1. 23-591 Consideration and Possible Actions on a Proposed 30-Unit Homekey Interim Housing Development on County-Owned Land Located at Lawrence Expressway and Benton Street, Including City Sponsorship and Partial Funding of Project Operations (CEQA: Statutory Exemption under Government Code Section 65913.4, SB 35 Affordable Housing Projects) - Continued from the April 25, 2023 Council Meeting
This type of program (low-barrier, unconditional)will only encourage homelessness, and inevitably increase the population of homeless in Santa Clara City and neighboring area. Just look at what's happened in San Francisco. Now is the time for city Council and Authorities to change direction, at least not to go down further to the wrong direction. I fully support any comprehensive housing program requesting accountability, e.g. low-income housing, shelter for family with kids, shelter for veteran
This project is not financially feasible.
There’s not even enough funds to cover the first several year. The City will be forced to take responsibility legally and financially after first 5 years with tax money from local residents. LifeMoves doesn’t have any long term plan for this project. After losing the financial resources, it’s the occupants, residents and the City pays the price.
I have attended all previous 5 meetings in person and all of them shows majority of our community is strongly oppose to this, please listen to people and vote NO! Not in this location and not the plan with huge financial gap!
I strongly oppose the construction of a new homeless shelter in our community. While I recognize the importance of providing support for those experiencing homelessness, building a new shelter in this location is not the solution. It will only exacerbate existing issues such as safety concerns, increased traffic and noise, and potential decreases in property values.
Unhoused people can not just be shuffled off to another neighborhood.
Taxpayers spend less money when they help the unhoused get onto their own two feet.
Unhoused people will not affect Laurelwood Elementary, or Wilcox High School, any more than other unsanctioned homeless encampments.
I live in the Birdland neighborhood and do not fear this project.
I strongly oppose this project. The county and Lifemoves care only about advancing their own political or financial agenda, and they obviously could not care less how it would ruin the lives of residents. I have joined the public hearings - the level of their sheer ignorance about the neighborhood, incompetence to conduct proper research (don't even know # of nearby schools), tone deafness to legitimate safety concerns, and contempt for the community in silencing opposition is truly astonishing.
I am opposed to this project, as the majority of the residence are. We do not want people with no background check to be housed by the tax payer money in the middle of our neighborhood. "Family" should be defined as "Fully background checked, non gang, drug free, stable but under financial drugs, capable of finding work". Last thing we want is gang members creating a fake family and taking over our area and schools, exposing our children to drug or crimes. Please understand our concerns
The LifeMoves doesn’t have detailed plans supporting mental health or safety maintenance, because they don’t care. They don’t care Santa Clara residents’ safety, they don’t care homeless people safety, they don’t care how much money we need to pay.
This is just a money grab for the shelter operators.
This project is about helping people get off the streets and into housing. It is about helping the highest risk people - those most likely to DIE on the streets. Research and evidence shows over and over that this model works, and Council has a clear moral imperative to support it.
There are NEW information in the "4-25-23 Post Meeting Materials" that the County and LifeMoves did not present during the public hearing last Tuesday, 4/25/23. We the public did not have a chance to review them, comment on them. The City CANNOT add or discuss information that was not released to the public in the April 25 meeting. This is clearly a violation of Public Hearing codes and laws.
Please vote yes.
This type of program (low-barrier, unconditional)will only encourage homelessness, and inevitably increase the population of homeless in Santa Clara City and neighboring area. Just look at what's happened in San Francisco. Now is the time for city Council and Authorities to change direction, at least not to go down further to the wrong direction. I fully support any comprehensive housing program requesting accountability, e.g. low-income housing, shelter for family with kids, shelter for veteran
Please vote YES.
This project is not financially feasible.
There’s not even enough funds to cover the first several year. The City will be forced to take responsibility legally and financially after first 5 years with tax money from local residents. LifeMoves doesn’t have any long term plan for this project. After losing the financial resources, it’s the occupants, residents and the City pays the price.
Strongly oppose!
I have attended all previous 5 meetings in person and all of them shows majority of our community is strongly oppose to this, please listen to people and vote NO! Not in this location and not the plan with huge financial gap!
I strongly oppose the construction of a new homeless shelter in our community. While I recognize the importance of providing support for those experiencing homelessness, building a new shelter in this location is not the solution. It will only exacerbate existing issues such as safety concerns, increased traffic and noise, and potential decreases in property values.
Unhoused people can not just be shuffled off to another neighborhood.
Taxpayers spend less money when they help the unhoused get onto their own two feet.
Unhoused people will not affect Laurelwood Elementary, or Wilcox High School, any more than other unsanctioned homeless encampments.
I live in the Birdland neighborhood and do not fear this project.
As a resident living in the area, I strongly OPPOSE this proposal!! It’s not responsible for the nearby residents at all!!!!!!
I strongly oppose this project. The county and Lifemoves care only about advancing their own political or financial agenda, and they obviously could not care less how it would ruin the lives of residents. I have joined the public hearings - the level of their sheer ignorance about the neighborhood, incompetence to conduct proper research (don't even know # of nearby schools), tone deafness to legitimate safety concerns, and contempt for the community in silencing opposition is truly astonishing.
Strongly oppose this location
not at this location
Please Vote NO to this project
strongly oppose the low barrier shelter at Lawrence and Benton!
I am opposed to this project, as the majority of the residence are. We do not want people with no background check to be housed by the tax payer money in the middle of our neighborhood. "Family" should be defined as "Fully background checked, non gang, drug free, stable but under financial drugs, capable of finding work". Last thing we want is gang members creating a fake family and taking over our area and schools, exposing our children to drug or crimes. Please understand our concerns
Please Vote NO.
Just look at shelters already in operation near us. All numbers point to FAILURE!
NO need for more failure of the same. The funding can be better used for the homeless people; they deserve better! We deserve better.
Abomination of anproject, LifeMoves is not an effective organization to be trusted with our tax funding and community good will.
The LifeMoves doesn’t have detailed plans supporting mental health or safety maintenance, because they don’t care. They don’t care Santa Clara residents’ safety, they don’t care homeless people safety, they don’t care how much money we need to pay.
This is just a money grab for the shelter operators.
Please vote NO.
This project is about helping people get off the streets and into housing. It is about helping the highest risk people - those most likely to DIE on the streets. Research and evidence shows over and over that this model works, and Council has a clear moral imperative to support it.
There are NEW information in the "4-25-23 Post Meeting Materials" that the County and LifeMoves did not present during the public hearing last Tuesday, 4/25/23. We the public did not have a chance to review them, comment on them. The City CANNOT add or discuss information that was not released to the public in the April 25 meeting. This is clearly a violation of Public Hearing codes and laws.
Please Vote NO!