The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitation period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasi-adjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred. If a person wishes to challenge the nature of the above section in court, they may be limited to raising only those issues they or someone else raised at the meeting described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clara, at or prior to the meeting. In addition, judicial challenge may be limited or barred where the interested party has not sought and exhausted all available administrative remedies.
STREAMING SERVICES: As always, the public may view the meetings on SantaClaraCA.gov, Santa Clara City Television (Comcast cable channel 15 or AT&T U-verse channel 99), or the livestream on the City's YouTube channel or Facebook page.
Note: The public cannot participate in the meeting through these livestreaming methods; livestreaming capabilities may be disrupted at times, viewers may always view and participate in meetings in-person and via Zoom as noted on the agenda.
AB23 ANNOUNCEMENT: Members of the Santa Clara Stadium Authority, Sports and Open Space Authority and Housing Authority are entitled to receive $30 for each attended meeting.
Note: The City Council and its associated Authorities meet as separate agencies but in a concurrent manner. Actions taken should be considered actions of only the identified policy body.
LEGEND: City Council (CC); Stadium Authority (SA); Sports and Open Space Authority (SOSA); Housing Authority (HA); Successor Agency to the City of Santa Clara Redevelopment Agency (SARDA); Bayshore North Project Enhancement Authority (BNPEA); Public Facilities Financing Corporation (PFFC)
Public contact was made by posting the Council agenda on the City's official-notice bulletin board outside City Hall Council Chambers. A complete agenda packet is available on the City's website and in the City Clerk's Office at least 72 hours prior to a Regular Meeting and 24 hours prior to a Special Meeting. A hard copy of any agenda report may be requested by contacting the City Clerk's Office at (408) 615-2220, email clerk@santaclaraca.gov <mailto:clerk@santaclaraca.gov> or at the public information desk at any City of Santa Clara public library.
If a member of the public submits a speaker card for any agenda items, their name will appear in the Minutes. If no speaker card is submitted, the Minutes will reflect "Public Speaker."
In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"), the City of Santa Clara will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability in its services, programs, or activities, and will ensure that all existing facilities will be made accessible to the maximum extent feasible. The City of Santa Clara will generally, upon request, provide appropriate aids and services leading to effective communication for qualified persons with disabilities including those with speech, hearing, or vision impairments so they can participate equally in the City's programs, services, and activities. The City of Santa Clara will make all reasonable modifications to policies and programs to ensure that people with disabilities have an equal opportunity to enjoy all of its programs, services, and activities.
Agendas and other written materials distributed during a public meeting that are public record will be made available by the City in an appropriate alternative format. Contact the City Clerk's Office at 1 408-615-2220 with your request for an alternative format copy of the agenda or other written materials.
Individuals who require an auxiliary aid or service for effective communication, or any other disability-related modification of policies or procedures, or other accommodation, in order to participate in a program, service, or activity of the City of Santa Clara, should contact the City's ADA Coordinator at 408-615-3000 as soon as possible but no later than 48 hours before the scheduled event.
There is a tricky paragraph on page 9 of proposal. If at some point there were no unhoused households with children to place, the building would place single clients in dorm style “flex” units.
This uncover the nature of the proposal - the family is just a bait for the community and city to say yes. After it gets approved, city and LifeMoves can change the admission, number of units and beds at any time without informing the community.
The project is a financial disaster and leaves a huge burden for future 20+ years. And the money is spent with huge waste such as over 1 million for just 377 sqft room(only building cost not including land and maintenance). Deny this Benton and Lawrence project and using such money will save much much more homeless people. Please Say big "NO" to this project to save more homeless people. I support helping homeless people and extremely oppose this project!
The proposal is not imperfect, it is completely wrong, wrong location! 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.
The City of Santa Clara clearly should not rush to partner with LifeMoves and the County, after what they have demonstrated, that they would basically do anything, misinformation and all, just to get our City hooked. If the City decided to go forward with this proposal, it will open a bottomless big hole in our city budget for years to come.
Strongly oppose low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton. It is going to make the neighborhood very unsafe. The authorities havent been able to come up with a concrete workable plan to ensure safety of the peaceful neighborhood. This housing is going to increase the crime rate significantly and make lives of everyone around the neighborhood miserable. Do not build the low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton. It will ruin the peaceful neighborhood permanently
We must continue public hearing on 2nd May. County is doing "bait & switch" they uploaded yet another version and added more details in middle continued public meeting that was supposed be paused and resume without any new information being added to proposal. Now that they did, public must get chance to review new details and add their comments and ask questions
There are still too many unanswered questions about this project.
1) Who will fill the financial gap for the first 7 years?
2) Where's funding for the rest 23 years?
3) Does county inform Sunnyvale the potential change of use of the existing shelter? From mix with family to singles
4) Whether this shelter can have non-family tenants? This is really vague and got conflicted answers for county staffs in the meeting.
...
VOTE NO, PLEASE!
Majority (~90%) of residents, we strongly OPPOSE!
1) Funding and lack of accountability: huge burden on Santa Clara residents at the cost of our safety.
2) No background checks which is a safety concern residents and homeless clients.
3) County imposing redlining of cities like Santa Clara
4) Misinformation from County and LifeMoves officials. They sneakily are keeping 90 units plan.
5) Misinformation from County and LifeMoves officials. They sneakily are keeping 90 units plan.
....
....
....
As a local resident, I strongly oppose the proposal.
The construction cost is way too high, almost $1 million per family unit, and there's still the financial gap every
year. That's totally a waste of tax money.
Also LifeMoves cannot show it can really help homeless people move to their next step. In MTV LifeMoves,
success rate is only 26%!
So I believe, LifeMoves & County are not trustworthy partners to work with. Please reconsider this project and
vote NO!!!
I strongly oppose the building of the Homeless Shelter!
1. We already have vandalism and destruction of propery - dumpster diving and illegal dumping of trash in our bins. Home owners can't throw their trash because its full. Breaking into vehicles and storage.
2. Unauthorized parking - strangers parking in homeowners stall doing drugs. Condo is hidden in the back where police does not patrol.
3. Gated condominium - strangers still come into the property and use the pool and loiter.
Our family strongly oppose this proposal. It’s ridiculous to build a low barrier shelter so close to residential area and schools. Definitely will bring safety issues.
Please vote NO!
I oppose because Santa Clara has high ratio of shelters. Please don’t make city of Santa Clara a homeless headquarter! This proposal @ Lawrence / Benton is not suitable for homeless because the high speed of Lawrence expressway and no bus on this section of Benton! Not to mention that this location is too close to nearby school. Homeless kids have free transportation to school but regular kids have to walk to schools. With such close shelter nearby, it is a treat to children in the neiborhood!
Please don’t make my home area become homeless concentrated area.
I oppose because drugs and crime are root of homelessness. And, increase drug related activities due to Bella vista shelter.
Unreasonable cost of building this interim housing. 34 million builds 30 units of less than 300 square per unit. That is outrageous. Please vote “ NO” on this proposal! Thank you
Oppose because within 300 ft of residential neighborhood with kids and increased drug related activity due to Bella vista shelter
Please it’s “ NO” thank you
Any Council person who votes yes does not care about the community and clearly has their own agenda. When the community declines, police calls increase, and we have the first assaults, rapes or murders, it will be a result of their vote of yes. They should be held accountable.
There is a tricky paragraph on page 9 of proposal. If at some point there were no unhoused households with children to place, the building would place single clients in dorm style “flex” units.
This uncover the nature of the proposal - the family is just a bait for the community and city to say yes. After it gets approved, city and LifeMoves can change the admission, number of units and beds at any time without informing the community.
Why all the News talking about this has been approved?! Does city has already made the decision and leaked to the news? Please vote No!
The project is a financial disaster and leaves a huge burden for future 20+ years. And the money is spent with huge waste such as over 1 million for just 377 sqft room(only building cost not including land and maintenance). Deny this Benton and Lawrence project and using such money will save much much more homeless people. Please Say big "NO" to this project to save more homeless people. I support helping homeless people and extremely oppose this project!
Please vote “No” to protect Santa Clara.
Definitely strongly oppose low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton!!!
Strongly oppose low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton.
The proposal is not imperfect, it is completely wrong, wrong location! 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.
Please be thoughtful and vote NO!
The City of Santa Clara clearly should not rush to partner with LifeMoves and the County, after what they have demonstrated, that they would basically do anything, misinformation and all, just to get our City hooked. If the City decided to go forward with this proposal, it will open a bottomless big hole in our city budget for years to come.
Please VOTE NO!
Strongly oppose low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton. It is going to make the neighborhood very unsafe. The authorities havent been able to come up with a concrete workable plan to ensure safety of the peaceful neighborhood. This housing is going to increase the crime rate significantly and make lives of everyone around the neighborhood miserable. Do not build the low barrier entry interim housing at Lawrence and Benton. It will ruin the peaceful neighborhood permanently
We must continue public hearing on 2nd May. County is doing "bait & switch" they uploaded yet another version and added more details in middle continued public meeting that was supposed be paused and resume without any new information being added to proposal. Now that they did, public must get chance to review new details and add their comments and ask questions
Please VOTE NO for this project!
There are still too many unanswered questions about this project.
1) Who will fill the financial gap for the first 7 years?
2) Where's funding for the rest 23 years?
3) Does county inform Sunnyvale the potential change of use of the existing shelter? From mix with family to singles
4) Whether this shelter can have non-family tenants? This is really vague and got conflicted answers for county staffs in the meeting.
...
VOTE NO, PLEASE!
Majority (~90%) of residents, we strongly OPPOSE!
1) Funding and lack of accountability: huge burden on Santa Clara residents at the cost of our safety.
2) No background checks which is a safety concern residents and homeless clients.
3) County imposing redlining of cities like Santa Clara
4) Misinformation from County and LifeMoves officials. They sneakily are keeping 90 units plan.
5) Misinformation from County and LifeMoves officials. They sneakily are keeping 90 units plan.
....
....
....
As a local resident, I strongly oppose the proposal.
The construction cost is way too high, almost $1 million per family unit, and there's still the financial gap every
year. That's totally a waste of tax money.
Also LifeMoves cannot show it can really help homeless people move to their next step. In MTV LifeMoves,
success rate is only 26%!
So I believe, LifeMoves & County are not trustworthy partners to work with. Please reconsider this project and
vote NO!!!
I strongly oppose the building of the Homeless Shelter!
1. We already have vandalism and destruction of propery - dumpster diving and illegal dumping of trash in our bins. Home owners can't throw their trash because its full. Breaking into vehicles and storage.
2. Unauthorized parking - strangers parking in homeowners stall doing drugs. Condo is hidden in the back where police does not patrol.
3. Gated condominium - strangers still come into the property and use the pool and loiter.
I strongly oppose this proposal
Our family strongly oppose this proposal. It’s ridiculous to build a low barrier shelter so close to residential area and schools. Definitely will bring safety issues.
Please vote NO!
I oppose because Santa Clara has high ratio of shelters. Please don’t make city of Santa Clara a homeless headquarter! This proposal @ Lawrence / Benton is not suitable for homeless because the high speed of Lawrence expressway and no bus on this section of Benton! Not to mention that this location is too close to nearby school. Homeless kids have free transportation to school but regular kids have to walk to schools. With such close shelter nearby, it is a treat to children in the neiborhood!
Please don’t make my home area become homeless concentrated area.
I oppose because drugs and crime are root of homelessness. And, increase drug related activities due to Bella vista shelter.
Unreasonable cost of building this interim housing. 34 million builds 30 units of less than 300 square per unit. That is outrageous. Please vote “ NO” on this proposal! Thank you
Oppose because within 300 ft of residential neighborhood with kids and increased drug related activity due to Bella vista shelter
Please it’s “ NO” thank you
Any Council person who votes yes does not care about the community and clearly has their own agenda. When the community declines, police calls increase, and we have the first assaults, rapes or murders, it will be a result of their vote of yes. They should be held accountable.