Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNon Agenda ItemsFrom:Jeffrey Schneider To:City Clerk Subject:Concern about the STR contract reduction Idea from a constituent Date:Wednesday, November 2, 2022 3:19:07 PM NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Dear City Manager, I am a full-time retired resident, STR owner and a constituent of Christy's in SouthPalm Springs. I am writing in response to the recent council meeting. Iwant to express my objection to the idea of changing the number of STR contractsfrom 36 to 24. 1- This seems to have come out of nowhere. It has never been on the agenda; it hashad no study and was not a part of the work group recommendations. 2- I guess the intent is to deter outside investors from speculating in our housingmarket. But the ultimate effect is a direct target on the financial well-being of a largenumber of your constituents, who like myself are full time retired residents who rely ontheir vacation rental as a large portion of their retirement income. 3- I, like many others, have invested my life’s savings into flipping a neglected oldhouse and transforming it into a successful mid-century gem. The pride of PalmSprings, like so many others, and the reason visitors flock here. My renters comeback year after year, creating tax revenue and spending lots of money at the restaurants and activities that I recommend to them. And I provide a living wage formy gardener, pool guy, house cleaners and the many other vendors I hire. Do youreally want to cut this by 33%? 4- My average rental is 4.3 days. That’s a total of 154 days a year. Most of the year itis not occupied by renters. I am here as a full-time resident to oversee my rental and Ihave never had a complaint. I am close personal friends with all of the neighbors. Ihave integrated this rental seamlessly into our quiet cul-de-sac. I regard it as a greatasset to the spirit and financial well-being of the city. 5- With 36 contracts the numbers just barely work out financially. It will not be viablefor many of us at just 24. There may be a flood of houses for sale in 2 years. Iwonder what that will do to home values here in Palm Springs, and how that will affectour community and its businesses. Who knows? You haven’t bothered to do any sortof study. 6- I hate to say this, because I respect all of you so much, especially MayorMiddleton. She has been a great inspiration to me. I have been a great supporter ofall of you, but it seems very disingenuous, the way this idea has been pulled out ofnowhere with no study, being rushed to a vote in a lame duck session. Why? Where is the pressure coming from? What special interest are you kowtowing to? There’ssomething about the way this is playing out that seems awfully suspicious,almost unethical. 7- Why is Christy recusing herself from this discussion and vote? Is it because she operates an STR? If so, then she really is representative of many of her constituentson this issue, and she should have a vote on the matter. Otherwise, it leaves ourentire district without a say in this decision that will profoundly change our lives in adetrimental way. So I am asking you to reconsider this awful idea. If you want to keep out speculators,ban the LLC’s, or find other means to weed out those who are not deeply committedmembers of our community. Don’t vilify those of us who are upright members of thecommunity and are dependent on the successful operation of our STR’s, Those of uswho have worked so hard to blend our STR's seamlessly into their neighborhoods and created great assets for the city. Thanks for your time, Jeffrey Schneider 2990 Araby Circle Palm Springs, CA 92264 From:mn perry To:Lisa Middleton; Grace Garner; Geoff Kors; Christy Holstege; Dennis Woods; Llubi Rios; City Clerk; Jeff Ballinger- C; Teresa Gallavan; Amy Blaisdell; Denise Goolsby Subject:our 2nd home PS Date:Tuesday, November 1, 2022 11:07:56 AM NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Good morning and Happy November!! My family and I purchased a home in central Palm Springs about a year ago, we have been working very hard to restore a very old and rundown property in an effort to enjoy for ourselves, add value to the community and neighborhoods in which we are so passionate about. We have lived in the desert for nearly 5 years, we have made massive sacrifices to be able to call this area our second home and we are excited for the day we get to call it our primary residence!!! When we started this project we made the decision to invest in a single family so we could grow into it and share with others along the way. We know from experience that anyone who visits the desert is always helping keep our local economy thriving, they are always wanting to come back again or even find a way for themselves to also have a second home here! It has never been our intention, or anyone that we have met along the way, to abuse the short term rental system, to abuse our neighborhoods, to abuse our personal home. We simply want to share with others when it's not being used by us, our family or friends, to help offset expenses, to keep it occupied for safety purposes and to allow others to have the time to bond and create memories with their loved ones in our great city! With the news of the moratorium we are beyond incredibly concerned, as we cannot handle the financial hardship we will incur if we are not permitted to use this property as a rental to help cover the expenses we have. Every decision we have made in this investment was based on the information we have had from the city - we are still in the process of completion and haven't even had the opportunity to submit our application, we now feel rushed, slighted and incredibly frustrated that this is changing so dramatically and without ample warning. This changes everything for everyone in this community, especially the people who truly invest in making it a better place. To change the rules without significant and proper warning to prospective investors and homeowners is very concerning and puts nearly all community investors in a position to adjust course and pull resources. To make a decision to impact the economy of Palm Springs and those who are investing in it in various ways is disappointing and damaging, my family, along with several other investors and homeowners impacted by these decisions, will be encouraged to explore our options to further challenge this decision. I kindly and respectfully ask you to reconsider this and to grant and permit all who were in the process of getting their permits to be allowed to adhere to the previous rules/regulations associated with property ownership and the vehicles provided to generate income to offset expenses. Respectfully, The Perry Family From:Rob Roggentien To:Lisa Middleton; Grace Garner; Geoff Kors; Christy Holstege; Dennis Woods; Llubi Rios; City Clerk; Jeff Ballinger- C; Teresa Gallavan; Amy Blaisdell; Denise Goolsby Cc:Lindsey Roggentien Subject:Moratorium on new permits concerns Date:Tuesday, November 1, 2022 10:13:52 AM Importance:High NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Writing to all to share concerns with the news my wife and I received a couple weeks ago. My wife and I recently purchased a home in Palm Springs with both short and long term plans. We knew after moving to Southern CA that Palm Springs was the area we wanted to eventually retire so we wanted to invest in the area now, and quickly have the property set up as a short and long term rental to offset expenses over the next several years to enable a the eventual permanent move to the area. With the news of moratorium we are incredibly concerned, as we cannot handle the financial hardship we will incur if we are not permitted to use this property as a Airbnb to cover the expenses we have and will continue to incur. We were told that we would have no issues as long as we submitted our application prior to the vote which we did, and we’ve already had the property inspected and were expecting to receive our permit soon so we could begin marketing the property for both short and long term renters. To change the rules without warning to prospective investors is very concerning and puts nearly all community investors in a position to adjust course and pull resources. To make a decision to impact the economy of Palm Springs and the folks investing in the community both short and long term is in poor taste, and myself along with a multitude of other investors will need to explore all options to fight this decision. I kindly and respectfully ask you to reconsider this and to grant and permit all folks who were in the process of getting their permits to be allowed to adhere to the previous rules/regulations associated with property ownership and the vehicles provided to generate income to offset expenses. Respectfully, Robert and Lindsey Roggentien From:Robert Rankin To:Merritt Paul Cc:Grace Garner; City Clerk; Denise Goolsby; Tabitha Richards; Greg L. Rodriguez; Ricardo Sereno; Cynthia Session; Tex August; Pedro Arriola; Phil Barboni; Sam Jones; John Leys; Stefan Gonzalez Subject:Re: Fw: Palm Springs Villas I Trespassing CONSTANT HOMELESS TRESPASSING WE WANT CITY ACTION PAUL Date:Sunday, October 30, 2022 1:40:58 PM NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Correction....pool "3 " hot tub, not pool 4....pool 4 hot tub is still cold On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 1:23 PM Robert Rankin <rankskiguy@gmail.com> wrote: Agree, without evening security it will become a free for all for the vagrants and it seems the word is already out. There were food leftovers and blood-covered bandaids beside the hot tub at pool 4....the bandaids, (cotton balls with scotch tape), very likely covered an injection site in an arm. The cotton balls are still there in the gravel stones beside the hot tub. There has also been a small black vehicle parked early am near the maintenance bldg, not in a stall, might be Carlos or Charlies but it looked like someone was sleeping in it. Hiring security issue should be dealt with ASAP. Robert R. On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 12:12 PM Merritt Paul <merrittmaster@yahoo.com> wrote: paul merritt c ----- Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2022 at 11:06:46 AM PDT Subject: Fw: Palm Springs Villas I Trespassing From: Denis Subject: Palm Springs Villas I Trespassing Hi A, Please share this email with council. Will we ever get security back? We need them. There have been a group of strangers, maybe homeless, but trespassers spending lots of late nights in the Villas. Not sure how often or how many non-residents enjoy pool 3 and the hot tub, but seems often between midnight and 2am and beyond, and even comment about the pool temperature. Voices carry so now have to close my windows, and do we want to know what they are doing in the pool? They sometimes park by bldg 4, then either hang out or drive off after, and have spent the night in the car; or maybe that's a different group. Are you getting the point? Its getting bad. Bold late-night swimming, running the tub jets, not making too much noise but they make themselves at home arranging furniture. Is there anyone to call other than the police, and are you the right person to talk to or is there anyone else I can bring this to the attention of? It's going to be a long winter if this is the norm. Having been here only 10 days so far, and the pattern is already concerning. Thank you, Denis Mik Bldg 4 From: A To: denismik@hotmail.com <denismik@hotmail.com> Subject: Palm Springs Villas I PALM SPRINGS VILLAS HOA Powered By TOPS[ONE] Palm Springs Villas I Dear Owners, Today we have officially closed the Palm Springs Office, it is also our last day with Jennie at Desert Management. For the next month I will be taking care of Palm Springs Villas I until your HOA transitions to Personalized Property Management on December 1st. You can contact me at (760)862-1202 or via email at apavia@desertmanagement.com. Thank you, A Association Manager For questions or comments, please reply to this email or contact at apavia@desertmanagement.com. This email was generated by the TOPS [ONE] platform. From:City of Palm Springs To:City Clerk; City Clerk Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs Date:Saturday, October 29, 2022 9:53:49 AM Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs Submission #:2054623 IP Address:72.132.199.136 Submission Date:10/29/2022 9:53 Survey Time:20 minutes, 33 seconds You have a new online form submission. Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login. Full Name/Nombre Alyson Vogel City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia Palm Springs, Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional) 6464579704 Email (optional/opcional) alysonvogel@gmail.com Your Comments/Sus comentarios RE: overseeding Tahquitz Creek Legend Golf course during the winter-seeding along certain holes- it should be the understanding that the purpose of NOT overseeding certain sections of the holes along the sides of the fairways is to save water- pathetically, they don't even maintain the Bermuda grasses along the sides of the fairway (specifically along holes 3 and 4) during high spring season but it adds insult to injury when they scalp the grasses now & don't even bother to seed the sides when they are watering to excess anyway. So for the cost of a few bags of seeds this city wastes thousands of gallons heavily and repeatedly watering poorly maintained acreages of land along multi million dollar properties. For this, the luxury of requesting we put see-through gates to view poorly maintained grounds 12 months a year. I invite you to 5337 E Lakeside Drive to witness this folly yourselves. Saving water, not seed $ should be the goal for high taxes- hence the folly. Pathetic all around. Thank you, City of Palm Springs This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email. From: John Kirby <JohnKirby0517@outlook.com> Sent: Monday, October 24, 2022 4:25 PM To: Lisa Middleton <Lisa.Middleton@palmspringsca.gov>; Grace Garner <Grace.Garner@palmspringsca.gov>; Geoff Kors <Geoff.Kors@palmspringsca.gov>; Christy Holstege <Christy.Holstege@palmspringsca.gov>; Dennis Woods <Dennis.Woods@palmspringsca.gov> Subject: Homelessness - perspective from a relative newcomer to the valley NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Hello Councilmembers, I’m going to copy/paste a piece I’ve been writing for a couple weeks here in the body of the email, so you don’t have to open an attachment from someone you don’t know. So, here it is: Christmas morning 1994 – I came to in the urine-stained doorway of an abandoned upholstery shop at 7th and Temple in Long Beach, California. As the bright morning sun breached the horizon, I rolled over to avoid its glare and was met with a more pungent smell. It was my first “official” night of being homeless. I had spent the previous six months couch surfing, sleeping in cheap motels when I could afford them, occasionally getting an 8-hour room at a different kind of legitimate business; but I had not yet slept on the street until that Christmas Eve when the circumstances of my life became undeniably real. I had been a decorated infantry soldier in the U.S. Army until late 1991 when I discharged, honorably to get out of my rainbow closet and start figuring out who I was. I had overseen operations for a mechanized infantry company planning and coordinating training and deployments for 200 men and billions of dollars’ worth of equipment. But I needed too much alcohol to help me keep the secret of my sexuality. Moving to Long Beach’s thriving LGBTQ community quickly led to trading alcohol for methamphetamine, which led to getting terminated from my job as a federal security supervisor and starting to sell methamphetamine for a living, while using more and more of it myself. The meth eventually won out over any business sense, and I started sleeping under park benches and a good meal was when I could get to the Kentucky Fried Chicken on Pacific Coast Highway when they were throwing out the leftovers at closing time, but right before they locked the dumpster for the night. It was a tight window of opportunity. Had I known, when eating that lukewarm chicken, that Long Beach supposedly had a plan to end homelessness since 1988 when the city government started the Homeless Services Advisory Committee, I might have been a little angry that they hadn’t fixed homelessness yet. But I didn’t know. Had I been reading the comment section of OpEds and letters to the editor about homelessness and seen the caustic comments and virulent judgments and aspersions cast upon the homeless by people who didn’t even know me, I might have been even more angry. But the Press Telegram wasn’t online yet, and we didn’t have smartphones; so, I didn’t know. Had I heard the fear, and loathing, and almost hatred of citizens when speaking on 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda homeless issues at the City Council meetings, I would have been angry, and scared, and my Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) would likely have brought about some damage in the streets. But I didn’t hear it. I wouldn’t find out about all this vitriol toward the homeless until after I went to substance abuse treatment in 1995, after which I started volunteering in social services, and later became gainfully employed within the nonprofit behavioral health and social service field. I’ve been working with substance users, mentally ill folks, homeless folks, and others in the streets and in counseling rooms, working on their behalf at municipal microphones, around policy and planning tables, and in program design and fund development for over 25 years now. I’ve learned a few things, and I’ve still a few more things to learn. One thing I’ve learned for certain – we aren’t going to solve homelessness in the comment section of the Desert Sun’s OpEd page. Now, I’ve been paying attention to more than just the OpEd page since I moved to Cathedral City in March 2020. Though I must say that watching the elected officials, nonprofit organizations, reporters, and laypersons battle it out in print and social media has been enlightening. But what I haven’t seen is anyone, even those in positions which would seem to make them experts, give a thorough explanation to the public about what it will take to solve homelessness. The short explanation is that it will take the collective will of every one of us in the community to end this travesty of service to our fellow human beings. The confluence of circumstances that brings each individual into homelessness is unique to each person living in our streets, while often looking similar on the outside. We (the community of folks working to solve homelessness) often make the mistake of boiling things down to concrete manifestations and shortcomings of people and systems, then creating siloed solutions that do not effectively address the underlying causes of homelessness for the individuals we are hoping to serve. These manifestations and shortcomings include, but are not limited to: • They are substance abusers and need treatment • They are mentally ill and need treatment • They need employment readiness training and entry level jobs • There aren’t enough affordable housing units • The minimum wage is too low to afford rent Now here’s a little reality for us all. The vast majority of folks addicted to drugs aren’t homeless. The vast majority of severely mentally ill people aren’t homeless. The vast majority of unemployed people aren’t homeless. The vast majority of people making minimum wage have figured out how to keep a roof over their heads regardless of affordability. The social service community, the political community, and many citizens call these the problems. They are symptoms. For many people who are homeless, or on the verge of homelessness, when we provide one or more of these siloed solutions their problems resolve, and they eventually become self- sufficient, productive members of society. But for the 222 unsheltered folks in the streets of 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda Palm Springs during the 2022 Point In Time Count (PITC) of the Homeless conducted by Riverside County in January these solutions had not yet helped. For these folks, treating the symptom while ignoring the underlying problem doesn’t work. The PITC tells us that 50% of the unsheltered homeless folks in Palm Springs have a history of substance abuse but only 13% are homeless because of substance abuse. 44% have a history of mental illness but only 4% attribute being homeless to mental illness. And 46% have a history of PTSD but none of them reported PTSD as the reason for their homelessness. In fact, the two largest reasons for homelessness noted in the PITC are lack of income (26%), and family disruption (24%), with an additional 15% noted as “other reasons.” What the PITC doesn’t tell us is what percentage of these folks have both a substance abuse disorder and a co-occurring mental illness; and by the way, PTSD is a mental illness so these reports can really cause folks who don’t analyze data for a living to get rather confused. I play with data all the time and I’m still somewhat confused. We do know, from Riverside University Behavioral Health’s “Who We Serve Consumer Population Profile Fiscal Year 2017-2018” that about 61% of substance abusers served in county funded substance abuse treatment programs have a co-occurring mental health diagnosis. So, for real numbers out of our 222 unsheltered homeless folks we have: • About 69 (31%) have both a substance use and a mental health disorder • About 42 (19%) have a substance use disorder alone • About 24 (11%) have a mental health disorder alone • And most or all of the folks with PTSD are likely represented in the three bullets above this one The most prevalent comments coming from community members about how to fix the homeless problem is that we need to force all the drug addicts into treatment, and all the mentally ill people into locked psychiatric hospitals. That would be nice but for two problems, (1) it’s unconstitutional to force anyone to accept a treatment they don’t want unless they represent a danger to self or others, and only then can forced treatment be maintained if they continue to remain a threat. This threat generally resolves within 72 hours of taking psychotropic medications and they are back on the streets, and (2) there simply aren’t enough residential substance abuse and psych hospital treatment beds available to the Medi-Cal population. I’ve only met one homeless person in 25 years who had private medical insurance, so we can expect most, if not all, of our unsheltered homeless folks to have either Medi-Cal or no medical coverage at all. Riverside University Behavioral Health (RUBH) (who handles all the Medi-Cal funded substance use and mental health treatment programs in the Coachella Valley, and across the county) only contracts with six residential substance use treatment providers in the Valley – ABC Recovery Center, The Ranch Recovery Center, Hacienda Valdez (part of The Ranch Recovery Center), Metcalf Recovery Ranch, Casa Cecilia, and Soroptimist House; these programs are licensed for a total of 188 beds between them. My own anecdotal experience would suggest that only 10% of those beds might be unutilized at a given time by folks who aren’t from our 222 homeless folks. So, if we could fill up that 10% with our homeless 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda substance users 18 people at a time, for an average length of treatment of 90 days, it would take us a year and half to get them all through treatment the first time. Research from the National Institute of Drug Abuse tells us that at least 60% will return to substance abuse treatment within a year. Meanwhile, more folks are likely to become homeless, especially considering that eviction moratoriums brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic are set to expire, if they haven’t already. So how about county funded psychiatric hospitals in the Coachella Valley? There aren’t any. There is a mental health crisis stabilization program operated by Telecare in Indio, but as stated earlier – that’s only for short term stabilization on medications and then back to the street, generally within 72 hours. The one psych hospital in the county funded by RUBH is a wing in their own hospital in Riverside, but the same rules apply for the danger to self or others. Governor Newsom did recently sign the CARE Act, which will try to force homeless folks into treatment for substance use and/or mental illness; but even if that law stands up in the courts – the facilities don’t yet exist for this law to become the panacea some folks think it will be. Another large number of folks have said, both in the Desert Sun and at municipal microphones, that we should ship all these homeless people back where they came from, believing the majority aren’t from our desert. I haven’t been able to find any Riverside County data that tells us where our homeless folks lived right before becoming homeless, but other municipalities have conducted this research (Los Angeles, San Francisco, Long Beach, New York, Chicago) and all have found that 60-80% of homeless folks are homeless within about 5 miles from the last home they rented or owned. Perhaps Riverside County could start collecting that data during the next PITC. Then there is the problem of not enough affordable housing, especially housing with attached services like substance use and mental health treatment for those who need that support when first moving from the streets. Everyone seems to want folks housed and off the streets, but not in their neighborhoods. The first project I read about was the Ivy Palm, when Palm Springs wanted to turn an old motel into supportive housing for the homeless. Everyone screamed that it would ruin business and bring down property values, crime would increase, and tourists would stop coming. Several pieces of research in multiple locations throughout California and the country have proven these fears unfounded. In fact, property values increased more significantly in some areas where supportive housing was built than in comparison areas where there was no supportive housing program. It’s not the nature of the housing itself, but how well it is run, and how pretty it is. But somehow the Ivy Palm got nixed. Another “solution” I heard during a discussion of the Cathedral City Housing Element in 2020 was to build affordable housing on the other side of Interstate 10 where there is nothing – no services, no buses, no grocery stores – nothing. That leads to a whole other discussion about quality of life, cost of living, and social isolation. A basic rule of thumb folks, if you wouldn’t 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda want to live there, why would you think that’s a good solution for homeless folks to get their lives together? And the cost of building where there is no infrastructure (city water lines, electric lines, gas lines, etc.) is rather daunting. I’ve seen/heard more than one comment from folks complaining that one affordable housing project in Coachella was going to cost about $700,000 per unit to build and one person said they could rebuild their entire 3500 square foot house for half of that. Well, there are significant costs that go into building these units that we “regular” folks don’t encounter when we build a house: • First, most of these housing projects use at least some federal or state grant dollars, combined with no interest or forgivable loans, and federal tax credits, and a federal law called the Davis-Bacon Act requires that developers pay the State’s (in this case California’s) prevailing wage for all labor in the construction. Here are just a few of California’s Prevailing Wage law required hourly rates on a construction site: o Carpenter $71.32/hour o Cement Mason $69.10/hour o General Laborer $65.19 (for the new guy with a shovel) I’m guessing the guy who did most of the work building your house didn’t get paid half of this amount. • Back to that building where there is no existing infrastructure – the developer must pay for all that infrastructure to be built. • And in the last decade or so there has been an increase in the “green building” requirements on any project using state or federal funds. So, the quality of materials, the added expense of renewable materials, energy efficient wiring, windows, HVAC, etc. The Ivy Palm would have been much less expensive to rehab than building the housing units at the new homeless navigation center coming into the Highland Gateway neighborhood will end up being, on top of rehabbing the existing buildings for the service center operations. And even this new navigation center, for which there is abundant research to prove its potential efficacy, is receiving significant community backlash from folks who do not want it in their neighborhood. And one can only reason that this particular project will move forward because it’s going in the neighborhood with the largest number of residents who can ill afford to donate to political campaigns, and who hold the least political clout in the Coachella Valley. And even if we had all the treatment beds we needed, abundant affordable housing, good job training and employment prospects, we still wouldn’t be able to just fix everything overnight. You see – each of those 222 homeless folks have those unique circumstances which brought them to homelessness. Each of these human beings have an emotional and 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda psychological puzzle which must be spread out on the table and pieced together to create the person-centered circumstances to bring them out of homelessness. So, this brings us to story time: I was about two years sober when I first saw “Steve”. I got off the Long Beach Transit route 51 bus at the downtown turnaround and I saw Steve sitting on the sidewalk against a building. He was wearing what used to be white painter’s pants stained so many colors there was no way of figuring out what any of it was, a similarly soiled and torn white t-shirt. His more than shoulder length grey hair was matted and knotted like he had been sleeping in a mud pit for years and hadn’t touched a comb for longer. There was a small pile of cigarette butts next to his right hand that he had collected from the streets and bus benches. His head was down with his chin on his chest. He started to pick up a cigarette butt and I said, “hey, would you like a whole one?” He didn’t look up. Continued lighting his scavenged tobacco roach. I placed a couple of Marlboro 100s next to his pile and I went on to work. I saw Steve in the same spot every day for about three months. We repeated the same scenario each day; and each day Steve would not respond at all, and I would leave a couple more cigarettes and go about my day. One day, after about three months, Steve looked up at me as I lay down the cigarettes. His lips quivered slightly. I smiled and nodded and said, “I’m John.” He tucked his chin back in his chest. I went about my day. Steve continued to look up at me after that, and about four months into our routine he said thank you as I laid down those two Marlboros, “I’m Steve.” I started leaving earlier for work after that so I could take the time to talk to Steve for a few minutes each morning. I learned that he held three advanced degrees in physics, biology, and anthropology. He had three adult children, all successful in their fields. His wife had passed about a decade earlier and his barely contained depression of a lifetime crippled him as a result. His massive financial debt as a result of paying for his children’s advanced degrees, and his wife’s medical expenses didn’t allow for paying for a psychiatrist or therapist out of pocket. His medical insurance from work didn’t pay for behavioral health (this was long before the Affordable Care Act and expanded Medi-Cal eligibility.) He started drinking more to self- medicate the depression. Got a DUI. Got terminated from his job. His kids refused to provide any help. The “system” was no help. He walked away from his house one night – hopeless – with a bottle of Smirnoff to go drink himself to death. Ten years later a stranger laid down two cigarettes. The he did it again. And again. And eventually Steve began to trust just one person. It took about a year after those first two cigarettes and I got Steve into a detox and a 90-day residential substance abuse treatment program. Steve went from that residential program to a 1-year supportive housing program that helped with continued substance abuse treatment, psychiatric care and therapy, 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda employment readiness to get back into the workforce, and most important to Steve, a reunification and counseling program to get his adult children back into his life. The last time I saw him he was ten years sober, self-sufficient, and relatively happy with his life. There were so many points in Steve’s life before he left with his house with Smirnoff in hand that so many different people, institutions, and systems could have “laid down a couple of cigarettes” and didn’t. So, by the time well intentioned service providers started talking to him in the streets to invite him into their silos of service – he didn’t trust them; and they didn’t take the time to build the trust necessary to form a relationship with him. Steve is just one story with his unique set of circumstances. We have around 222 of these stories to unravel just in Palm Springs, with a few hundred more across the Coachella Valley. And we all need to work together to in order to do so. Otherwise, we’re just going to keep yelling at each other, casting blame and aspersions, capitulating to political pressures and “donor suggestions”, and the homeless will remain on the streets in greater numbers – seething with an anger I can completely understand, both as a formerly homeless person, and as a service provider who has been working for 25 years to try and make a dent in the problem. If our elected officials really want to solve homelessness, I have a few suggestions: • Stop letting the community overwhelm your intentions with their fear and move forward with plans and projects that make sense from a peer reviewed research base. • Educate the NIMBY folks with research instead of capitulating to their unreasonable demands that you put housing and services in poor neighborhoods or in the middle of nowhere. • Change the zoning laws to allow for affordable housing, supportive housing, transitional housing programs in all neighborhoods. • Partner with the nonprofit behavioral health providers in the Coachella Valley to increase spending on treatment infrastructure for folks on Medi-Cal who need substance abuse and mental health treatment. • Work with the Riverside University Behavioral Health unit to bring/increase funding for street-based service delivery so that providers can get compensated for taking counseling, therapy, and medication assisted treatment to the streets while we’re getting the physical infrastructure built. • Provide city sponsored capacity building grants to smaller nonprofits specifically to fund professional government grant writers as employees or consultants, as most of the agencies doing good work can’t afford these writers on their shoestring budgets. The city can’t afford to pay for the services, but you can 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda certainly pay for a grant writer who can get the county, state, and federal funding that can pay for the services. • And while not addressed in this narrative thus far – start encouraging social service providers to work together instead of engaging with some of the backstabbing, gossip mongering behavior I’ve heard (from leaders themselves) that has kept any real cooperation from happening in the Coachella Valley. There is no one provider out here who can help everybody, and every single provider out here can help somebody. But nobody will help anybody if all we do is keep fighting about it. Yours in Service, John Kirby (He/Him/His) 67725 Garbino Rd. Cathedral City, CA 92234 Home Office: (760) 699-7698 Cell: (909) 312-1850 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:Terri M To:Lisa Middleton; Christy Holstege; Dennis Woods; Grace Garner; Geoff Kors Cc:Monique Lomeli; City Clerk Subject:Section 14 resolution - 1968 Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 5:31:27 PM Attachments:_THE SECTION 14 STORY - THE DESERT SUN - NOVEMBER 1968 Pages 5-6.pdf NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Mayor Middleton and Councilmembers, Attached are pages 5 and 6 of the Desert Sun story from 1968. As you can see, the lawyer representing the people in that portion of Section 14 conceded to the action taken. The Desert Sun reported that the City was trying to secure housing for those misplaced residents at a hugely discounted and affordable rate. In my opinion no retribution should be paid from the City to ancestors of these people. They got a deal! A brand new home for $8,000. I don't think they were out anything. They were relocated to something brand new! Please don't base your analysis and vote on speculation and feelings. Look at the facts and vote NO on any reimbursements. The city wasn't at fault for anything. No laws were broken. Solutions were offered. They were affordable and all agreed. Your fiscal responsibility is the foundation of local government--The watchdog of the budget for the people. That's why people vote for their representatives. Please don't screw this up. Sincerely, Terri Milton Resident of Palm Springs for 63 years Career in tourism and local government 35 years 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:City of Palm Springs To:City Clerk; City Clerk Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs Date:Thursday, October 27, 2022 7:55:16 AM Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs Submission #:2050673 IP Address:72.132.230.149 Submission Date:10/27/2022 7:55 Survey Time:14 minutes, 27 seconds You have a new online form submission. Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login. Full Name/Nombre Garth Gilpin City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia Palm Springs, Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional) Email (optional/opcional) gggilpin@sbcglobal.net Your Comments/Sus comentarios Project 12@Las Palma( actually Camino Norte) is under consideration at the planning commission. The egress/ingress is on a blind curve on a very narrow street that the neighborhood considers dangerous. The adjoining project Aloe at Palm Canyon had a traffic study that concluded the gate adjoining 12@Las Palmas was dangerous and would be gated and closed except for fire, police and ambulances. The planning commission states the project size dictates no traffic study is necessary. I ask each of you council members to drive by this curve in the next month to personally understand the neighborhoods concern. Thank you. Garth Gilpin Thank you, City of Palm Springs This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email. 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda THE SECTION 14 STORY THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 4 of 42 Desert Sun, Volume 42, Number 88, 14 November 1968 THE SECTION 14 STORY II Early '60's Bring Slum Clearance Hope By AL TOSTADO, Managing Editor On May 11, 1961 it appeared that the City of Palm Springs’ attempt to solve its problem of relocating the scores of people who were to be evicted from their ramshackle dwellings on Section 14 was taking a step forward. Joseph M. Jackson, Riverside businessman and Alaska Realtor, told the City Council he was calling for the residents to cooperate with municipal personnel in the survey of the area which had been ordered by the Federal Housing Agency. Jackson disclosed he had previously advised residents not to sign any questionnaires, and the move had temporarily halted the survey of the southwest quarter of the section, which had been scheduled for completion the day before. Jackson said he had not completely understood the necessity for the survey, but after a long discussion with Planning Director Jack Bearpaw, was pledging full cooperation. Jackson told The Desert Sun he was “not just representing the Negro population of the section, but all the people on the reservation” and took exception to the fact that the council thought he was. “But the council was right in taking its stand because the only area of Section 14 being surveyed is the southwest quarter section, residents of which are predominantly Negro. "In a manner of speaking these people have already been served notice that they must vacate this area, which is the desert’s worst slum section.” Jackson also revealed he was attempting to start immediate construction of a new housing development in Section 10, near Garnet, where he had purchased 105 acres of land and was planning for both purchase and rental homes. And on June 27, 1961, The Desert Sun reported that more than 430 families facing eviction from homes in Section 14 had aid coming from two directions: - A six-month moratorium on evictions announced by Mayor Frank Bogert; 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda THE SECTION 14 STORY THE DESERT SUN 1968 SERIES OF ARTICLES by AL TOSTADO, MANAGING EDITOR Page 5 of 42 - A promise from Federal Housing Authority representatives to the City Council that action would be speeded to certify city eligibility for financing guarantees for low- cost housing, both private homes and rental property. Section 14 residents had been under a June eviction deadline fron the Bureau of Indian Affairs that had already brought demolitions and burning of homes in the area. Richard G, Mitchell, special assistant for the Housing and Home Finance Agency of the Federal Housing Administration in San Francisco, and William Temple. FHA specialist from Los Angeles, reported Palm Springs could be certified for special housing finance guarantees within 30 to 45 days and funds could be cleared for the start of new housing construction shortly thereafter. Jackson, Riverside member of the Section 14 Housing committee told the council the Bank of America, one of the Indian property conservators, was willing to go along on early financing for low-cost housing he was planning north of the city. Spokesmen for nearly 50 Section 14 residents feared red tape would delay completion beyond the six-month eviction moratorium, but conceded the outlook was more hopeful than at any time in many months. Jackson further disclosed he was then building 85 units a half-mile north of Garnet on Indian land and was prepared to construct some 500, selling at $8,500 for two bedrooms and $9,500 for three, at $50 down and $70 per month. At this rate, a city survey showed, 55 per cent of the families in the area would be able to afford the houses, based on an estimate that persons earning $400 per month would be able to afford to buy the dwellings. It was noted these people were paying $70 to $80 per month for their housing on Section 14. And for the 45 per cent who could not afford to buy these homes, the city was working on rentals, and was also trying to assure more facile financing with no down payments and 40- year loans through the FHA. On July 8. 1961 Palm Springs financiers disclosed they were negotiating for purchase of land at the north edge of the city as a site for low-cost FHA housing facilities for the families being evicted from Section 14. Attorney Thurman Arnold announced the contemplated plan but withheld the identity of the principals in the negotiations, saying, “Nothing has jelled yet. But this is the obvious thing to do. Many people here are moving in this direction.” 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:Michael Cagle To:City Clerk; Christy Holstege Subject:Public Comment on Agenda - OPEN FORUM Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 5:13:00 PM NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. RE: Public Comment - City Council College of the Desert property SECOND REQUEST - No meaningful response from City Manager I am writing on behalf of some residents in the Vibe (District Four) community at Farrell, Baristo and Tahquitz. The fence screening surrounding the proposed COD location, just across from Vibe, is tattered leaving the blighted site in full view. The screening was briefly an improvement when first installed, however seems sturdier fabric should have been specified. Our new community contributes significant property tax revenue, and we should expect, in return, a neighborhood free of such visual pollution. Further, our HOA dues, along the the developer, have vastly improved the City’s roadways of Tahquitz, Farrell and Baristo. Time of COD to do their part. We request that the City follow with the COD to re-install the screening material of appropriate strength as soon as possible. Michael Cagle 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:Mary Ruebsamen To:City Clerk Subject:People living on the streets Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 6:40:24 PM NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. We are not doing the homeless community any favors by letting them live in filth. Someone needs to make decisions and not turn a blind eye to this problem! Sent from my iPhone 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:City of Palm Springs To:City Clerk; City Clerk Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 9:53:14 PM Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs Submission #:2045663 IP Address:136.29.47.209 Submission Date:10/24/2022 9:53 Survey Time:10 minutes, 26 seconds You have a new online form submission. Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login. Full Name/Nombre Bram Heidinger City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia Palm Springs, Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional) 9175234200 Email (optional/opcional) bram.heidinger@gmail.com Your Comments/Sus comentarios To the City Council of Palm Springs, I was informed today that the moratorium enacted on 10/17/22 has been applied to applications submitted prior to 10/17/22. This is egregious. My application for a short term rental (STR) and associated fees were accepted in July 2022. I passed the inspection on 8/1/22, and was told my permit would arrive on 10/20/22. Only after receiving that confirmation did I spend thousands renovating my condo into something I am proud of, and that reflects the mid century modern community. I simply ask that the City of Palm Springs honor the agreements previously made with the people prior to the date the moratorium was enacted. I made an informed choice to save money, buy, and invest in a community I love and where I hope to retire. Please consider that your decision to pause our original agreement jeopardizes my livelihood, and ability to pay my mortgage, HOA, and land lease fees. Please honor agreements made prior to 10/17/22. Sincerely, Bram Heidinger Thank you, City of Palm Springs This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email. 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:Grace Garner To:City Clerk Subject:FW: Feedback on Proposed Changes to VR Regulations Date:Tuesday, October 25, 2022 12:28:39 PM From: Kenny Felsher <Kenny.Felsher.178284587@p2a.co> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2022 8:20 AM To: Grace Garner <Grace.Garner@palmspringsca.gov> Subject: Feedback on Proposed Changes to VR Regulations NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Dear Mayor Pro Tem Grace Garner, I started my vacation rental company in 2004 after moving to the desert from LA. It has allowed me to build a good life for myself out here. While it can be a financially rewarding business to be in, It's also a tough business to be in. Being in charge of other people's million dollar investments is a lot of pressure. I want to make the homeowners some money while protecting their property from harm. It's a balancing act. I work very hard to get quality renters to protect both the homeowner client's investment and the neighbor's quality of life. I do both of these things while generating a ton of money in TOT Tax. My renters also generate a ton of tax and economic activity for the city. I do a lot of good for Palm Springs with my business and yet every five years or so I have to fight for my right to exist. It's not fair. The ordinance is working. I follow it to the letter. There isn't a problem. Why is the city yet again considering hurting me and others in this industry. I was hoping to sell my business in a couple of years and retire. I've been working non-stop for forty years and deserve to rest now. I was going to add a few more houses to my portfolio to build the value of my business before selling it. If you stop issueing new permits, I may never be able to retire. I just wanted you to know that what you do can really hurt someone like me. I'm begging you. Please don't place a moratorium on new vacation rental permits. I just want to retire in peace. Regards, Kenny Felsher 897 Oceo Cir S Palm Springs, CA 92264 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda From:Grace Garner To:City Clerk Subject:FW: The effect short term rental changes will have on young people. Date:Tuesday, October 25, 2022 3:12:54 PM From: Eva Gutowski <eva@select.co> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2022 12:56 AM To: Grace Garner <Grace.Garner@palmspringsca.gov> Subject: The effect short term rental changes will have on young people. NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe. Greetings Mayor Pro Tem Garner, My name is Eva Gutowski. We met outside the city hall meeting on Monday October 17. I also spoke. I write this to say I sincerely hope your colleagues are considering young people and especially the middle class in these decisions regarding short term rental rules changing. Please allow me your time. Regarding the '90 day required to live in PS' proposal; Not everyone who wants to build a life in Palm Springs has the luxury of being retired. Lots of us are still very much working, and have decades until we are able to relocate for 3 months out of the year. When I bought my home in Palm Springs, it was to have a place for my family to get away from their less fortunate households in Los Angeles. It was a place to come together for holidays. It was a place that I could hopefully spend many weekends in, swimming in the pool with my golden retriever Hanalei, should I work hard enough. But it was not a place I could ever afford to live full time, without utilizing short term rentals to the fullest capacity. I am 28. To me, the amazing thing about Palm Springs was that it always seemed to be a place that struck gold with balance. Leading the desert in coolness, youthfulness. If you tell a friend you're going to Palm Desert or Cathedral City they will honestly look at you like you're crazy. But if you tell anyone you're going to Palm Springs, they'll all beg to come with. For someone young like me, you could build a serious future for yourself here, by participating in the short term rental community. You said in the recent city hall meeting that you wanted to find a way for people to not be 'incentivised' to buy here. I agree, investors are exploiting the town. But in 2022, for millenials entering the housing market like me, the 'incentives' to Palm Springs are what enables us to actually look towards a life of retirement. But enough about me and us young people. Should you enact this rule, the most affected will be middle class families, who cannot afford to relocate their kids, pause their jobs, pay for extra flights, and find someone to care for their primary homes- just to meet these 90 day requirements. You know It will only be the 1% that benefit off this rule. The people who can shift their vacation schedules, and hire more staff. Enacting this rule would very well drive working families out of their homes in Palm Springs who cannot accommodate their 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda lives to these new standards. Also consider, who will swoop into that house once that family is gone?... There are lots of things in the city hall meeting I had thoughts about, but I won't waste your time and I'll end on this. If you're going to adopt new rules, it's in my opinion totally shameful and feels extremely convenient to 'grandfather' existing permit holders in. It's completely elitist, protecting only those who are 'in' and isolating a new group to much stricter rules. Not to mention, the elder people who have benefited so much from these rules (to where they can now adapt to them the best out of anyone) aren't affected? But the young people trying to find a way in this economy to create a future in Palm Springs can all deal with this themselves. The people that are far away from retirement and relaxed schedules and extra vacation time. Not okay. If you are going to change anything, you change them for everyone. I agree with plenty of points you made in the city hall meeting, and I also agree that changes can be made to fit the goals of the city. Big Investor activity in residential properties is definitely a problem to tackle and I award you for taking on that job. I feel there are better ways to address this, i.e a new rule that you are only allowed to have one STR in the county and it needs to be somewhere you are living at for one month out of the year. This is more accommodating for normal residents like myself, and weeds out investor activity. Please if you are not already, consider young people and what (or better who*) the future of Palm Springs looks like to you. If you enact these rules, any young person like me will have absolutely no way of making Palm Springs make sense for them. You heard a lot about 'dreams' in the city hall meeting. I don't like to over-sensationalize that word especially in pleads, but I want you to know, Palm Springs really was a dream to me. If you'd like to talk more about Gen Z and Millennial impact. I am happy to offer healthy dialogue :) Thank you so much for your time, eva. 10/27/2022 Public Comment Non Agenda