Re: Agenda Item L1 - Introduce and waive the first reading of an ordinance amending Title 11 of the municipal code to revise sections related to stopping, parking and standing for vehicles, and establish parking restrictions for oversized vehicles
Dear City Council and Staff,
I’m opposed to the proposed Oversized Vehicles (OSV) ordinance. The staff report only considers one approach–policing–when we already have laws on the books that empower staff to deal with the issues presented in their report.
Instead, City Council should be dealing with the problem of folks living in their vehicles for what it really is: A manifestation of the local housing crisis. I urge the City to consider non-policing approaches that center on helping the residents who live in their vehicles find permanent, supportive housing.
We should be preventing displacement, not promoting it!
How many people will be displaced by this ordinance? No one knows. But there are 60 vehicles parked over by Bohannon Drive, which means we’re removing more than 60 affordable homes from the market.
As a renter, I am familiar with the challenges of finding affordable housing. My husband and I experienced two intense, stressful months as we searched for a new residence the last time we had to move. Because of the high cost of rents, we started looking further and further away from our friends, family, and jobs. We were grateful when we finally found an option that would allow us to stay in the area.
We should be making people’s lives easier–not harder!
The city should be supporting the safety, health, and welfare of all residents. Even though the two months we spent looking for housing were extremely stressful, we were lucky enough to have information, time, and financial resources at our disposal. And even though we landed well, it took us many months to recover from the mental, emotional, and financial drain of moving. What do you expect people to do who have little to no resources to work with?
I urge Council to VOTE NO on the OSV ordinance. The OSV ordinance is the wrong tool for dealing with a problem caused by the housing crisis and by so many other socio-economic factors.
Instead, take the time to come up with REAL solutions. Let’s offer services and programs that address the ACTUAL problems. Engage trusted service providers, like WeHope or LifeMoves, who have helped the residents of our neighboring cities with transitional services and support.
We’re entering an era where economic disparities are only getting worse, which will only result in more and more folks becoming unhoused. If you decide to move ahead with this ordinance, I beg you to take steps to mitigate the harm it will cause to current and future residents, including but not limited to:
1. Defer implementation of the ordinance by 12 months. These folks work, they have friends and family here, they have school-age children. They deserve to be given time and support to relocate.
2. Engage trusted and experienced outreach services to assist residents during the transition. Let’s provide for the safety and well-being of the vehicle-dwelling residents and, by extension, the safety and well-being of everyone who lives and works in the area.
3. Double down on funding and implementing the anti-displacement strategy identified in H2.E of our current Housing Element. This includes a local just cause ordinance that covers tenants’ cost of relocation for all no-fault evictions, with additional payments for tenants who are low-income, disabled, elderly, have minor children, or who are long-term tenants. Implement an eviction monitoring and data collection program to establish a baseline and measure progress.
4. Stay the course on our City’s commitment to produce hundreds of affordable homes in the current housing plan cycle, including 345 homes on city-owned downtown parking lots.
Thank you,
Katherine Dumont
Resident, Menlo Park
