Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-08-25 Policy & Services Committee Summary MinutesPOLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 15 Special Meeting August 25, 2025 The Policy & Services Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 6:00 PM. Present In-Person: Veenker (Chair), Lu, Stone Absent: None Call to Order Chair Veenker called the meeting to order. The clerk called roll and declared all were present. Public Comments: None. Agenda Items 1. Discussion and recommendation to Council on prioritization of potential approaches to address oversized vehicle (including recreational vehicle) impacts, particularly relating to individuals living in vehicles Chair Veenker thanked Staff for their hard work on the staff report they had put together. Ed Shikada, City Manager, stated that most of Palo Alto's homelessness issues were related to people living in vehicles and that Staff was bringing forward possible options for the Policy & Services Committee to consider. Melissa McDonough, Assistant to the City Manager, stated that Staff believed that the number of people living in vehicles had doubled since 2023. The presence of oversized vehicles (OSVs) in public streets was still a concern in Palo Alto despite efforts to address homelessness in the past 5 years. A slide was shown which mapped out some of the affordable housing throughout the City. Assistant McDonough reviewed what the City has done so far in 2025 regarding homelessness and vehicle dwellers. Staff identified options to address the impacts of oversized vehicles, both supportive and regulatory: SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 A. Expand Safe Parking at Baylands Athletic Center (or Other Dedicated Parkland). B. Safe Parking on Privately-Owned Commercial Lots. C. Expand Congregation-Based Safe Parking Program. D. Increased Cleaning and Street Sweeping on Selected Streets. E. Enhance Services Relating to Inhabited OSVs. F. Prohibit Renting of Public Parking Spaces. G. Prohibit Storage of Detached Trailers/Inoperable Vehicles on Public Streets. H. Limit Oversized Vehicle Parking to Certain Streets with Focused Regulations. I. Prohibit Oversized Vehicles on Specific Streets. J. Prohibit Oversized Vehicle Parking Throughout the City. Options I and J were not being recommended because of possible unintended consequences. A phased approach to these options was being endorsed. Phase 1 would begin with Council approval and would focus on actions that were more straightforward to implement. Phase 2 would begin concurrently with the implementation portion of Phase 1 and would build infrastructure and aid in engagement needed for policy shifts. Phase 3 entailed launching the enhanced services pilot, approving expanded safe parking, and starting to develop a location- based parking approach to identify where OSVs may be allowed. Phase 4 would finalize the work, evaluate pilot outcomes, complete implementation of expanded safe parking, and enforce new rules around designated parking areas. Staff would evaluate at every stage and adjust accordingly. Staff was proposing that the P&S Committee discuss and recommend this phased approach concerning OSVs for approval by Council as they felt it offered stability and dignity to vehicle dwellers. Chair Veenker hoped the public commenters would also be sharing proposed solutions. Chair Veenker stated that the Committee would not be making any final decisions this evening and reminded that the City had to operate within the law. Item 1 Public Comment 1. Barry K. spoke on behalf of 12 (Rosalie H., Scott V.D., Veronica W., Byron B., Lissy B., Wuping Lu., Daniel I., Francine G., Penny B., CeCi K., Teresa F., Victor L.) and represented the Ventura Neighbors Association. The commenter wanted the Committee to be aware that a number of people had spoken to him privately about the issue of long-term parking of OSVs but would not identify themselves for fear of harassment. The greatest number of issues raised by neighbors was related to long-term parking of OSVs at the latest neighborhood event. The commenter had been speaking to members of City Council for 8 or 10 years about this issue and presented a self-made map showing current long-term OSV parking in the Ventura neighborhood. Public safety was cited as an issue because OSVs were obstructing sightlines for pedestrians and bicycles. 2. Kathryn T. was an owner of 3225 El Camino Real at the corner of Portage. Safe parking was permitted in this area subject to Regulation 18.42.160, and the commenter believed that none of these OSVs had permits. Municipal Code 10.47 was also referred to SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 concerning large vehicle parking along Portage. The commenter estimated losing $2 million on the sale of these condos because of this issue and stated that her business would not survive a phased approach over many years. The commenter along with other owners on the first block of Portage requested a restriction of 2-hour parking in this area. A photo was shown of a red zone curb that was barely visible and needed repainted. 3. Bruce lived on Park Boulevard where RVs were parking long term. Examples of nuisances were given such as dead rats, mosquitoes, foul smells of urine and feces, and various trash in this area. Tow notices distributed on Monday mornings were discarded as trash onto Park Boulevard. One individual had been witnessed moving at night between multiple RVs on Sheridan Avenue, proving that there were fewer people using the RVs than the number of RVs. This commenter was in favor of recommendations to address homelessness head-on. 4. Hugh L. agreed with speakers Barry and Bruce, particularly with respect to the safety issues on Park Boulevard. The OSVs were causing a sanitation issue along Park Boulevard and Matadero Avenue because of dumping into the storm drains. This commenter wanted to see the current housing being built get earmarked for unhoused individuals and vehicle dwellers and also wished to ban OSVs from the City. 5. Christian H. was a local property manager who represented many owners and tenants and agreed with the first speaker regarding safety. There were safety concerns for his tenants entering and exiting the buildings on Embarcadero Road by the golf course and the airport. The commenter opined that the phased approached needed to consider immediately addressing safety concerns such as not being able to see children riding bicycles on sidewalks at certain entrances and intersections. This commenter urged the Council to make these changes citywide and not focus on just certain areas. 6. Rollin T. was part of a group of engineers who worked for a satellite company and had been living in RVs for almost a decade. The street where they lived was kept clean until about a year ago when another group showed up who did not care about tow notices and who were leaving piles of trash and dumping sewage in the street. This commenter had talked to a parking enforcement officer about an RV actively leaking sewage and was told it was not known when that vehicle would be towed. It was suggested that actually enforcing the tow warnings would reduce the problem. 7. Raymond G. spoke on behalf of Black Democrats against demonizing the unhoused population. The commenter wondered why the speaker who invested $35 million into her business did not ask the unhoused person in front of her building how she could help him. The commenter stated no solutions had been heard to offer employment to the unhoused people. It was wondered if a citywide ban on RVs would include the parts of Stanford and their students that were in Palo Alto. The commenter stated that the SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 City was trying to criminalize the African-American population and opined that to address homelessness, employment opportunities needed to be offered. 8. Dave M. represented Recor Medical, a company which had grown from 150 employees to 350 employees. The RVs in front of their location made it difficult to hire and bring in customers because of safety issues, including sewage in streets and drug dealing. The commenter was seeing no action taken against these RVs despite almost daily contact with the police. RVs accounted for approximately 70 percent of the street parking in that area. The commenter stated the City was not enforcing the laws concerning these RVs which may mean that their business would not be able to stay in Palo Alto. 9. Jeremy E. thanked the officer who had been given the new job of policing this issue. It was reminded that some adjoining communities had recalled their Council members. It was requested that a lot of effort be given to addressing the OSV issue and that it be done quickly. 10. Jeanette B. represented Anderson Honda on Embarcadero Way. As of the preceding Saturday, 14 RVs were counted on Embarcadero Way, 15 RVs on Embarcadero Road, and 16 RVs on Faber. These RVs were causing problems such as waste, safety issues, employee harassment, and damage to cars and properties. Children had to ride their bicycles in the middle of the streets because there was no access to the curbs because of these RVs. The commenter stated that safety and health needed to be addressed first and that laws were not being enforced. 11. Larry G. lived in the Ventura neighborhood for 21 years and pointed out that certain communities were disproportionately affected by this issue. A theme among all the speakers was physical and environmental safety concerns. The commenter stated that an immediate solution would be to enforce the law and to find a safe place for the homeless people to go. 12. Ken J. appreciated the comprehensive staff report and wanted to remind the Committee that the unhoused population were people who lived in the community and were neighbors. It was hoped that any ordinance would allow general contractors to park trailers for storage of equipment in front of buildings. The commenter thought that Coyote Hill Road and Deer Creek Road could be considered as streets designated for OSVs. This commenter endorsed weekly street cleaning in order to help take care of the neighborhoods and unhoused individuals. 13. Reece H. wished to discuss the safety issue with the RVs. This commenter lived in an OSV and advocated punishing those who did not take care of their RVs and to leave those alone who did. It was stated that safety goes both ways and that the OSV community wanted to help but also wished to be heard. 14. Justin H. commented that living in these cars and RVs was not a choice and that the background of these individuals contributed to some of their situations. The commenter SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 stated the RV dwellers wanted to be treated with dignity and not as outcasts in the community. Designating the RVs to certain areas could mean that this commenter would have to quit his current job and find another. 15. Patty stated the unhoused problem was because there was not enough affordable housing. A suggestion was made that land be found to build small houses for people who currently lived in mobile units to allow for a more permanent solution. The commenter stated that other places in the country have used prefab homes for this issue. 16. Alisa E. spoke on behalf of the Foster Museum and stated that the museum was experiencing significant operational challenges due to OSVs parking for extended periods of time in front of the museum. Visitors were being impacted because of parking issues, including those with disabilities, seniors, and young children having to park farther away from the museum building. Organizations who were interested in renting the museum for special events had expressed reservations due to street conditions. The sightline when entering and exiting the museum lot was blocked because of these OSVs. Street conditions were frequently unsafe because of equipment, wiring, waste, and other items. 17. Maia H. spoke on behalf of Jay Paul Company, the property owner at 2747 Park Boulevard. A request was made for the implementation of time-restricted parking, preferably 2 hours, on Sheridan Avenue between Park Boulevard and Page Mill Road, which was a block where RVs and vans were parked months at a time. It was believed that 5 of these permanently parked vehicles were owned by the same individual engaging in vanlording. This commenter supported increased street cleaning and sweeping. An ordinance prohibiting vanlording and increasing safe RV parking sites was recommended. The commenter also wished to see Sheridan Avenue included in the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking Program. 18. David A. quoted from the staff report, "as a practical matter, to date, it is not common that OSVs attempt to park in residential zones," and stated this was not true for the Ventura neighborhood. A reply from Ken Kratt, Traffic Sergeant, was read regarding the 72-hour rule and the half-mile rule discussed in the staff report: "It is very rare to be able to read an odometer in vehicles but especially RVs. We use to be able to tow vehicles once they had 5 parking citations, but the 9th Circuit Court ruled that unconstitutional. Now all that occurs is the citations pile up and just don't get paid." The commenter opined that the recommendation in the staff report of using fabric over storm drains would just be accommodating the dumping of human excrement. The commenter stated that the option to limit OSV parking to certain streets would consolidate the problem while causing problems for certain neighborhoods in the process. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 19. Scott O. (Zoom) agreed with speakers Reece, Justin, and Patty. This commenter had visited RV dwellers on East Meadow Circle and Fabian and said that those people were kind and many were young independent individuals and minorities. This commenter did not agree with vanlording because it was renting city-owned land but questioned where their tenants would go if shut down. It was opined that the City would then have a dilemma of vanlords versus unsheltered street homelessness. The suggestion was made to charge lot rent to vanlords and build dorm-style housing units. 20. Becky S. lived in the Ventura neighborhood and proposed the idea that different areas throughout the City could rotate hosting RV dwellers while solutions were being sought so that all neighborhoods could share in the care of unhoused individuals. The commenter stated that not much was done after the Ventura neighborhood talked to a couple City Council members about their concerns. Parity for the Ventura neighborhood would be appreciated, while offering humane solutions to the OSV parking problem. 21. Aram J. (Zoom), who also lived in the Ventura neighborhood, quoted a San Jose Mercury News article that stated the City of Gilroy (with a slightly less population than Palo Alto) had 1,048 unhoused people while Palo Alto had 206. A 1995 quote by Justice Stanley Mosk was shared: "The City cannot solve its homeless problem simply by exiling large numbers of its homeless citizens to neighboring localities." The commenter stated that the City needed to think more globally when solving homelessness and urged them to think about what would happen if the RV dwellers were demonized and pushed out. 22. Anjuman J. says his community serves roughly 200 families, which includes elderly people and children who used the facility on a regular basis. This commenter was concerned about the presence of long-term OSVs parked along the property lines despite the 72-hour parking ordinance in this area. Smoking, drinking, and loud music was disruptive to the congregation and the priest who lived nearby also. Extra costs had to be absorbed due to the use of outdoor facets and electrical outlets by these RV dwellers. Personal items placed on the sidewalks caused tripping hazards to community members. Conversations with RV owners had gotten aggressive while trying to discuss these issues. 23. Williams (Zoom) [inaudible]. 24. Lopez (Zoom) said that they’ve been spitting at the drivers and giving them racists remarks, which we shouldn’t tolerate as people of America. He asked the Committee to take this into account when deciding. 25. Matt B. had sent previously sent an email outlining his points. The commenter opined the current options on the table did nothing to help the unhoused and that housing was needed. 26. Ashok (Zoom) stated that most of his comments had already been addressed by other speakers and that the OSV parking situation was more serious than he previously SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 thought. The commenter hoped that the City would take action quickly to solve this problem. 27. TV (Zoom) spoke in Spanish, and his comments were translated. This commenter was one of the persons who lived in a mobile home and wanted to get support because it was not easy to live in this situation. Rent was very expensive and not affordable on minimum wage. The commenter understood the difficulty for the neighbors when parking in streets. If RV dwellers were displaced, poverty would continue. 28. Mbacke C (Zoom) reiterated that RV dwellers were human and stated that everyone should be thinking about dignified ways to include these individuals in the community and not ostracize them. The commenter wanted the community to be innovative in working together to find solutions to the OSV problem. 29. Exsararguello (Zoom) represented DELFI Diagnostics on Embarcadero Road. Within this business, the problem with OSVs was a focus of conversation among board members and potential partnerships. The commenter agreed there had to be a balance when fixing this issue. Many of their employees felt unsafe to take walks or to come into work. The commenter believed an accident was imminent because of the limited sightline when entering and exiting the facility. Chair Veenker asked for clarification concerning the permitting process for parking detached vehicles for general contracting use. City Manager Shikada stated that construction-related parking on the streets could be addressed through the permitting process and that ongoing permitting would need further discussion. Chair Veenker questioned if the Ventura neighborhood fell under the current code that disallowed parking between 2 and 6 AM in residential areas. City Manager Shikada confirmed that this code did apply to the Ventura neighborhood but reminded that signage was required to enforce that regulation. It was explained that in the Ventura neighborhood, the delineation between residential and industrial areas was often not clear. It was verified by Chair Veenker and City Manager Shikada that none of the Councilmembers had any input in the staff report. Chair Veenker stated that it had become clear that OSV dwellers were a diverse group which would mean different types of solutions. Councilmember Stone believed that all Palo Alto residents needed to follow the rules. Councilmember Stone was surprised by the Point in Time count that showed 88 percent of the unhoused in Palo Alto were living in OSVs, which was significantly higher than the rest of the county, and asked for thoughts from Staff about that. Assistant McDonough stated that no study had been done as to why Palo Alto had a higher percentage of OSV dwellers but felt it might have been due to the different types of communities Palo Alto had. Councilmember Stone reminded that Mountain View had made some significant changes concerning OSVs and wondered if the results of those regulations had been tracked yet. Assistant McDonough stated that when the County released the 2025 city-level data, Staff would be able to look at updated numbers concerning Mountain View's new OSV regulations. The data in this staff report was SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 from 2024 and supplemented with Staff observations. City Manager Shikada added that the settlement agreement in Mountain View which designated 3 miles of streets for OSV parking was to meet the demand in their city. Councilmember Stone wondered why outreach had not been done to community stakeholders who served the unhoused and was surprised that very few of those stakeholders were heard from at this meeting as that could have a strong impact on decisions. City Manager Shikada stated that initial feedback on the proposed solutions from the Councilmembers would help lead further outreach. Councilmember Stone asked for clarification on what constitutes jeopardizing public safety in order to tow a vehicle and if improper disposal of waste would qualify as a risk to public safety. Molly Stump, City Attorney, stated that OSVs blocking a fire hydrant or a driveway and impeding traffic were examples that were considered health and safety issues. Some courts had also considered parking illegally to be a factor. Attorney Stump added that improper disposal of waste was not described in any currently published cases. Councilmember Lu inquired about the current policy on towing OSVs. Kara Apple, Lieutenant, stated that were 2 reasons for which the police department could lawfully tow: 1) an expired registration and 2) a 72-hour violation. Attorney Stump added that there were more extensive procedural requirements for those towing laws. Councilmember Lu asked if there had been a shift in the towing policy over the last year or so with prioritizing certain RVs or certain situations within those laws. City Manager Shikada stated there had been no shift in policy but added that resource availability was an issue, including with the police department, towing, and prosecution. Councilmember Lu queried how many RVs had been towed in the last few years because a baseline number would be useful. Assistant McDonough stated that information was not available offhand. Councilmember Lu asked for Staff's comment about how enforcement on RVs could create street homelessness problems. Assistant McDonough opined that there was more sense of security in a vehicle as opposed to being outdoors. Councilmember Lu wondered if any feedback was received from LifeMoves or The Karat School Project in regard to these OSV issues. Assistant McDonough answered that the options in the staff report were developed by meeting with the RV dwellers group every month, which included representatives from LifeMoves and The Karat School. Chair Veenker asked if there was any interaction with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan concerning these issues. Ria Hutabart Lo, Chief Transportation Official, said that Staff was working on an update to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan but that this OSV issue had not come up as part of that but could be considered. Chair Veenker added that attention needs to be paid to visibility problems with children riding in streets and that the Ventura neighborhood needed to be treated the same with respect to enforcement as other neighborhoods. Chair Veenker agreed with the staff report that expanding safe parking at the SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 Baylands Athletic Center would not be worth the time and effort just to gain a few more parking places. Chair Veenker was on board with prohibiting vanlording and the renting of public parking spaces. Chair Veenker also concurred with additional street cleaning and sweeping. Councilmember Stone also agreed that expanding parking in the Baylands Athletic Center made no sense due to cost. Councilmember Stone concurred with Staff's option to allow safe parking on privately-owned commercial lots and to expand the Congregation-Based Safe Parking Program. Councilmember Stone inquired if the 24-hour parking rule was why congregation sites do not currently allow OSVs. Assistant McDonough reminded that having to move every day was difficult for RVs. Amber Stime, Director of Move Mountain View, replied that church parking lots currently only allowed overnight parking, not 24 hours. Also, because most churches were in neighborhoods, that would be an issue with the residents. Church lots were also used for their own activities and this would cause the RVs to have to move for those. Councilmember Stone felt that expanding the Congregation-Based Safe Parking Program would be worth exploring and suggested a pilot program with 1 or 2 RVs being allowed in church parking lots to begin. Councilmember Stone agreed with increased street cleaning and sweeping on selected streets. Councilmember Stone was curious about why Mountain View's pilot pump-out program was not made permanent. Assistant McDonough stated that Mountain View decided not to go forward with a permanent pump-out program because of high costs and the focus on the many other initiatives to address homelessness. Regarding the option to Enhance Services Relating to Inhabited OSVs, Councilmember Stone thought that this approach would only work if enforcement was increased to ensure illegal dumping and other problems were stopped. Councilmember Stone opined that vanlording and the renting of public parking spaces should be prohibited because no one should be profiting off public streets. It was pondered if Staff had the resources to identify the vanlords. Assistant McDonough stated the police department had found people advertising RV rentals on various websites. Councilmember Lu commented it was not humane to move unhoused individuals from city to city or to let them live in RVs long-term without transitional housing. Areas with heavy concentrations of OSVs needed to be helped such as Ventura. Councilmember Lu felt that decisions on solutions could be both thoughtful and fast, especially for what could be done within the already existing framework and where there was alignment. It was suggested that the City could quickly start to tow and impound vehicles that they knew were being leased out by vanlords that would not immediately impact particular families. RVs which had the most consistent dumping, most dangerous electrical setups, etc., could be provided more focused services or be towed if necessary. No parking on certain bike lanes such as Park Boulevard could be implemented relatively quickly also. Councilmember Lu supported extremely affordable housing and RV parking throughout the entire City. Concerning Options A and B in the staff report about safe parking, it was questioned whether any other lands such as the courthouse parking lot or near the airport could help this SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 move faster. Assistant McDonough was excited to hear new ideas and stated that land was looked at near the airport, county-owned land, Caltrans-owned land, and private land for safe parking, but they did not succeed. Councilmember Lu hoped that any promising leads could still be revisited concerning those lands. It was wondered if temporarily allowing people to park RVs in the batting cage area at the Baylands Athletic Center would require undedicating parklands. Attorney Stump stated that even though it would be temporary, this would require voter approval. Councilmember Lu felt that Option B could be expanded beyond commercial property. Councilmember Lu supported Option C (Expand Congregation-Based Safe Parking Program) and wondered if faith-based institutions could be incentivized to allow RVs to park on their property. Chair Veenker was not supportive of adding OSV parking spaces around Geng Road because RV dwellers would not have ready access to public transit or to schools at this site. Concerning congregation-based safe parking (Option C), Chair Veenker agreed with this option. Chair Veenker made a suggestion that because churches and businesses had busy hours that were opposite of one another, perhaps RVs could park in church parking lots Monday through Friday and then move to industrial areas on the weekends. Chair Veenker wanted to explore the commercial parking lot option more fully and felt this was the option that had the most opportunity. Chair Veenker appealed to any business owner to come forward who had an unused commercial lot that could be used for this purpose. Councilmember Stone was in support of Option G (Prohibit Storage of Detached Trailers/Inoperable Vehicles on Public Streets) because the public right-of-way needed to be maintained. Councilmember Stone queried if there were approaches to enforce nonmotorized or inoperable conveyances without having to install signs on all City streets, which would be costly. Attorney Stump stated that if the Council endorses this idea, Staff would come back with a more detailed plan. Councilmember Stone liked Option H (Limit Oversized Vehicle Parking to Certain Streets with Focused Regulations) but asked if there was a way to limit the amount of parking spaces for OSVs on each designated street. City Manager Shikada stated the only way to limit the number was to limit the overall length and the parking for any vehicle, not just OSVs. Councilmember Stone thought that OSV parking spaces needed to be provided in the short term until more affordable housing was available. Councilmember Lu noted that San Francisco's new approach to RVs and OSVs applied a permit system and registering with the City. Regarding Option D (Increased Cleaning and Street Sweeping on Selected Streets), Councilmember Lu was concerned about the implementation of this and felt that it would be important to sequence this and have predictable dates for the sake of the RV dwellers. Assistant McDonough responded that this would be taken into account and that details were still being worked out. Councilmember Lu believed that the City should be thinking about how the Homekey site would fit into these approaches because a concern of RV dwellers was losing some of their belongings and their mobility when moving from RVs into any other kind of shelter. Being able to access their belongings in their RVs while living in housing would need to be taken into consideration. Councilmember Lu was on board with addressing vanlording and using existing tools to address that more urgently. With Option G (Prohibit SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 Storage of Detached Trailers/Inoperable Vehicles on Public Streets), Councilmember Lu was uncertain about how the City would qualify a vehicle inoperable versus operable and asked for thoughts from Staff about that. Assistant McDonough stated that this option would prohibit the storing of detached trailers on the public right-of-way. City Manager Shikada added that if the trailer was hitched to a vehicle, then it would not be in violation. Councilmember Lu expressed support for more exploration of this option. Councilmember Lu disliked the idea of limiting OSVs to certain streets but believed the City needed to have some jurisdictional control. Councilmember Lu believed that if appropriate lots were found for the OSVs, perhaps Options H and I would not be needed. City Manager Shikada reminded that there were constraints on other types of properties which may exceed the City Council's authority, for example, the FAA on the use of land within proximity to the airport. Councilmember Lu offered the idea of using the spot along Sherman Avenue by the Public Safety Building. Specifically regarding Option I, Councilmember Lu felt that clearing critical bike lanes should be done more urgently. Chair Veenker disliked the idea of designating OSVs to certain streets even though places needed to be found for the current demand. Chair Veenker again expressed her strong desire to find safe parking lots for these OSVs and reaching out to partners in the community who could help. Chair Veenker believed that enhancing services to OSV dwellers (Option E) would enable to the City to get a better sense of what had caused these unhoused individuals' situations. It was discovered that some RV dwellers contracted with people/businesses to do pump-outs and take their trash, and Chair Veenker wondered if the City could offer these services at a nominal fee to the RV dwellers. Chair Veenker asked if it was possible to cap the number of RVs per street. Attorney Stump stated there were legal and administrative challenges but that at least one idea had come up from Staff that would be further investigated. Chair Veenker supported prohibiting detached and inoperable vehicle parking. Chair Veenker queried if tow lot availability was an issue, and Lieutenant Apple confirmed that the police department's contracted tow companies had capacity and resource problems which severely impacted their ability to remove these vehicles. Chair Veenker made a motion to not recommend exploring the limiting of OSV parking to certain streets except after exhaustion of all other options. There was no second to this motion and so it failed. Councilmember Lu suggested starting from the Staff motion and calling out specific things to change. Councilmember Lu asked Staff if they wanted anymore clarification in the motion for Phase 2, Bullet 2 (Return to Council for direction on a preferred option for expanded safe parking). Staff recommended excluding the idea of using the Baylands Athletic Center for parking because it was made clear by all 3 Councilmembers that it was not of interest. Councilmember Lu proposed a friendly amendment to include a specific approach on how to handle the Homekey site and potentially secure RV parking and storage. City Manager Shikada suggested that this topic be discussed with LifeMoves. Assistant McDonough was working very closely with LifeMoves to discuss the likelihood of RV dwellers making use of Homekey. Chantal SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 Cotton Gaines, Deputy City Manager, suggested for clarification adding the words "working with LifeMoves to see if there are options available." Councilmember Lu stated the hope was to get the right conditions so that RV residents would move to the Homekey site. City Manager Shikada wanted to confirm that it was less about the storage and more about attractiveness to those who were currently in vehicles. Councilmember Lu offered another friendly amendment to Phase 1 to consider some kind of enforcement for vanlords, for blocking bike lanes, and for some class of public health risks. There was existing towing protocol for grossly out-of-date registrations and persistent violations of the 72-hour rule with appropriate notice. Attorney Stump confirmed that these towing violations could be enforced connected to violations of the law. Councilmember Lu wondered again if more immediate action could be taken for RVs that meet those conditions which may pose an especially high public health risk, were currently blocking bike lanes, or were vacant and listed for lease. Attorney Stump responded that this was a mix of scenarios and was dependent upon the situation. It was clarified that an ordinance was needed for vanlording and it was the hope of Staff that this would decrease the number of OSVs on the streets mostly through fines and not through seizure of those vehicles. Councilmember Lu pondered whether enforcement could take place for OSVs listed for lease and were going to be in the same spot for more than 72 hours. Lieutenant Apple stated in some cases the tenants of vanlords did not have the means to comply with the law because a trailer was being rented and not an RV. Lieutenant Apple added that many times when the City did tow these OSVs, the actual owner had the money to pay the tow fee to release the vehicle from the storage lot and rent it out again. Councilmember Lu reiterated that his amendment would involve vacant OSVs that were on the market to be rented. Councilmember Lu wanted to know what the timeline would be for development of the ordinances in Phase 1, and Attorney Stump estimated it would be 4 to 6 months. Chair Veenker was concerned about Phase 2, Bullet 2 (Return to Council for direction on a preferred option for expanded safe parking). The City needed to start reaching out as soon as possible to owners of potential lots that could be used for safe parking. Chair Veenker would like the wording to be more specific so that it was known that they were talking about private commercial lots and congregation lots. City Manager Shikada suggested the wording say "expanded safe parking in commercial and congregational properties," and Chair Veenker offered a friendly amendment for that rewording. City Manager Shikada was not sure how much time Staff could dedicate to the safe parking issue but suggested that Councilmembers could actively engage in seeking properties owners that may be open to this idea. Chair Veenker asked if it was acceptable for her or someone on Staff to attend a meeting of the group Multifaith Voices for Peace and Justice, and City Manager Shikada voiced no concerns with that. Chair Veenker wondered if Phase 2, Bullet 2 could be moved to Phase 1. Assistant McDonough stated she herself would be the lead coordinator for all items in Phase 1 and that adding more work to this phase would stretch her workload too tightly. City Manager Shikada explained that safe parking on private property would be lead by the Planning Staff and would require reprioritization of other work. Chair Veenker reiterated her concern about the length of time to obtain safe parking lots and that this was the key to solving the OSV issue. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 13 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 Councilmember Lu suggested ordering items in each phase to determine priority. It was wondered if in Phase 1, Bullet 3 (Refine the scope and begin implementation of additional street cleanups and sweeping) and Bullet 4 (Return to Council for approvals of ordinances and contract amendments [e.g., street sweeping] as soon as possible, estimated to require up to 4 months) could be moved to Phase 2. Councilmember Stone offered that after going to Council, Staff could come back and inform the Committee on how best to prioritize some of these items, and City Manager Shikada agreed. Chair Veenker was concerned that nothing was being done to start creating more parking spaces. Chair Veenker offered a friendly amendment to move Bullet 2 (Return to Council for direction on a preferred option for expanded safe parking) in Phase 2 to Phase 1. Jonathan Lait, Director of Planning and Development Services, stated there would need to be a reprioritization of nonhousing element-related Council priorities and that his department would be happy to share that when it came back to Council. Deputy City Manager Cotton Gaines clarified that Director Lait was speaking about documentation and that the identification of a lot would push that work back. Chair Veenker wanted to confirm that identification of a safe parking lot would not fall under Director Lait. City Manager stated that, because of Staff's workload, the ideal scenario would be if Councilmembers or other community members could step forward with suggested sites. Chair Veenker felt there were some obvious places to start looking for these lots. Chair Veenker did not support the Bullet that read "Begin exploration of the limiting OSV parking to certain streets approach, including determining a process and criteria for designating streets where OSV parking might be permitted, with appropriate community engagement" and would rather create safe parking and/or housing for OSV dwellers. Chair Veenker thought the idea of an RV buyback program was very interesting because the City of Berkeley had good results with their program. Chair Veenker offered a friendly amendment to put that in Phase 2. City Manager Shikada reminded that a buyback program was part of the potential strategy in Phase 1. Chair Veenker felt that a generalized buyback program should also be offered to those not going into Homekey. Councilmember Lu believed that buyback should only work in conjunction with a path to permanent housing. Councilmember Stone did not believe the motion needed to be amended for this. Councilmember Lu suggested to add the words "or other housing options" to Phase 1, Number 6. Councilmember Lu agreed that limiting OSV parking to certain streets should be an absolute last resort. Councilmember Stone felt that this option would still be needed despite the success of safe parking lots. Chair Veenker felt that most of the RVs had already found areas outside of residential zones and that the City would try to clean up where that was not the case. It was suggested that the staff report sent to Council could note dissent on this issue, and Chair Veenker asked if Staff was considering putting it on consent. City Manager Shikada stated that was at the Committee's discretion. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 14 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 Chair Veenker was still confused on Phase 1, Number 6, concerning a buyback program. Councilmembers agreed to add the words "such as a buyback or parking program" to this item. Councilmember Stone felt that the language added to Phase 2, Bullet 2 was trying to address the issues expressed by neighborhoods and businesses who were impacted by the OSVs and hoped that having certainty and consistency for those neighborhoods would be a significant improvement. MOTION SPLIT FOR PURPOSES OF VOTING MOTION: Councilmember Stone moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to recommend the City Council In Phase 2: Begin exploration of the “limiting OSV parking to certain streets” approach, including determining a process and criteria for designating streets where OSV parking might be permitted, with appropriate community engagement o Identify non-residential and non-residential adjacent streets where OSV parking would be permitted, and to the extent possible, evenly distribute those streets across the city o Tie the number of OSV permitted parking to the Point in Time count o Explore the possibility of a permitting program for OSV o Evenly disburse permissible OSV parking spots across the identified streets to avoid overconcentration and clearly mark on those streets where OSV parking is permitted MOTION PASSED: 2-1, Veenker no MOTION: Councilmember Stone moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to recommend the City Council Phase 1: Upon Council approval, Staff would: 1. Develop an ordinance to prohibit parking of detached/inoperable vehicles on public streets, 2. Develop an ordinance to prohibit the renting of public parking spaces (“vanlording”), 3. Refine the scope and begin implementation of additional street cleanups and sweeping, SUMMARY MINUTES Page 15 of 15 Sp. Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 8/25/2025 4. Return to Council for approvals of ordinances and contract amendments (e.g., street sweeping) as soon as possible, estimated to require up to four (4) months, and 5. Implementation and enforcement of these actions would follow. 6. Work with LifeMoves to consider options, such as a buyback or parking program, to accept RV residents quickly at the Homekey site or other housing options 7. Return to Council for direction for expanded safe parking on privately-owned and congregation-based parking lots, excepting any safe parking site that requires undedicating parkland Phase 2: Concurrent of Phase 1 implementation, Staff would initiate work on: 1. Design a small-scale enhanced services pilot (e.g., mobile pump outs, additional outreach workers/hours, garbage pickup, etc.), Phase 3: Following the completion of related components in Phase 2, Council would: 1. Approve pilot and any related contracts and agreements for small-scale enhanced services pilot, 2. Approve a preferred option for expanded safe parking on privately-owned and congregation-based parking lots, 3. Identify streets where OSV parking will be allowed and develop necessary ordinances and program design for “limiting OSV parking to certain streets” approach, and 4. Implementation of these actions would follow. Phase 4: Following the completion of related components in Phase 3, Staff would: 1. Evaluate the enhanced services pilot, 2. Pursue implementation of expanded safe parking, and 3. Obtain related Council approvals for “limiting OSV parking to certain streets” and begin enforcing new approach. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Future Meetings and Agendas Deputy City Manager Cotton Gaines noted the next meeting would be September 9, when there would be at least 1 audit item and possibly 2 other referrals. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 9:33 PM.