S iledsuch as tents. 42 U,C. § 12132 ,F'urdler. Ordinance No. N -S-29.2,0 impficates homeless 1esicic"Is' I-iighls ruder the Fourth, Eighth, and JLo Alle tjlljlucl States Con'stilatiall, Which proleut Ilmse individuals" ri,gints to be free frons un=1sanable searches,,and seizure, froin seizures wilbout due, ppoecss of IaNy, and fi I , �oji..i being pm:i-shod hosed Dil their -huJTTeIeSSSIatLIS. See, t, 9, Jones v CilyplIvs Ang.dvs, 444 F.3d 111$_ 1 132 (9th Cit. 2006), La ren v. City o,.f Los An,69' .1 )C" 20 12.. gules,f-.3 11022, 1032-33 (9th Cir. 2101 North TUStin Avj21lLIC,SWIW.An,-L, CAiTormiki 9,27,05 Letter to Santa Ana re Ordinance No. NS -2926 0 cluber 17- 2017 Page ')'oj'3 for these reasons and the reasons stated in LASOC's October 3, 2017 fetter, attached lincto as Exhi bit,k -iAe urgme you to cote NO on Ordinance No, NS -2926. Jf YDLIJUIVCany questdiwsair vvis'll to Cligewssthese ;issues Further, p] case,,cic) 1101 11,esittite loconlacl us at 714-571-'5354 fir se re >o,y rc21c .1J-ai cl.com. (2N- Sabyl Landrum sal -all Grt'go'py 71 D MOl'th Tustin AwOIILIG, Sanw,Ana, C-alif'ovida 93705 EXHIBIT A LEGAL AID S 0 C I E T M M 11) N I I y L li A 1. S 1. it C j! OF SMUTHEANT LUS AN514LAS CTVNTY Delp be r 3, 2 017 ,co Lill 011 id eln be I, Jose So I orio Count 5il Member Michele Martinez Council IvIen-liber Vken(e Sarmicnio Council Member Miguel IN Udo Council Mciubzr David Benavktes Council Member Sal ThuQu C'u'unnei I N?Ielvlber Juilli Viflepas City ofSanta Ani 2Q:CiVjC CQJ1teT PJaZil, 8111 ROD]' &mta Ana, CA 92702 ax: Insta Alan Cit), Council MDefmeg, Octabci- 3,2DA7,Agenda Item SOA — E mer"geney 0n ina—mv. Ainkounfing MunicipM Me Section .1&551 arl.1d AJdfings'galons 10-552, 10-553, lynx! H-5.554 Desi Counctimembers: Wtsulbinii'l thJs letter on behlif of omMents, Smokm bind disabled mslidentsfof time City of Au,,) Municipal C.,ocle'sculi"all 10-551 and add Sections 10-552,110-55.3, ryind 10454:nelatai'wfire S1,011,al7C jMUNbRAn Of SAMAs, 1MhMe1aeC.eSS,Lajjo NloluwLoel svi-vicesin tile civic Center area. Because the 'oxdinlnn ce'r'ffstriets siolvices to AQ homeless Lcoxtununity and ori mi nal izes NO on the OndiiyanCoL 11assine lanes loll cilrAnWke our homeless co nnmtnv rial irsolve T The City cannot,dr ter people f1mm sletpiag utriskle because they heve nowhery else to go 7,11tis, restnicting'serviOle pl"oviders, Kul, to oftei food, ruedicv] or social serviet's.vit time Civic'celllen will unly,nuda i:,t ln�crtrc dillIctill For residents 10 PUD 1henise'lves'0111 of hoinz.1easiness, Sunuarly. issuing Qxpemsivc dckzfs ol. se,iZing IT'innella3s; residents, residents Dam =MPQ humdcwme,,�vby robbing them of the possessianstheyxise co 5w -vivo and matin AM AM They JD not have the izesoancesto pay. Dis'41h],ed homeless; inSviduals we dispri:)gortionately iimpacted,b,y laws th=at .uhuimilize ffieEi 11(linjeless ljvij,rp such laws exa"Alace tiny handicap or disabTlay. Foi examp& Wrivoy Kabled residants tolive withow basic access u s 11'ke Shwitel. arld Shade tvould Viulule Tide 11 Who Awwkus vvith Di,sahill] ties Acct j("ADA" ), avhith OdWdkg 1w denial af swOms or We% an the bast ofa pergon's disvibility. 42 U.&C. k 12132. 2101 North Tustin Averitic, Shinn Ann, ChMwThit 92705 Clunnnillizanlnn also jaulallosnwriglits undclLhe h'at7tn�h. G�.bhth, a�tsl Fourteen ill Annendvnensus to le Il Awd Stages CoosLiWtiom, which 1mr0tecl lnmmeless findividuals, aid s Io Abe 21 Run unreasomable szx cher and wizu es, 2'1,0112 semzn2es wntho;ud Lille pl'00egs of1nw, and from being 17uini:shesl ,b< sed oil Vich. honma less sLauts. FSse, e,g, .beaus v L'ily,of Ln, s Angeles, 444 r 3cl 1118, 1132 o91h 2h% 2106D (chatng &%mall) i,. CC'I.Wornia, 370 U.S. 660, 605 (1962)), L iwn v Cny ay'Zos aA,ingWcs, b'73.L.3al 1.022, 1032,33 (9th fir. 2012). ALIffitionnlly, adne .Santa Ana Chasten Pt0vicic^s dVA "[m]0 ciclinnnoe sila11 be lttassad Finally on rhe Jay it is iritis heed" unless A ts"necesalry as an zmcrgetuynneaszue tat pxesci-v ung the JDATIuc ,�.Lu1ce, lm,al:oh. 0I saCerg" ulul uo alntivs"a stntement 01' Ole reasmns B01 mss urgurxy " Santa Ana Charter J§ 413 415. However, the knee otf the ordinance Maks cl it shat the InroWeIns hurinormctly P¢hlressud lry the 014iilvance haws been gaing on fler W JaWLthepaM year,,ithnot loi;}gner. h>r S,tafl' Report at 5ilr1-2 1, 5DA-74Amumdingly, Ae C)a'tlunance is not sin alnergertC), nreasmas zulrl Inust be given two readings bek'no it is-parssocI purs uant to Santa Ana Chanter Secli:om 4,13.SantaAna Omrtci Q 413 we uliyu Sxtnta Araa Orclialanee No NS2843, Santa Ana Nlunkipal Code' 150„, 2- 155; Gov, CodeSection 54953, 7. lkcause (I It C ulinarice Oestrids sea'\'iOrs to thehoiudesscornu tunsly and mini nalices Inonlelessness by uz iug n Illegal to possess basic ne ess2lies, At Loge you 10 vote N�O on the Adintawn Qua oa W e may gateslions 01. 'wish to tiisuiss tl"C'sc is uos 1"tnt-Itaer, Meese do not hesilale uo ct2ntus t sulaia CJr-e:soly nt 71 4-571-525 4 of sgregor3=;n?legn]-auil comm. `Sncen�el3%, Li'h Graham Subyl Lanewum Sa2nh Gregory legal Attl S0c icty 01'0161119Z Cvun ty 21OI North TustinA-vemimSUM AnkDIM! 9M To: Santa Ana City Council ;ainip.+i resisi Uy lAmCurls s r 2eiecst thie;vTti Rona;{US fltdiaastct Why is this important? In January of thin year the Santa Ana City Council de -tared Santa xAna to be a Sanctuary City. Yet many of our most vul nerathe neighbors continue to suffer under the City's agenda of cdan4rraflZ@hQn. People experiencing hoinelessiieso are consistently, the target of compasoonf ess efforts to outlaw their every behavior. £urrently; flee Can Ajta City Council is considering an ordinancet§rat would ban Rear, Vitala people'e" survivat, such as Neots of any6helter Frorru fhecorning w6nter, chairs, arrd recpc&abler. It would noake It a misdemeanor fw churches and curnmunitygrouips to ProsEdefood to those in need, which will Iaad to costly li NSults the City is not likely to vJi n. While the City claims this is being done in the interest of public safety, this is oothdng more than a transparent atter pit to dIve the people away fwarn 8heh offices, with no established shet@eras viable alternative. please acid your voice to the cancer ned residents call hog on the Cit ho vote noun such a cruel and shortsighted ord bra nae.. 'This campaign is a collaboration betWeen:OCHOM; OCNF.P, Catholic Viker, Chicanos U nicks; Cluspa, ©range County I ninigraotYou th united, Resilience Orange County, and Sum pots of the People. CCM" 10-kq-11� 8 of 300 signatures Sign the petitar First Name Last Name: Pfiarre N.n bK Zip urde Celan ry. United Stu Leh rqF Acranna`= gilws...*', 6tfwiw,u . s+r m. isdF: nn, p �aaameupyar{.ydliu Poore [dien£f LASTSICNEDRYp 'C Joseph S.:. Sharon G. Janice, R. s anthonYIs I sHAUEan I ¢ Facebook I V Twitter 1 C3 Emait CATEGORY Poticc & Prisons pnra�t=n.pelsAs:r ror r�,vYry Reasons for signing LS Cruelty in the nsmeaF.,w.Menc. is unmaedionall it6rJmrei At obcr✓tG laxxsaga �C justice hortf,e oppressed. mres�o,., ai, PhyAatw;xr.ogn {( isigned because. all people have a5ghtto llva and h,,a-aiety.tt does notdn geod to ban when yruu nanedar.+kaand hza E€ I nra'we fd. nhartSLuwa ngn au.., n ," Updates '. � aY�Ucs l'Ev�uis rgo luosEgnatvtea reached SOsignatuces rsched 25sip.Wresrsuched '� _soi 1.Ls„m ngo 10 sigiratvresreach d LanguageI6--jis,(Usq} Tei me&ConditSons Community PBUacy AbeutUs To: Santa Ana City Council Reject the Anti -Homeless Ordinance Signed by 223 people: Name Zip code Hairo Cortes 92703 Sheenalnnocente 92780 Stephanie 92845 Roberts Lou Noble 92801 Jamie Ludoyise 9278p Susan Sonne 90620 Jordan Hoiberg 92701 Peyton Mcdevitt 92886 Diana Strange 92627 Daniel Robbins 92802 Laura Robbins 92802 Brenda Mercado 92707 Judith Mercado 92707 Nick D Andrea 92808 --------- ........ James Bergthold 90620 Amy M.' ` 92617 David Pollock 92626 Sofia Laguna 90902 Jed Parriott 90027 Thao Le 92708 _. Thy Le _ _ 92708 Name Zip code Celeste Ruiz 91723 Sussanna 92626 Davidson Michelle R 92677 Nikki -Rae Alkema 92647 Michelle Au 90018 =Dallas Augustine 92870 Lina Nguyen 92612 Humberto 92805 Delgadlllo Jordan Stein 90620 Michael Calderon- 90405 Zaks Byron Lopez 92703 Linda Lehnkering 92805 Jasmine S 92630 Miriam Mcquade 92866 Alexes Batta 92708 Hasmik 91204 Burushyan, ... Perla Dionicio 92701 Mohammed Aly 92701 Karen Hernandez 92653 Name Zip code Michael 90703 Wauschek Sharon Tipton 1 92614 Diana 92586 Worthington Mart4s 93103 Henriquez Thomas Fielder 92804 Andy 92865 Lewandowski Marlha Sanchez 92703 Laraine Turk 92252 Leia Smith 92701 Logan 92868 Woodhouse Jackie Garcia 92376 Daniel Moses 92865 Mike Friedman 92626 Michael 8utlec... mT92677 ... Jake Giffin 92660 Erica Gonzalez 92707 lisa Rivera 06516 Joubin Khazaie 92701 Jim D 92701 Robert Deglow 38111 Mackenzie Cater 92701' Joshua Staggs 92673 Name Zip code Kim Vander 92806 Dussen -6 ". Alystar 90815 McKenneh 0 Neill 92806 Jenna Halliday ROM1SO Morgan Denges 92701 Claudia Fuentes 92708 Monica VU 92708 Carol Newark 90802 Robert Franklin 92647 Graham -6 ". Clevidence 92617 Shelia Raja 92806 Erin Layton 92627 Brooke Weitzman 92780 D A. Cunningham V8T 2W4 Kelley Butler 92866 Alex Pearlman 90703 Mardeanl 92806 Pepenella Ruth Parson 92821 Jim Lee 91748 Jeanette Duran 92703' Catherine Liu 92617 Michael Campos - 92844 David Macariola 92844 Anrreliese�Aguular 90023 Elizabeth 92801 Stevenson Rebecca, Garcia. 92626 Massimo Marini 92705 Jayne Becker 92805 Name Zip code jenny hubbard 90631 Jordan Cahn 92617 Ignacio Carrillo 90032 . , Alison Rowley 92866 Sam Searles 11231 Rebecca Goodsell 92617 Faris Jamil 92626 Diem Thinh Pham 92705 nora coyle 92807 Ugochi Ahaebere- 92701 Nicholson''. Zuhair Sheikh 92612 Brandon Young 92844 Lisa Ayres -Smith 92647 Mahan Naeim 92620 Kristen Maziarka 92617 Helen Boyer 92617 Antonia Alario 90706 Jemma Alarcon 92617 Fahrin Bhuiyan 91730 Shalisa 92604 Sanuntoong William Lavin 92612 Name Zip code Araiye Medlock 92617 Ashlie Ibrahim 92879 Kevin Norgaard 93012 Madeleine Hart 90808 Philipp Lehmann 92617 Eve Garrow 92705 Carl Shields 92630 Steven Gonzalez 92707 Paul Read 91773 Rishi Gadepally 92617 James Keegan 92651 Maricel Parnell 92869 Davina Stein 92704 ---` ..Elizabeth __. _...----- ElizabethCastillo ---------- 90712 Kala Ghoorayf 92866 Alexis Teodoro 92701 Sylvia Castner - 91326 Jeffrey Dickman 92701 Diane Goldstein 92705 Kristin Fast 92651 Robert Herrera 92703 Name Zip code Zeke Hasenfeld 91107 anna steiner 94609 Jenny Anderson 92620 Roussan Collins 92804, Winnie Cheng 92618 Monida'5ea _f 90813 Marion Krizo 90650 Josh Baco;pulos 92630 Lara Nguyen 92617 Leah Eng'rand 92840 Jaya Dubey 92612 Alexis Annunziata 43201 Kira Egan 90638 Haimme-Meyers 92570 Jennifer Geraci 92617 Bethany Steidl 92612 Leonora Saavedra 92617 Cat Martin 19947 tilia lam 92683 Erin Hitomi 92627 ' Joanne Marquez 92675 Luke Green 92701 LaBreonna Bland 9261.7 .. Jenny West 92780 Ruzan Orkusyan 92617 Po H 92604 Alexandra 92656 Theodotou mike Music 92539 Name Zip code Alicia Stearns 92626 Jamie Rogers 92617 Cynthia Gooden 90057 "Harold -ern, 93453 Ivan Enriquez 92706 Mel Aguirre 92840 Merryl Chewning 92802 Veronica Moreno 92869 Jillian Gottlieb 90232 Julie Wood 92617 Margaret Sharpe 92626 Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Huizar, Maria Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2017 2:32 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: ACLU letter in opposition to Ordinance No. NS -2926 Attachments: Santa Ana Letter -amended ordinance NS2926.pdf Did we receive this one already? It came in afterhours From: Magallon, Becky Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 7:22 PM To: Huizar, Maria <MHuizar@santa-ana.org> Subject: FW: ACLU letter in opposition to Ordinance No. NS -2926 Forwarding an email the Council received. Thanks. Becky Magallon I Secretary to the City Manager City Manager's Office bmagallon@santa-ana.ore 714.647.5200 120 Civic Center Plaza jSanta Ana, CA 92701 This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. From: Eve Garrow[mailto:EGarrow(caACLUSOCAL.ORG] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 5:13 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Martinez, Michele; Sarmiento, Vicente; Solorio, Jose; Villegas, Juan; Benavides, David; Tinajero, Sal Subject: ACLU letter in opposition to Ordinance No. NS -2926 Dear Mayor Pulido and City Council Members, Please see the attached letter from the ACLU of Southern California in opposition to Ordinance No. NS -2926. Sincerely, Eve Garrow Eve Garrow, Homelessness Policy Analyst & Advocate Dignity for All Project Please note our new address: ACLU of Southern California Orange County Branch Office 1851 E. First Street, Suite 450 Santa Ana, CA 92705 (0)714-450-3962 x104 aclusocal. arg 11 facebook 11 twitter II b:loz: The ACLU: Stand for Justice 1M p 2 '1 ). LIBERTIES UNION o .I SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA October 17, 2017 Mayor Miguel Pubdo Mayor Pro Tem Michele Martinez Council Member Vicente Sarmiento Council Member Jose Solorio Council Member Juan Villegas Council Member David Benavides Council Member Sal Tinajero Dear Council members, mnuhdo c2santa-ana.:oxg nvmartmez&santa rana.org vsarmientlo@auta-ana org isolorio rna santa-ana:org iviller*as&Santa-arra.;org dbenaviAes n@sania-ana.o stimic og, saata-:ai a&rg We strongly oppose the amended Ordinance No. NS -2926, which criminalizes 1) life- sustaining activities in the Santa Ana Civic Center, including sleeping in tents for protection from the elements; and 2) unauthorized provision of food, medical, or social services to people living in the Civic Center—a restriction on expressive conduct that violates the constitutional rights of religious organizations. We urge you to reject the ordinance. By criminalizing homelessness and the provision of humanitarian aid, the ordinance seeks to deter unsheltered living. But people are not malting a choice to be homeless. They are living in the Civic Center because they have nowhere else to go. According to a recent Bert by Susan Price, the Director of Care Coordination, the county's four housing authorities have a cumulative wait list for affordable housing of over 90,000 people, and the wait can last ten years or more. Further, there is approximately one emergency shelter or transitional spot for every two people in need. These severe shortages leave about half of all people experiencing homelessness with no alternative but to live outside. Punishing unsheltered people and preventing organizations from providing them with humanitarian aid is ineffective, cruel and immoral. It is also unlawful. For example, the requirement that food providers obtain written approval from the City Manager and obtain "any applicable licenses or permits required to provide such services or access to Civic Center property" prior to distributing food is unconstitutional. The ordinance's provisions are simply not sufficiently tailored to the City's purported interest in "ensur[ing] that all services are provided in an organized manner by those who have the proper experience and/or credentials needed to provide the service and who have submitted a set-up and clean-up plan to the City." Religious organizations such as the Catholic Worker regularly provide coffee and other food and toiletry items to homeless individuals in the Civic Center as part of their religious mission to provide alms to needy individuals. Others may do so to call attention to the needs of homeless individuals that are not being met by the City. Regardless of the rationales for their expressive conduct, their activities are entitled to First Amendment protections. To pass constitutional scrutiny, restrictions on expressive conduct must be "within the constitutional power of the Government," "farther[] an important or substantial governmental interest," be "unrelated to the suppression of free expression," and, most importantly here, be "no greater than is essential to the furtherance of that interest." United States v. O'Brien, 391 STA NO foo JUS7Ire U.S. 367, 377 (1968). Put another way, such restrictions must be "narrowly drawn to further a substantial governmental interest." Clark v. Cmty. for Creative Non -Violence, 468 U.S. 288, 294 (1984). The restrictions in the proposed ordinance, however, are neither "narrowly drawn" nor "essential to the furtherance of the City's stated interests. Indeed, the City's stated interests appear to be nothing more than post -hoc rationalizations to justify its increasingly punitive approach to the crisis of homelessness impacting those encamped at the Civic Center. Requiring every group that wishes to distribute food in the Civic Center to obtain the approval of the City Manager is constitutionally suspect. It is clear that for expressive conduct, "In public open spaces ... permit requirements serve ... only to regulate competing uses and provide notice to the municipality of the need for additional public safety and other services. Only for quite large groups are these interests implicated, so imposing permitting requirements is permissible only as to those groups." Santa Monica Food Not Bombs v. City of Santa Monica, 450 F.3d 1022, 1042 (9th Cir. 2006). The ordinance, however, contains no consideration of the number of participants in the food distribution effort. The ordinance likewise fails to assess the impact of food distribution activities on the normal functioning of the Civic Center despite this being a critical point of analysis. "The nature of a place, `the pattern of its normal activities, dictate the kinds of regulations of time, place, and manner that are reasonable... The crucial question is whether the manner of expression is basically incompatible with the normal activity of a particular place at a particular time." Grayned v. City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 116 (1972). It cannot, however, be reasonably argued that serving food to homeless individuals is basically incompatible with the normal activity in the Civic Center, where numerous homeless individuals have little choice but to live and, as the City acknowledges, many prepare their own food. With regards to the City's asserted interests, not once does the City's lengthy recitation of the issues purportedly plaguing the Civic Center mention any problems with food or any other services being provided in a disorganized way. It is difficult to imagine that there are simply so many providers of food to the homeless that they need to be coordinated by the City. Similarly, if the distribution of food and the like were resulting in chaos and melees because of lack of organization, the City presumably would have included that information in its preamble. Nor does the City indicate anywhere that food is being distributed by individuals who lack proper experience; moreover, it strains the bounds of reason to assert that distributing coffee and food to needy individuals requires a particularized curriculum vitae. Indeed, the City's attempt to impose stringent qualifications on both medical providers and people handing out food or coffee highlights the difference between these two activities and the needlessness of imposing qualifications on the providers of both. The City does, however, mention the problematic use of propane stoves and the preparation of food in unsanitary conditions, both of which would actually be exacerbated by onerous approval requirements for food distribution. Unnecessary and burdensome restrictions will chill those who would otherwise provide food, forcing homeless individuals to prepare food themselves more frequently. The City likewise fails to justify the need for "a set-up and clean-up plan." Presumably, this requirement is aimed at reducing litter in the Civic Center, which the City identifies as B T AND r OR J us I I cc problematic. There is, however, no indication that the distribution of food and other items is a significant contributor to litter if it is at all. "[P]reventing a marginal quantity of litter is not a sufficiently significant interest to restrict [expressive activity]. Discarded paper, coffee cups and food wrappers can [] add to litter, but we remain free to carry beverages and candy bars on public streets... the City must show not only that [expressive activity] can create litter, but that it creates an abundance of litter significantly beyond the amount the City already manages to clean up." Klein v. City of San Clemente, 584 F.3d 1196, 1203 (9th Cir. 2009) Even if food waste and packaging did contribute to litter, there are already laws against littering and well placed additional trash receptacles could help ameliorate the problem; "where there are easily available alternative modes of regulation that both satisfy the government's substantial, legitimate concerns and affect considerably less speech than the mode chosen, [courts] are likely to conclude... that the governmental restriction sweeps in substantially more speech than is necessary to meet the government's concerns. Santa Monica Food Not Bombs, 450 F.3d at 1041. In addition, to the extent that food or other refuse may end up as litter, that is no fault of the individuals who distributed it. Moreover, the Catholic Worker does not distribute from a centralized location at all, but rather from a mobile cart that is wheeled throughout the Civic Center; "a set-up and clean-up plan" would, therefore, have no application to them or others with such a distribution scheme. The ordinance is constitutionally defective in yet another way—by vesting seemingly unfettered discretion over the permit approval process in the City Manager. If an ordinance subjects the exercise of First Amendment freedoms to a permit requirement, it must contain "narrow, objective, and definite standards to guide the licensing authority." Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Ala., 394 U.S. 147, 151 (1969); Niemotko v. State of Md., 340 U.S. 268, 271 (1951). "Unfettered discretion to license speech cannot be left to administrative bodies. Such discretion grants officials the power to discriminate and raises the spectre of selective enforcement on the basis of the content of speech." Richmond, 743 F.2d at 1357 (internal citations omitted). The ordinance as drafted, however, provides no standards whatsoever on which the City Manager can base their decision. An assessment of whether or not an applicant will ensure the organized distribution of food, the requisite licensing requirements, credentials, and experience, and the adequacy of the set-up and clean-up plan all impermissibly rest within the sole discretion of the City Manager or their designee. Unfortunately, the City of Santa Ana has a history of violating the rights of its most economically disadvantaged residents. For decades, the City has engaged in a policy and practice of citing homeless individuals for sleeping, laying, or resting outdoors in public spaces. These actions are unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment proscribes the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment. In addition to " limit[ing] the kinds of punishments that can be imposed on those convicted of crimes," the Eighth Amendment "imposes substantive limits on what can be made criminal and punished as such ...." Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 667 (1977). The homeless people living in Santa Ana are in large part chronically homeless — those with mental or physical disabilities who experience long-term or repeated homelessness. The City cannot criminalize ANRRICAN CIVIL tIGPflNfALIR@N uNION utSPPYHBflH^_AY SIAND FOR JUS 1 3 t f people for being disabled and/or homeless by giving them citations for sleeping, resting, or lying down with their belongings — innocent activities they cannot avoid. Here, if the City cites persons for being homeless, a chronic condition that these individuals acquired innocently and involuntarily, the City is punishing them because of their status alone, which is beyond the power of the government to do. See Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660, 666 (1962). In Jones v. City of Los Angeles, 444 F.3d 1118, 1132 (9th Cir. 2006), the Ninth Circuit applied the principle articulated in Robinson, 370 U.S. at 666 — that the Eighth Amendment prohibits punishment based on a person's "status" — and held that the City could not enforce the ordinance against homeless individuals for involuntarily sitting, lying down, and sleeping in public when the number of homeless persons in the City surpassed the number of shelter beds.' Here, the City continues to criminalize the act or condition of sleeping outdoors in public spaces. Such acts, however, are "universal and unavoidable consequences of being human." Jones, 444 F.3d at 1136. The homeless individuals living in Santa Ana have no choice but to sleep in public because they cannot access a legal place to sleep. Currently, Orange County only has enough shelter beds to accommodate approximately half of the people experiencing homelessness. Therefore, sleeping in public is "involuntary and inseparable from" their status or condition of being homeless, and the City's criminalization of such status violates the federal Constitution. Id. Being too poor to afford a home is not a trine. The unsheltered residents of Santa Ana are in crisis, and they need justice. The City should meet their basic survival needs rather than punish them for being poor. And it should not criminalize private organizations that attempt to till the gaps left by its failure to respect every person's basic human right to food, water, medical care, hygiene, and housing. We strongly urge you to follow the law and respect the constitutional rights of those individuals who are homeless and living in Santa Ana, and the humanitarian organizations that seek to help them. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this issue further, please feel free to contact me at (714) 450-3967 or ea.aufiownnaclusocaJ.grg or our Staff Attorney for the Freedom of Speech and Government Transparency Project at binanime(ci�achrsocAmM. Kindest regards, Eve Garrow Homelessness Policy Analyst and Advocate, Dignity for All Project, ACLU of Southern California 'Although the Jones decision was vacated pursuant to a settlement agreement between the parties, 505 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2007), its logic reasoning, and analysis of Supreme Court precedent remains sound and persuasive. The U.S. Department of Justice has recently supported the reasoning in Jones and urged its adoption. U.S. Dept. of Justice Stmt of Interest Br. At 4, Bell v. City of Boise, No. 1:09-cv-540 (D. Idaho Aug. 6, 2015). Mitre -Ramirez, Norma From: Courtney Thompson <thelittleragdoll@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2017 10:28 AM To: eComment Subject: Homeless solution. Hi there, I recently came across an article that I thought might be of use in our current homeless situation. San Diego is giving this a try so maybe Orange County should too. nt>�r.//��w�..�sanc3l�egoa�ina•.a.�y'trii�ta�ee.,carn9:netiv�l�onaele�sness/sd-�rne�omeless-anove-�01"�71�0.�}b�sora�.I1Um1 Thank you, Courtney Sent from my Whone E UAN Civil. tIEU UNION OSOYNNCLMORNIR e I. Brendan Hamme Staff Attorney, Freedom of Speech and Government Transparency Project, ACLU of Southern California