[00:00:01]
COMPUTER CLOCK SAYS IT'S FOUR 30.[1. Call to Order/Pledge of Allegiance/Moment of Silence/Roll Call]
SO LET'S CALL TO ORDER THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27TH, 2022 AT 4:30 PM WOULD YOU ALL RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE? I PLEDGE.I PLEDGE THIS TO THE PLAY OF THE UNITED, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND REPUBLIC FOR WHICH ONE NATION UNDERGO INVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
AND NOW WE'LL HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE.
AND WOULD YOU PLEASE SILENCE ANY ELECTRONIC DEVICES YOU MAY HAVE WITH, UH, WITH YOU? AND I AM TURNING MINE OFF AT THE SAME TIME.
SO MADAME CLERK, WOULD YOU CALL HER ROLE PLEASE? MAYOR MOI.
[2. City’s Vision]
IS THE CITY'S VISION STATEMENT.THE VISION THAT THE CITIZENS HAVE FOR THE FUTURE OF THEIR CITY IS TO BE A CITY THAT IS CONSTANTLY VISION, RESERVATION OF ITS NATURAL BEAUTY, SCENIC EXISTENCE, PRISTINE ENVIRONMENT, AND CULTURAL HERITAGE.
TO BE A CITY THAT RETAINS ITS SMALL TOWN CHARACTER AND CREATES ITS MANMADE IMPROVEMENTS, STRICT HARMONY WITH NATURE, TO BE A CITY THAT IS ALIENATED BY YARDS, LIVES WITH A SPIRIT OF VOLUNTEERISM TO HELP ACHIEVE OUR COMMON GOALS, TO BE A CITY THAT OFFERS EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR ALL AND FOSTERS A SENSE OF COMMUNITY, TO BE A CITY THAT WELCOMES AND ACCOMMODATES ALL OF ITS VISITORS AND FUTURE RESIDENTS WITH A SPIRIT OF FELLOWSHIP.
TO BE A CITY THAT RETAINS AND ENHANCES A STRONG, VITAL ECONOMY, WHICH PRESERVES EXISTING LIFESTYLES WITHOUT EXPLOITING THE NATURAL BEAUTY AND FIND IT A CITY THAT PUTS UP TO THE CHALLENGE OF STEWARDSHIP OF ONE OF THE EARTH'S GREAT TREASURES.
[3. Consent Items - Approve]
NEXT ITEM IS THE CONSENT ITEMS. IS THERE ANYONE ON THE COUNCIL? STAFF ARE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA? NOT SEEING ANY.I MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
MOVED BY COUNSELOR WILLIAMSON.
ALL NEXT ITEM IS APPOINTMENTS.
[5. Summary of Current Events by Mayor/Councilors/City Manager]
THAT, ITEM FIVE IS SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS.WHO HAS A CURRENT EVENT? SCOTT.
FOR FROM THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE THE RED DIRT FALL CONSCIOUS SERIES OF FINAL CONCERT WILL BE THIS FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 30TH, AT THE POSSE GROUNDS PAVILION, FEATURING A LOCAL, UH, FAVORITE DECKER.
UH, SOMETHING THAT HASN'T BEEN ON OUR, UH, CALENDAR FOR A LONG TIME, TRICK OR TREAT, AND UPTOWN IS COMING BACK.
PARKS AND REC, UH, IS PARTNERING WITH UPTOWN MERCHANTS TO OFFER THE SIGNATURE EVENT ON OCTOBER 30TH.
OF COURSE, UH, MERCHANTS, UH, CAN REQUEST SUPPLEMENTAL CANDY BEING, UH, PROVIDED BY THE CITY.
THE DEADLINE FOR THEM IS OCTOBER 13TH TO BE, TO PARTICIPATE FOR THE UPTOWN MERCHANTS.
FOR THOSE WHO HAVEN'T BEEN THERE BEFORE, IT'S AN EXCITING TIME, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THE, UH, UH, THE REGULAR DANCE TROOP THAT, UH, WE U HAVE HAD IN THE PAST.
UH, BUT I'M SURE IT'LL BE EXCITING NONETHELESS.
WE HAVE, UH, SUNSET SPLASH PARK.
THIS IS THE LAST WEEK FOR THE SPLASH PAD.
UH, IT CLOSES OCTOBER, UH, FIRST, UH, ADULT VOLLEYBALL IS CANCELED DUE TO LACK OF INTEREST.
AND WHAT'S REALLY EXCITING HERE ALSO IS FOR THOSE THAT DIDN'T PARTICIPATE IN A WAG FEST AT POSSE GROUND, WE HAD APPROXIMATELY
[00:05:01]
310 ATTENDEES.SO THAT WAS REALLY WELL ATTENDED.
I WAS THERE AS WELL AS SOME OF US OTHERS FROM THE COUNCIL.
WELL, I JUST WANTED TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT, UH, THE CHILI COOK OFFICE THIS SUNDAY, OCTOBER 2ND, AND THE CITY OF SEDONA IS ONE OF THE COMPETITORS IN THE CHILI COOKOFF, BUT THIS YEAR IT'S GOING, HASN'T BEEN HELD FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS BECAUSE OF COVID, BUT, AND THIS YEAR IT WILL BE AT THE, UH, SEDONA PERFORMING ART CENTER, NOT TO LOCK PAC.
RIGHT? THAT'S, SO IT'S IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO KNOW THAT AND, UH, COME AND TASTE THE CHILI FROM CITY OF SEDONA.
THE CHILI I MAKE THAT I ENTER IS VEGAN, BUT IT'S REALLY GOOD.
IT'S, IT'S A, A AWARD WINNING
IT'S, AND ALSO, UH, BE A NUMBER OF THE FIRE DEPARTMENT IS PARTICIPATING AND A NUMBER OF OTHER COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS AS WELL AS SOME OF THE RESTAURANTS.
SO I THINK THERE'S SEVEN DIFFERENT STATIONS, SO IT'LL BE A FUN EVENT AND HAVE WONDERFUL SILENT AUCTIONS.
IT'LL BE IN THE AFTERNOON ON SUNDAY, 12 TO THREE 30.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING? ALL RIGHT.
CAN I JUST ASK HOLLY A QUESTION? SURE.
DOES IT BENEFIT ANYBODY? IT DOES.
YOU, IT BENEFITS A VARIETY
DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS, JOE? NO, WE DO NOT.
SO THEN AFTER THAT, PROCLAMATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS.
[8.a. AB 2866 Discussion/possible action regarding an Ordinance to remove part C of Chapter 15.15.020 -a prior amendment to the 2017 National Electrical Code.]
TO REGULAR BUSINESS ITEM EIGHT, A AB 28 66 DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE TO REMOVE PART C OF CHAPTER 15 POINT 15.020, A PRIOR AMENDMENT TO THE 2017 NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE.WHO IS PRESENTING ON THIS? HI, ANNE.
GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR AND COUNSELORS.
UM, THIS ITEM THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS AN ORDINANCE TO REMOVE PART C OF CHAPTER 15 POINT 15.020.
UM, AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 15 OF THE CITY CODE, UM, THROUGH THIS AMENDMENT WHERE WE RESTRICTED THE USE OF ROMAX IN MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS, UM, WHICH THE NAC DOES NOT RESTRICT.
UM, IT'S COME TO OUR ATTENTION THROUGH A COUPLE OF DEVELOPERS NOW THAT THIS ADDS COST TO DEVELOPMENT.
UM, I ASKED THEM TO PROVIDE ME SOME ESTIMATES, AND IT CAME OUT TO BE ABOUT EIGHT, EIGHT TO 10,000 MORE PER UNIT IN A MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT.
SO SEEING THIS AS AN IMPEDIMENT TO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE'RE SO DESPERATELY TRYING TO CREATE, UM, WE FELT THAT THIS AMENDMENT SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED.
VICE MAYOR, SHANNON, STEVE, WHOEVER.
UH, WHAT WAS THE REASON THAT, UH, THE ORIGINAL CODE CALLED FOR BX VERSUS ROMAX? WOULD THAT BE THE PAC RAT ISSUE THAT WE HAVE BECOME STEVE, HERE COMES THE EXPERT.
UM, MATT MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, ESTEEM COUNSELORS.
UM, YES, THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS IN OUR CODES FOR YEARS AND WAS ROLLED OVER.
AND THEN WHEN WE ADAPTED THE 2018 CODES, UM, WE SAW, UH, A BIT OF CONFUSION IN THE WAY IT WAS WRITTEN IN THAT, UM, ROMAX, WHICH IS CALLED NM CABLE IN THE CODES, UH, COULD BE USED WHEEL OUT.
ITS USE ONLY IN THE RESIDENTIAL SECTIONS OF A MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURE.
AND ALL THE PUBLIC AREAS COULD NOT USE THE NM CABLE.
SO NOW WE HAVE A BUILDING WITH ONE SET OF IN, UH, ELECTRICAL INSTALLATION METHODS AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITH ANOTHER.
ALSO, NM CABLE IS RESTRICTED IN SOME AREAS OF COMMERCIAL USE.
IT'S ALSO RESTRICTED IN AREAS OF MULTI-FAMILY BASED UPON THE CONSTRUCTION TYPE OF THE BUILDING.
SO WITH ALL THAT SAID, WE KIND OF, AT THAT POINT, WE WERE ADOPTING
[00:10:01]
THE EIGHTEENS, SAID, WELL, LET'S GET RID OF SOME OF THIS CONFUSION.JUST SAY YOU CAN'T USE IT AT ALL.
SO IT'S NOT THAT IT'S, IF INSTALLED PROPERLY, IT IS AN APPROVED USE, IT'S A SAFE USE.
SO SEEING THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S A MUCH BETTER ISSUE TO, UH, REMOVE THIS AMENDMENT FROM OUR CURRENT AMENDMENTS IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE COSTS OF HOUSING TO BE DROPPED.
UM, I HAVE NO, NO ISSUES WITH, WITH THIS, UH, PRESENTATION EXACTLY WHAT I WANT, WHAT I EXPECTED TO HEAR.
ANY QUESTIONS, TOM? THANK YOU, MA'AM.
MAYOR AND I DON'T ANYTHING ABOUT ELECTRICITY OTHER THAN YOU DON'T WANNA PLAY WITH AT W AND WATER? UM, BUT I, I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT SAFETY.
IT, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT TO CONDUIT OR NOT TO CONDUIT IS KIND OF THE, THE CHOICE HERE IN ROMAX IS NOT IN A CONDUIT.
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
UM, IT CAN BE PLACED IN THE CONDUIT, BUT ROMAX AS A SYSTEM HAS BEEN TRIED AND TESTED THROUGHOUT THE YEARS.
AND, UM, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT, UH, IT'S BEEN VETTED FOR DECADES AND DECADES AND DECADES.
AND THE CODES, WHEN I SAY THE CODES, IN THIS CASE, IT'S THE NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CODE, UM, WORLDWIDE CODE.
UM, SO IT HAS ITS LIMITATIONS FOR CERTAIN REASONS, BUT IT HAS BEEN APPROVED AND IS APPROVED TO BE USED IN THIS SITUATION WHEN INSTALLED PROPERLY.
IT IS A SAFE SYSTEM, GROUNDING WISE, UM, PHYSICAL PROTECTION WISE, THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS ON SETTING IT BACK FROM THE FACE OF A STUD, SO THE SCREWS AND, AND NAILS CAN'T, UH, GET INTO IT AND, AND CAUSE ISSUES.
UM, AND THAT'S OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE THAT IT, IT IS INSTALLED PROPERLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE AND MADE SAFE.
IT'S, IT'S A SYSTEM THAT'S BEEN USED FOR, LIKE I SAID, FOR DECADES IN THIS SITUATION.
MY, MY CONCERN WAS THE CONDUIT NORMALLY WOULD DEFLECT NAILS, IT WOULD COME AFTER IT AND, AND POTENTIALLY PUNCTURE THE LINE.
AND NOW YOU'RE SAYING THE PLACEMENT WILL STILL PROTECT IT EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT IN CONDUIT? CORRECT.
THERE ARE, UH, WHETHER IT'S THAT, WHETHER IT'S NAIL GUARDS WITHIN, UH, THE STUDS THEMSELVES, THERE ARE A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS WITHIN THE NEC AND WITHIN THE IRC IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, BECAUSE IT'S USED EXTENSIVELY THERE AS WELL, UM, TO PROTECT THAT, THAT CONCERN.
AND, AND, AND YET WE'RE NOT GOING, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL TO GET AWAY FROM CONDUIT, IS THAT CORRECT? SO COMMERCIAL IS PERMITTED TO USE AN M CABLE IN CERTAIN INSTALLATIONS.
YOU CANNOT HAVE IT IN ABOVE CEILING INSTALLATION.
SO IT IS RESTRICTED IN A LOT OF AREAS, BUT IN OTHER AREAS IT IS AN APPROVED METHOD AND WE WILL GO INSPECT THAT INSTALLATION TO MAKE SURE IT'S SAFE.
MAYOR, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? SO, GO AHEAD.
UM, SHANNON, I SAW IN THE PRESENTATION THAT THIS IS ESTIMATED TO REMOVE EIGHT TO $10,000 PER UNIT, NOT PER, NOT PER DEVELOPMENT, BUT PER UNIT IN A DEVELOPMENT.
SO IS JUST WANNA DOUBLE CHECK ON THAT MATH.
SO WE'RE SAYING THAT IF THERE WAS A 50 UNIT OF PROPOSAL FOR 50 UNITS OF HOUSING, THIS COULD REMOVE HALF A MILLION DOLLARS OF COST TO ENABLE THE DEVELOPER TO MOVE FORWARD.
IS THAT CORRECT? I SUSPECT AT 50 UNITS THERE MIGHT BE SOME ECONOMIES OF SCALE, BUT THE PROJECT THAT I WAS LOOKING AT WAS A 12 UNIT BUILDING FOR $120,000 MORE TO RUN THE CABLE.
I JUST WANTED DOUBLE CHECK THE NUMBERS.
CLARIFICATION ON COUNSELOR CAN TELL.
IS IT, THAT WAS 8,000 TO 10,000 OR $8 TO 10,000.
ANYTHING ELSE? I WAS ON A ROLL TONIGHT.
WHAT, WHAT'S THE DOWNSIDE THERE? THERE REALLY? WELL, SO THERE IS A CAMP, THE DOWNSIDE IS, IS NOTHING IF INSTALLED APPROPRIATELY.
UM, AGAIN, THAT'S, IT'S A SYSTEM THAT'S BEEN USED FOR DECADES.
UM, AS, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR NAMES ARE WRONG,
OH, REALLY? TELL ME WHATEVER YOU WANT AS COUNCILOR LAMPKIN.
UM, POINTED OUT, UM, THERE ARE FACTIONS THAT DON'T LIKE N M CABLE.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF MAIN THAT THE CHICAGO, UH, THE COUNTY THAT CHICAGO IS IN COOK COUNTY, AND
[00:15:01]
THE ADJACENT COUNTY DUPAGE, UM, BECAUSE OF THE UNIONS, THEY BASICALLY WROTE IT OUT OF THE CODES BECAUSE THE UNIONS, EXCUSE ME, THEY WANT THE WORK.THEY KNOW THAT YOUR AVERAGE HOMEOWNER CAN'T BUILD BEN CONDUIT.
UM, SO IT'S, IT'S, SO THERE ARE FACTIONS THAT DON'T LIKE IT.
IT IS A SAFE SYSTEM, UM, WHEN INSTALLED PROPERLY.
SO, UM, AND I'M SORRY, I FORGOT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION.
KATHY AND THEN JESSICA, SORRY.
SO I, MY QUESTION IS THAT SINCE THIS IS FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE DIRECTION ONLY TONIGHT, WOULD THAT MEAN THAT THE DIRECTION IS GIVEN TO REMOVE HER FROM THE CODE? IT SHOULD.
I DON'T SEE A, A MOTION IN THE PACKET.
HECK, COUNSELORS AND, AND MAYORS, THAT'S OUR APOLOGIES.
UH, IF YOU READ THE TOP OF IT, JUST THE MOTION, UM, GOT LEFT OFF.
SO IT'D JUST BE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBERED 2022 DASH, UH, WHATEVER.
AND IT'S, YOU COULD LOOK AT, IT'D BE THE SAME LANGUAGE AS FOR THE FOLLOWING AGENDA ITEM HAS, UH, THE CORRECT MOTION LANGUAGE, OR AT LEAST THE START OF A MOTION THAT COUNCIL COULD LOOK AT.
SO PERHAPS YOU'D READ THE MOTION AND THEN SOMEONE WILL SAY, SO MOVED.
WELL, LET ME, UM, DO A FIRST READING THEN.
MADAM MAYOR, CAN I JUST ASK A QUESTION? I KNOW LUKE IS HERE AND, OH, I'M SORRY.
I HA I DO HAVE A CARD FROM LUKE.
SO LUKE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AND HE'S KIND OF HIDING BACK THERE.
HE BROUGHT MADAM MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, LUKE STON, UH, LOCAL RESIDENTS.
UM, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK TONIGHT.
I'M PRIVILEGED TO BE HERE ON, ON THIS EVENT WHEN SO MANY TIMES I'M HERE ON A CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE, SO I'M GLAD TO DO THAT.
UM, TO TELL YOU HERE, HERE'S ROMAX AND THESE ARE IN EVERYBODY'S HOUSES.
EVERY, EVERY OTHER MULTI-FAMILY LIVES WITH THIS.
AND AS YOU KNOW, AND I KNOW MANY OF YOU ARE ON DIFFERENT HOUSING COUNCILS, I'M ON A FEW, WE, UM, AFFORDABLE HOUSING'S A PASSION, A PASSION OF MINE, AS WELL AS EVERYBODY HERE ON THIS COUNCIL.
THIS CAN HAVE A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE TO PRICING.
YOU KNOW, EVERY TIME WE ADD ANOTHER REGULATION, IT JUST ADDS A LEVEL OF ENTRY FOR THEM, YOU KNOW, SO THIS, THIS IS A GREAT THING TO DO.
UM, I LIKE WHAT SHANNON'S POINTED OUT IN HER, UM, LAYOUT OF THIS, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, NATIONALLY AND EVEN ARIZONA AND A LOT OF STATES ARE WORKING ON ZONING AND TRYING TO DO SOMETHING FOR AFFORDABILITY, THIS REALLY GOES A LONG WAY AND SHOWING THAT SEDONA IS PROACTIVE IN TAKING STEPS TO ADDRESS AFFORDABILITY.
UM, AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND COMING IN.
AND ANY QUESTIONS FOR LUKE? I HAVE A QUESTION, NOT FOR LUKE.
SO LAST NIGHT IN THESE CHAMBERS, THERE WAS THE, UM, THE STATE LEGISLATIVE HOUSING COMMITTEE HELD HEARINGS, UM, ASKING PEOPLE ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FOR INPUT ON HOUSING SOLUTIONS AND THE CHALLENGES.
AND ONE OF THE UNDERCURRENT THAT I SENSED COMING FROM SOME ON THE DAIS AT THAT POINT WAS THAT THEY FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW, MUNICIPALITIES HAVE BEEN VERY RESTRICTIVE, AND THAT'S PUT UP SOME ROADBLOCKS TO BUILDING HOUSING.
SO MY QUESTION FOR SHANNON IS, IF THIS IS ADOPTED TONIGHT, CAN WE PROACTIVELY COMMUNICATE THIS TO THAT COMMITTEE? THAT THIS IS YET ANOTHER STEP THAT SEDONA HAS TAKEN TO TRY TO MAKE ADDRESSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WORKFORCE HOUSING, SOMETHING THAT CAN BE PENCILED OUT IN OUR COMMUNITY.
I'D LIKE TO SEE THIS COMMUNICATED.
AND I ACTUALLY DID INCLUDE THAT IN MY PRESENTATION LAST NIGHT, THAT IT WAS ONE OF, I THINK ABOUT FIVE DIFFERENT CODE CHANGES THAT WE'VE LOOKED AT FOR THAT REASON.
JUST TO ADD, UM, WE WILL BE SENDING A CORRESPONDENCE TO THE FULL COMMITTEE, UM, JUST ON SOME, SOME NUMBERS THAT THEY ASKED FOR YESTERDAY.
WE'LL MAKE SURE THIS IS INCLUDED AGAIN.
AND JUST, UH, A THANK YOU FOR THEM COMING TO THE CITY FOR THEIR HEARING YESTERDAY.
DO YOU HAVE THE MOTION READY? I DO.
MADAME, UM, I'LL DO THE FIRST READING FIRST.
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022 DASH 7 7 7.
[00:20:01]
AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEDONA, ARIZONA, ADOPTING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE SEDONA CITY CODE CHAPTER 15 POINT 15 ELECTRICAL CODE, PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ANY COM, ANY ORDINANCE OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES OR CODE PROVISIONS IN CONFLICT HERE WITH.AND THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE SHOULD BE, UH, I MOVED TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022 DASH SEVEN.
REPEALING SEDONA CITY CODE SUBSECTION 15, POINT 15.020 C.
MOVED BY COUNSELOR CANEL A SECOND BY COUNSELOR.
[8.b. AB 2860 Discussion/possible action regarding an Ordinance revising the Sedona City Code, Chapter 3.20.080, to add language related to collection charges.]
ALL RIGHT.THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM EIGHT B, WHICH IS AB 28 60.
DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING AN ORDINANCE REVISING THE SEDONA CITY CODE CHAPTER 3.2 0.080 TO ADD LANGUAGE RELATED TO COLLECTION CHARGES.
SHERRY, GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNSEL.
UM, I WANT TO INTRODUCE YOU TO BERNADETTE KRISHNA.
UM, SHE IS OUR NEW REVENUE SUPERVISOR.
I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'VE MET HER YET.
AND SO SHE'S HELPED WORK ON THIS.
UM, WE ARE SIMPLY ASKING FOR A CLARIFICATION IN THE CODE REGARDING, UM, WHEN ACCOUNT IS DELINQUENT AND WHAT FEES CAN BE ADDED TO THAT BALANCE.
THE COLLECTION AGENCY WAS ASKING ABOUT THIS RECENTLY AND WANTED TO KNOW THAT WE HAD SOMETHING THAT REFERRED TO THAT THEY COULD ADD THEIR FEE TO THE AMOUNT THAT WAS OWED TO BE COLLECTED.
AND, UM, SO IT WAS, UM, VERY VAGUE IN THE CODE.
AND SPEAKING WITH KURT, HE ALSO AGREED THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD TO CLARIFY AND ADD MORE CLARIFICATION, UM, RELATED TO, UM, THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF, UM, UH, COSTS THAT CAN BE, UM, HAVE THESE ADDITIONAL FEES LIKE CITATIONS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO, UM, SO THIS IS REALLY JUST KIND OF HOUSEKEEPING ITEM TO JUST DO SOME CLEANUP, UM, IN THE LANGUAGE AND MAKE IT MORE CLEAR.
KATHY, IF PAST TONIGHT, WHEN WOULD THIS BECOME EFFECTIVE? 30 DAYS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THIS, IS THERE A MOTION? I CAN MAKE A MOTION IF YOU LIKE.
WE, I MOVE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 20 22 8.
SECOND MOVE BY COUNSELOR CANAL.
ORDINANCE NUMBER 2022 DASH EIGHT.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SEDONA, ARIZONA ADOPTING AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CODE CHAPTER 3.20.
COLLECTION OF DELINQUENT AMOUNTS OWED TO THE CITY BY AMENDING SECTION 3.2 0.080, PROVIDING FOR SAVINGS CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES.
OKAY, SO WE HAD THE MOTION, I THINK.
[8.c. AB 2871 Discussion/possible direction regarding amending the Sedona City Code Chapter 9.10 (Offenses Against Public Peace), Section 9.10.010 (Camping and sleeping in certain places).]
ITEM EIGHT C.DISCUSSION POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING AMENDING THE SEDONA CITY CODE CHAPTER 9.10.
OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC PEACE SECTION 9.10 0.010.
CAMPING IN, SLEEPING IN CERTAIN PLACES.
CUR, ARE YOU DOING THIS? I AM MAD.
WHAT DO YOU HAVE FOR ME? OH, PRESENT.
DO YOU HAVE A CARD FROM LORI THAT SHE'S GONNA SPEAK? OKAY.
MAD MAYOR, MR. WEIS, MAYOR AND COUNSELORS, UH, THIS AGENDA ITEM IS BROUGHT TO ADDRESS, UH, AN INCREASING NUMBER OF INCIDENTS OF CAMPING WITHIN THE CITY.
UH, THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A FIRST DISCUSSION FOR COUNCIL, UH, TO, TO WEIGH IN ON, UM, TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC.
AND TO BEGIN, UH, THE DISCUSSION ON POSSIBLY AMENDING THE
[00:25:01]
CITY'S CAMPING ORDINANCE.THE CURRENT CAMPING ORDINANCE HAS BEEN IN PLACE, UH, WITHOUT ANY SUBSTANTIVE CHANGE SINCE 1999 WHEN IT WAS ADOPTED.
UH, IN 2018, THE NINTH CIRCUIT RULED THAT CAMPING ORDINANCES THAT PROHIBIT ALL CAMPING WITHIN A CITY, UH, WHEN THERE'S NO OTHER AVAILABLE LOCATION FOR, UH, HOMELESS PERSONS SLEEP, UH, ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
UH, IN, IN REGARDS TO THAT, MANY CITIES STOPPED ENFORCING THEIR CAMPING ON PUBLIC PLACES, UM, AND SOME DECIDED TO ONLY ENFORCE IT IF THEY HAD AVAILABLE HOUSING.
UM, IN RECENT YEARS, THE NUMBER OF HOMELESS, UM, ENCAMPMENTS HAS INCREASED IN LOTS OF CITIES AND CREATED MORE PROBLEMS. SO SOME CITIES ARE, ARE, UH, CHANGING THAT INITIAL, UH, TAKE THAT THEY HAD, UH, AND THEIR INITIAL RESPONSE TO THE, THE MARTIN VERSUS BOISE CASE.
UH, HERE IN THE CITY, WE ARE EXPERIENCING INCREASED NUMBER OF CALLS FOR SERVICES RELATED TO CAMPING IN THE CITY, UH, PER THE DISPATCH DATA SINCE JANUARY OF 2021.
SO IN THE LAST ABOUT 20 MONTHS, UH, THE CITY HAS, UH, POLICE HAVE RESPONDED TO 237, UM, INCIDENTS OF CAMPING IN THE CITY.
UH, THOSE ARE PRIMARILY, UH, VEHICULAR CAMPING, UH, NOT, UH, NECESSARILY A PERSON SLEEPING OR IN JUST OUT IN THE OPEN OR INTENSE.
UH, I JUST FOUND OUT PRIOR TO THIS MEETING, THERE WAS A POINT IN TIME COUNT TAKEN OF HOMELESSNESS IN A VARIETY OF COUNTIES.
AND IT SHOWED THAT THERE WAS ONE, UH, PERSON EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, CHRONIC EXPER, CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS, I GUESS, IN COCONINO COUNTY AND NINE IN YAVAPAI COUNTY.
UM, AND, AND SO THOSE ARE THE, THE NUMBERS THAT AS OF JULY 19TH, THE POINT IN TIME COUNT SHOWED, THERE'S A LOT OF DATA AND DISCUSSION THAT COULD BE HAD ABOUT POINT IN TIME COUNTS AND HOW THEY TEND TO UNDERCOUNT, BUT THAT'S THE, THE NUMBERS WHERE WE HAVE.
AND SO, AGAIN, THE 237 IS PRIMARILY MORE OF A, NOT A, UH, PERSON'S, UH, LIVING WITHIN SEDONA, EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, BUT OFTEN PEOPLE TRAVELING THROUGH, UH, COMING TO STAY FOR A LITTLE WHILE.
AND THEY'RE OFTEN IN VEHICLES THAT ARE CONTACTED BY, BY PD.
SO, UM, BASED ON THE EXPERIENCES IN SEDONA AND, AND OTHER CITIES, UM, STAFF FINDS THE FOLLOWING.
I'LL JUST SUMMARIZE THESE BRIEFLY.
UM, AND THIS IS SOME OF THE FINDINGS THAT COUNCIL COULD EVENTUALLY AGREE WITH OR FIND, FIND OTHERWISE.
UM, BUT A, IT TALKS ABOUT, UH, UH, CAMP FACILITIES CREATE TRASH AND HUMAN EXPERIMENT, UH, THAT CAN END UP IN OAK CREEK AND OTHER WATERWAY, UH, B, THAT IN AND CAMPING CAN, UH, HURT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF RESIDENTS BY DAMAGING PUBLIC PROPERTY, INCREASING THE RISK OF FIRE AND SANITARY CONDITIONS, AND RESTRICTING THE EMERGENCY SERVICES ACCESS.
C UH, TALKS ABOUT CAMPING ON SIDEWALKS AND OTHER RIGHTS AWAY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE SHARED USE PATH, TRAILS, ROADWAYS, BLOCKS THE RIGHT OF WAY, UH, AND CAN ALSO IMPEDE EMERGENCY SERVICE ACCESSES ACCESS AND CAN CAUSE TRIPS, FALLS AND CRASHES.
UH, CAMPING DE CAMPING IN ON CRITICAL, UH, INFRASTRUCTURE IS A PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY RISK, UH, BECAUSE IT INTERFERES WITH THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE FACILITIES AND CAN LEAD TO DEATH FROM FLOODS AND WATER COURSES AND INCREASED WATER AND INCREASED FLOODING RISKS, UH, FROM THE DEBRIS THAT GETS WASHED DOWN FROM ENCAMPMENTS, UH, CLOGGING CULVERTS AND OTHER WATERWAYS.
UH, E CAMPING WITHIN 10 FEET OF MAILBOXES, DRIVEWAYS, ROADWAYS, AND INTERFERES WITH THE PUBLIC'S RIGHTS TO TRAVEL, CREATES DRIVERS, DISTRACTIONS AND IMPAIRS EMERGENCY ACCESS AND RESPONSE.
UH, F CAMPING NEAR USE, SERVING FACILITIES IMPAIRS ACCESS TO THE FACILITIES, UH, BY CHILDREN.
GE PUBLIC PROPERTY IS GENERALLY, UM, OPEN TO USE BY ALL OF THE PUBLIC AND NOT THE EXCLUSIVE DOMAIN OF A SINGLE PERSON OR GROUPS OF PERSONS.
SO, IN RESPONSE TO SOME OF THOSE FINDINGS, UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, UH, BEFORE COUNCIL, UH, ARE IN YOUR COUNCIL PACKET.
AND I'LL GO THROUGH THEM BRIEFLY, AND I'M WELCOME TO, UH, OPEN TO TAKING QUESTIONS AT ANY TIME, UH, FROM COUNCIL, UM, AND SUGGESTIONS AND DISCUSSION.
UM, UM, IT MAY, I CAN RUN THROUGH IT QUICKLY, AND THEN IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO DO THAT AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO COUNCIL.
UM, BUT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS BEGIN THE MAJOR AMENDMENTS THAT DOES PRESERVE IN THE ORDINANCE, THE PROHIBITION ON CAMPING AND PUBLIC, ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND, UH, UH, THE PROHIBITION ON VEHICULAR CAMPING.
UH, BUT IT RELAXES THE PROHIBITION ON ALL CAMPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTIONS OF THESE LOCATIONS.
SO NO PERSON SHALL OBSTRUCT PUBLIC PROPERTY, UH, AND C ONE BY CAMPING, SITTING LINE, UM, STORE, AND USING MAINTAINING, UM, IN, IN, IN THE RIGHT OF WAY, UH, CAMP OR CAMP, UH, FACILITIES, OR IN A MANNER THAT IMPEDES, UH, ADA ACCESS SO THAT I UNCOVERS THE, THE, UH, SIDEWALKS AND ROADS, UH, SHARED
[00:30:01]
USE PATHS, TRAILS, UM, AND THAT GENERAL AREA.THERE'D BE NO, UH, CAMPING WOULD BE ALLOWED IN THOSE AREAS.
UH, C2 WOULD PROHIBIT, UH, CAMPING WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE FIVE LISTED LOCATIONS THERE, FIRE HARAN OR OTHER FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION MAILBOXES, UH, THE BACK OF THE CURB OF THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT OF A, SO THE BACK OF THE CURB OR THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT, WE DON'T HAVE ALWAYS HAVE A CURB ALONG OUR ROADWAYS.
SO IT'D BE MEASURED FROM THE BACK OF THE CURB OR THE EDGE OF THE PAVEMENT OF A STREET OR HIGHWAY.
UM, AN OPERATIONAL UTILIZABLE LOADING DOCK BUILDING ENTRANCE OR EXIT.
AND AS SUGGESTED BY ONE COMMENT FROM A RESIDENT, UM, THEY FEEL LIKE DUMPSTERS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE THERE IN, IN THAT SECTION.
UH, AND THEN, UH, TWO E, UH, DRIVEWAY INTERSECTION OR WITHIN THE TRAFFIC VISIBILITY.
SO 10 FEET OF A DRIVEWAY INTERSECTION OR WITHIN THE TRAFFIC VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
THE TRAFFIC VISIBILITY TRIANGLE'S ALREADY IN CITY CODE.
UM, AND IT PREVENTS THE OP OBJECTS GREATER THAN FOUR FEET, UM, UH, FOUR FEET TALL OF, OF IMPEDING THE VISIBILITY ON, ON DRIVEWAYS AND INTERSECTIONS.
AND THAT'S SO THAT DRIVERS EN ENTERING, UM, OR EXITING A DRIVEWAY.
AND OTHER DRIVERS CAN SEE VEHICLES AND PEDESTRIANS AND, AND, UM, BICYCLES CLEARLY.
AND SO THIS WOULD BE, UH, WITHIN 10 FEET OF EITHER OF THOSE OR IF GREATER THAN OUTSIDE THE TRAFFIC VISIBILITY TRIANGLE.
UH, AND SO THERE'S SOME STANDARDS IN, UH, THE CITY CODE AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, UH, 6.5 POINT J AND THEN THREE BY CAMPING, SITTING OR LINE OR SLEEPING, UH, WITHIN 500 FEET OF YOUTH SERVING FACILITIES, UH, WHICH WOULD BE DEFINED AS, UM, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS, DAYCARES, PARKS, UM, AND CHURCHES.
AND WE GO THROUGH THE, THE DEFINITIONS JUST A SECOND, OR WITHIN 500 FEET OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH WOULD BE POLICE STATIONS, FIRE STATIONS, AND PUBLIC UTILITY, UM, AND WATER COURSES.
SO, UH, WATER COURSES ARE DEFINED IN CITY CODE AND ARE GENERALLY OUTLINED IN THE CITY'S, UH, GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM, THE GIS MAP, SO THAT THEY'RE FAIRLY WELL DOCUMENTED, UH, WHERE FLOOD HAZARDS CAN OCCUR.
UM, AND WHERE IT'D BE DANGEROUS FOR ANYONE TO, UH, TO CAMP IN, UH, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT, UH, IN, IN SUBSECTION E WOULD PROHIBIT ANYONE FROM OUTSIDE OF THESE OTHER PROHIBITIONS, ANYONE FROM OCCUPYING ANY PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR MORE THAN 25 HOURS OR 24 HOURS CONSECUTIVELY, UH, BY CAMPING OR SITTING LINE OR SLEEPING, UM, AND THEREBY EXCLUDING OTHER PUBLIC FROM THE USE OF THAT PUBLIC PROPERTY.
AND THEN SUBSECTION M WOULD ALLOW FOR AN ABATEMENT AND STORAGE OF PERSONAL, UH, PROPERTY PROCESS, UH, SO THAT IF, UH, IT'S OFTEN, UH, PD HAS A DIFFICULT TIME DETERMINING WHETHER THE PROPERTY'S BEEN ABANDONED, UM, OR WHETHER SOMEONE'S STILL USING IT.
UM, BUT THIS WOULD ALLOW, UH, WITH 24 HOUR WRITTEN NOTICE, UH, TO BE ABLE TO REMOVE THE PROPERTY AND THEN STORE IT FOR 24 HOURS OR UP TO SORT FOR 90, 90 DAYS, UH, IN ORDER FOR THE PERSON TO COME IN AND CLAIM THEIR PROPERTY.
AND THEN HERE ARE THE DEFINITIONS TO THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.
UM, SO, UH, LET'S THE USE SYRIAN FACILITIES, UH, I FORGOT CHURCHES, I BELIEVE.
SO IT MEANS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOLS.
LIBRARIES, CHILDCARE, CHILDCARE, FACILITIES, PARKS, OR CHURCHES.
UM, AND SO THOSE ARE THE DEFINITIONS THAT WOULD BE ADDED TO, UM, THE ORDINANCE IF ADOPTED.
AND SO THAT'S THE, THE PROPOSED CHANGES.
UM, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT COUNCIL HAS.
UM, KURT, THE, UH, RESTRICTION OF, UH, UH, CHURCHES PARTICULARLY STUCK OUT TO ME BECAUSE I, I, I KNOW I'VE HEARD OF SITUATIONS WHERE A CHURCH HAS A, A LARGE RECREATION AREA OR WHATEVER, AND THEY MIGHT WANT TO OPEN IT UP TO HOMELESS, UH, UH, PEOPLE.
IS WOULD THIS BE A RESTRICTION ON CHURCHES EVEN IF THEY WANTED TO DO IT ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY? SO THE, THE CODE WOULD CURRENTLY HAS AND WOULD PRESERVE A, UM, A PROHIBITION ON, UH, CAMPING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE CHURCHES, UM, CHURCHES ARE PRIVATE PROPERTY.
UH, SO THIS WOULD JUST IN ADDITION TO THAT, BY INCLUDING IN THE YOUTH SERVING FACILITIES THAT WOULD EXTEND IT, THE NO CAMPING OR CAMPING WITHIN 500 FEET OF, OF CHURCHES, IT WOULD NOT PREVENT A A DAY USE TYPE SCENARIO OR PROVIDING, UH, FOOD OR OTHER, UH, SERVICES TO HOMELESS.
HOMELESS PEOPLE WOULD JUST PREVENT CAMPING WITHIN 500 FEET OF THE, OF THE CHURCH.
SO THE CHURCH STILL HAS, UM, THE RIGHT TO OPEN UP THEIR, THEIR BUILDING TO HOMELESS FOR OVERNIGHT OR, OR WHATEVER, OR SET UP SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF THEY WANT TO.
SO THE, THE CURRENT ORDINANCE,
[00:35:01]
UM, PROHIBITS CAMPING IN ALL, IN ALL THE CITY, UM, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.AND THAT INCLUDES EVEN A, A PRIVATE RESIDENCE OR A PRIVATE CHURCH.
UM, THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT DOES REMOVE THE PENALTY AGAINST THE OWNER, UH, THAT WAS THERE IN THE PAST.
AND SO THE PENALTY WOULD ONLY AGAINST THE PERSON, UH, NOW SLEEPING IN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, UM, OR, OR PUBLIC LOCATION.
UM, SO, SO POTENTIALLY, UM, POTENTIALLY THAT COULD BE ALLOWED.
SO IF, IF YOU'VE COUNCIL WANTED THAT ALLOWED, THEN IT COULD BE AN EXCEPTION, UM, TO THE PRIVATE PROPERTY PROHIBITION.
BUT, UH, BUT OTHERWISE THAT PROHIBITION WAS GONNA REMAIN IN PLACE.
UH, THE, THE OTHER EXCEPTION LISTED IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, AND THAT WAS GONNA REMAIN IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WOULD BE TO, IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT, UM, THE TYPICAL USE OF A, OF A RESIDENTIAL, UM, STRUCTURE.
SO, UH, THE OCCASIONAL CAMPING, LIKE BACKYARD CAMPING BY YOUR CHILDREN, OR, YOU KNOW, THEIR COUSINS COME OVER AND OR FRIENDS AND THEY SLEEP OVERNIGHT, THAT WAS NEVER PROHIBITED IN THE CURRENT ORDINANCE AND WOULDN'T BE GOING FORWARD.
BUT AS FAR AS A CHURCH SETTING UP A SHELTER FOR HOMELESS AND THEIR, AND THEIR BUILDING THAT'S CURRENTLY PROHIBITED, IT WOULD STILL BE PROHIBITED BY THE ORDINANCE.
AND I, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU KNOW, BUT I, JUST AS A QUESTION, I WOULD SUPPOSE THAT IS BECAUSE IT COULD GET TO BE A PRETTY BIG OPERATION AND CHURCHES ARE ALLOWED TO BE IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND SO THAT IMPACTS THE WHOLE RESIDENTIAL AREA.
PRI THE CHURCHES ARE PRIMARILY IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
THEY'RE OFTEN OPERATING UNDER A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
UM, THAT WOULDN'T ALLOW THAT TYPE OF USE ANYWAY.
ANYBODY ELSE? KATHY? THANK YOU, MAYOR.
SO WHEN I READ THROUGH THIS, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
UM, SECTION E TALKS ABOUT A 24 HOUR LIMIT AND MOVING PEOPLE ALONG WITH A 24 HOURS, AND THAT SEEMS LIKE A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, AND THAT THAT MAY NOT BE THE SAME PERIOD OF TIME IN OTHER MUNICIPALITIES.
CAN CAN YOU SPEAK TO WHY 24 HOURS IS PROPOSED HERE AND WHAT YOU FEEL YOU, WHY THAT'S APPROPRIATE? BECAUSE I QUESTIONED THAT, UH, THE 24 HOURS WAS PROPOSED BECAUSE, UH, A COUPLE REASONS.
ONE, THERE WAS ALREADY A, UM, UH, PART OF THE ORDINANCE PROHIBITED, SAID THAT ANY INTENT TO CAMP OR ANY CAMPING FOR MORE THAN 25 HOURS WAS, WAS PRAC EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE.
UH, AND SO THIS 24 HOURS WAS ONE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT.
AND THEN TWO, BECAUSE STAFF FELT THAT CAMPING IN ONE LOCATION FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S ON, ON GRASS OR FLOWER BEDS OR, UH, THEIR STRAWBERRY DAMAGES, THAT IF IT'S LONGER THAN THE 24 HOUR PERIOD.
UH, BUT TO YOUR POINT, OTHER, UM, UH, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER CITIES THAT HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME ORDINANCE, BUT THERE ARE SIMILAR ORDINANCES ABOUT VEHICULAR CAMPING THAT ALLOWS THEM TO STAY FOR MAYBE 72 HOURS IN A PERIOD BEFORE THEY HAVE TO MOVE ALONG, UH, SOME DISTANCE.
I BELIEVE SAN DIEGO HAS AN ORDINANCE LIKE THAT, UM, AND OTHER CITIES HAVE HAVE VARYING TIMEFRAMES.
SO YOU'D BE OPEN TO DIRECTION FROM THIS TO CHANGING THAT IF THIS MOVES FORWARD? YES.
AND, UM, THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS, IS THE LANGUAGE OF THIS IS BROAD.
THERE ARE, THERE ARE, WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN SEDONA THAT COME HERE FOR ALL DIFFERENT REASONS.
THEY HAVE ALL DIFFERENT SORTS OF RESOURCES.
SOME ACTUALLY HAVE RESOURCES EITHER IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE OR AVAILABLE IN A QUICK WAY TO THEM, ATM CARDS OR WHATEVER, OR FAMILY RESOURCE, WHATEVER IT IS.
HOW DOES THIS ORDINANCE OR THE PROPOSED DRAFT MAKE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE ANY RESOURCES AND THOSE WHO WOULD HAVE RESOURCES FOR MAYBE A HOTEL OR GETTING GAS TO MOVE ON TO SOMEPLACE ELSE IN THEIR CAR? I, I DON'T SEE THAT SPELLED OUT IN HERE.
IT, IT DOESN'T MAKE THAT DISTINCTION.
THE, THE, THE ORDINANCE ITSELF DOESN'T NECESSARILY ADDRESS PERSON'S EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS VERSUS OTHERS WHO ARE JUST CHOOSING TO CAMP OUT.
IT CURRENTLY PROHIBITS CAMPING EVERYWHERE IN THE CITY.
AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WOULD PROHIBIT CAMPING IN THESE LOCATIONS IN THE CITY.
WOULD WE BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THAT IN THIS AND MAKE SOME DISTINCTION BETWEEN PEOPLE WHO TRULY ARE DESTITUTE AND PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT? I MEAN, IT'S AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION FOR ME, UM, THAT IF SOMEBODY DOES HAVE THE RESOURCES, THAT'S ONE SITUATION.
AND IF SOMEBODY HAS NO RESOURCES, THAT'S A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION.
AND CAN I PIGGY BACK ON THAT FOR A MINUTE? AND DID THE BOISE CASE DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THOSE SITUATIONS? I BELIEVE THEY IDENTIFIED ALL THE PLAINTIFFS AS BEING HOMELESS, UM, WITHOUT RESOURCES, YOU, I MEAN, HOMELESS, IT DID NOT SPELL GO INTO THEIR FINANCES.
UM, AND SO I'M, THIS ORDINANCE DOES NOT, YOU KNOW, APPLY ANY MEANS TEST,
[00:40:01]
UH, TO PERSONS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN, UM, YOU KNOW, HOW EXPENSIVE THEIR VEHICLE IS OR WHETHER THEY CAN AFFORD GAS TO MOVE ON OR NOT.IT'S JUST A, A STRAIGHT PROHIBITION ON CAMPING IN THESE CERTAIN AREAS.
UH, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THE STAFF COULD CERTAINLY LOOK INTO.
AND THEN ANOTHER, ANOTHER CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS THE, THE CLASS ONE MISDEMEANOR SEEMS A VERY, IS, AM I READING THAT RIGHT? THAT THAT'S A MORE SEVERE CLASSIFICATION OR, OR CHARGE TO BRING? THERE ARE, WOULD THE OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO US A A CLASS ONE MISDEMEANOR IS THE HIGHEST MISDEMEANOR, UM, LOWER THAN THE SIX LEVELS OF FELONY? UH, ALL CITY ORDINANCES ARE LISTED AS CLASS ONE MISDEMEANORS, ALL CITY ORDINANCES.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY ORDINANCE, UH, THE ONLY LEVEL THAT THE CITY USES FOR ITS ORDINANCES.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S KIND OF STANDARD ACROSS CITIES, BUT THERE'S, THERE'S NOTHING TO PROHIBIT THIS FROM BEING A, A CLASS TWO OR CLASS THREE MISDEMEANOR, OR EVEN A PETTY OFFENSE.
THOSE ARE THE, THE, THE LOWER LEVELS.
SO A CLASS SIX MISDEMEANOR CAN BE PUNISHED BY UP TO SIX MONTHS IN JAIL AND $2,500 FINE.
UM, AND I BELIEVE YOU GET ALL THE DOWN TO, OH, I DON'T EVEN ASK ME WHAT A PETTY OFFENSE IS.
I THINK IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S A LESSER, UH, CERTAINLY A LESSER AMOUNT OF OF TIME.
SO, BUT WE DON'T USE THAT IN ANYWHERE ELSE.
I MEAN, HOW COMFORTABLE IS OUR CITY ATTORNEY? WOULD YOU BE IN USING A DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATION IN THIS CASE? MY, MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO, TO, TO STICK WITH THE, THE CLASS ONE MISDEMEANOR.
AND THE REASON YOU, YOU LEAVE IT OPEN TO THE HIGHER PENALTIES IS FOR REPEAT OFFENDERS.
UM, THE CITY DOESN'T, AND COUNCIL WOULDN'T AND DOESN'T IN THIS ORDINANCE, UM, NECESSARILY DICTATE THE, THE, THE PUNISHMENT, UM, THAT'S LEFT OPEN TO, BUT THE RANGE TO DICTATES THE RANGE OF PUNISHMENT.
IT, IT DICTATES THE MAXIMUM OF RANGE.
AND SO, UM, SO IF YOU HAD SOMEONE THAT WAS, UH, FLAG, FLAG REALLY VIOLATING THIS ORDINANCE DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY, YOU MAY NEED TO GET INTO A HIGHER PENALTY THAN SOMEONE WHO JUST NEEDS A WARNING.
SO THE CITY, I WILL SAY THAT THE CITY HAS ISSUED VERY, VERY FEW, UH, SINCE 2018, UH, TICKETS, UM, CITATIONS REGARDING THIS ORDINANCE.
AND THEY'VE, UH, BEEN, UH, REGARDING, UH, VEHICULAR CAMPING, UM, AND, AND GENERALLY REPEAT OFFENDERS.
UH, THE PRIMARY OPTION IS TO, AND THE ORDINANCE REQUIRES A WARNING FIRST, UNLESS IT'S ALREADY, UH, UH, BLANKET POSTED AND WELL, WELL POSTED SO THAT THE PERSON COULD SEE THE SIGNS.
UH, AND INSTEAD OF CHANGING THE CLASS WHEN MS. SAMIR AN OPTION, I THINK THAT THAT MAY BE MORE, UH, BENEFICIAL OFFICIAL WOULD BE TO CONTINUE WITH THE REQUIREMENT THAT THERE'D BE A WARNING, UH, REQUIRE THAT THE, UH, IF THERE IS AN INITIAL CITATION, THAT IT'D BE FOR A CIVIL OFFENSE AND THEN ONLY AS A, A THIRD OR, OR I GUESS I A SECOND, BUT ONLY AT A THIRD CONTACT, UM, THAT THAT COULD THEN GO TO A, THE CRIMINAL OFFENSE, THE CLASS ONE MISDEMEANOR.
UH, BUT, BUT AS FAR AS YOUR INITIAL QUESTION, COUNSELOR CANELA, UM, THE, THE CITY PROSECUTE STATE LAWS THAT ARE CLASS TWO MISDEMEANORS, CLASS THREE AND PETTY OFFENSES.
BECAUSE IT DOES SEEM, AND, AND YOU USE THE WORD IN THEIR PUNITIVE, AND IT DOES SEEM PUNITIVE, OVERLY PUNITIVE FOR, AGAIN, IF WE HAVE A MEANS TEST OR IS THERE IS SOMETHING IN HERE AND YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY WHO'S REALLY DESTITUTE, AND YET WE'RE PUTTING THIS, UM, YOU KNOW, HIGHER LEVEL, UM, PUNISHMENT ON THEM, WHICH PUNISHING THEM FOR WHAT? FOR NOT HAVING RESOURCES.
SO, SO THIS IS AN AREA OF CONCERN FOR ME.
UM, ANOTHER AREA OF CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS ABOUT THIS MOVING PEOPLE ALONG.
I'M, I'M NOT, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T HAVE YOUR LEGAL EDUCATION AND BACKGROUND IN THIS, SO I NEED YOU TO HELP ME OUT WITH THIS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT YOU CAN'T JUST GO INTO SOMEBODY'S DOMICILE.
AND THE QUESTION IS, IS IT A DOMICILE OR NOT? YOU KNOW? AND IF THEY'VE SET UP A TENT SOMEWHERE AND THEY'RE LIVING THERE, DOESN'T, DON'T THEY HAVE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS THAT WOULD BE VIOLATED BY JUST COMING IN AND MOVING SOMEBODY ALONG, GOING INTO DISASSEMBLE AND PHYSICALLY MOVE IT ALONG.
I'M JUST, I'M CONCERNED THAT WE ARE SETTING UP SOMETHING THAT COULD POTENTIALLY STEP ON RIGHTS PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE'S RIGHTS.
AND AT THE SAME TIME, I UNDERSTAND WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY GENERALLY, AND IS FINDING THE SWEET SPOT IN THERE, THERE IN LIES A CHALLENGE.
BUT, BUT I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE LACK OF A WARRANT THAT'S NEEDED OR JUST BEING ABLE TO MOVE SOMEBODY ALONG, GIVE IT THE WARNING, AND THEN, I MEAN, EX EX RUN ME THIS THROUGH ME.
NO, DON'T RUN THIS THROUGH ME.
SO, SO, UM, THERE HAVE BEEN SOME COURTS THAT HAVE, HAVE RULED, UH, THAT WARRANTS WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR A SEARCH OR SEIZURE IN INSIDE AN ENCAMPMENT, UM, OR THAT
[00:45:01]
HAVE SIMILAR TO A DOMICILE.UH, BUT THOSE WERE ARE ALWAYS GONNA BE BASED ON A CASE BY CASE SITUATION.
AND IT WOULD, IT WOULD DEPEND ON THE, THE AMOUNT OF TIME THEY WERE THERE.
UM, THIS ORDINANCE AS ENFORCED, UH, NO ONE WOULD, I DON'T BELIEVE ANYONE WOULD BE, UH, ABLE TO ESTABLISH A DOMICILE, UM, IMMEDIATELY OR WITHIN 24 HOURS, 48 OR 72 HOURS.
UM, AND REGARDLESS OF THE, SOME OF THE COURT RULINGS, UM, ALL CITIES HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MOVE, UM, ENCAMPMENTS, UM, FROM ONE LOCATION TO ANOTHER OR, OR MOVE THEM OR CLEAR THEM OUT WHEN THEY GET TO BE A PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY, UH, RATIONALE.
SO EVEN ONES THAT HAVE BEEN THERE FOR A YEAR PLUS, UH, CITIES HAVE GONE IN AND CLEANED OUT, UP ON PROVIDING PROPER NOTICE.
AND THOSE HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED AND, AND COURTS HAVE GENERALLY BEEN ALLOWING OF LATE, UH, HOMELESS ENCAMPMENT, ENCAMPMENT, CLEANUPS.
SO IT'S, IT'S NOT, UM, AND I THINK IT PARTLY HAS TO DO WITH THE, THE, UH, IT'S PUBLIC PROPERTY.
UM, AND NO ONE CAN ADVERSELY POSSESS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
UM, AND SO YOU DON'T GET, UH, UH, AN OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN PUBLIC PROPERTY NO MATTER HOW LONG YOU REMAIN THERE.
AND THEN I'LL WRAP UP MY QUESTIONS WITH THIS ONE, PLEASE.
WE'RE REVIEWING THIS, WE'RE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION BASICALLY BECAUSE OF THE, THE BOISE DECISION, BUT PART OF THAT IS BASED ON THE FACT THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE RESOURCES, BECAUSE THERE ISN'T SOME PLACE IN THE CITY TO WHICH WE CAN DIRECT SOMEONE WHO NEEDS HELP OR A SHELTER FOR OVERNIGHT WHEN THE TEMPERATURE IS DOWN OR EXCEEDINGLY HOT OR WHATEVER THE SITUATION IS, RIGHT.
UM, IT'S OUR, IT'S OUR LACK OF RESOURCES IS THAT'S DRIVING THIS, IS THAT CORRECT? UM, I MEAN, IT'S, IT NOT NECESSARILY, I MEAN, IT'S PARTLY, UM, THE CITY CAN CERTAINLY EXPEND, UH, RESOURCES, UH, TO HELP COMBAT HOMELESSNESS.
UM, BUT WE DO HAVE, LIKE, WE, LIKE WE SHOW 'EM MAJORITY, THESE ARE OUR VEHICULAR CAMPERS.
WE DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY, AS YOU POINTED OUT, WHETHER THOSE ARE, UM, TRULY HOMELESS OR JUST PEOPLE PASSING THROUGH AND, AND SOMETIMES PD CONTACTS AND THEIR EXPENSIVE, YOU KNOW, CAMPER VANS.
UM, BUT THE, NO, THE CITY'S LACK OF RESOURCES DOESN'T, DOESN'T NECESSARILY CAUSE HOMELESSNESS, BUT, UH, OR EXPENDITURE.
THE CITY'S EXPENDITURE ON RESOURCES TO HELP HOMELESSNESS, UM, DOESN'T CAUSE HOMELESSNESS.
UH, BUT OBVIOUSLY IF THE CITY WERE TO EXPEND MORE, IT COULDN'T HURT IT EITHER.
IT WOULD, IT WOULD CERTAINLY HELP, BUT IT'S, BUT THE LACK OF SOME PLACE TO BRING SOMEBODY IS WHY WE HAVE PART PARTIALLY, YES.
SO LOTS OF CITIES HAVE DECIDED THAT THEY WILL NOT ENFORCE THEIR, UH, CITYWIDE CAMPING PROHIBITION UNLESS THERE'S A PLACE TO, TO HOUSE THEM.
UM, AND THAT WAS IN RESPONSE TO THE DIRECT, YOU KNOW, THE HOLDING FROM MARTIN V BOISE AND ALSO WHAT BOISE DECIDED TO DO, UH, WHICH KIND OF SET THE EXAMPLE FOR, UM, OTHER CITIES TO FOLLOW SUIT.
AND THAT'S WHAT A LOT OF CITIES DID.
UH, AND SO THE, THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS THEN, UM, IT, IT APPEARS THAT NO CITY, OR I DON'T KNOW IN ANY WAY, THERE MIGHT BE A FEW HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT HOUSING.
UM, AS, AS YOU PROVIDE IT, THEN IT GENERALLY FILLS UP AND THEN THERE'S A GREATER DEMAND.
ANYBODY ELSE? J TWO? UH, JUST, JUST TO CLARIFY ON THAT LAST QUESTION, I MEAN, IT, THIS IS A CAMPING ORDINANCE.
I MEAN, IT WOULD APPLY NOT JUST TO HOMELESS PEOPLE, BUT YOU KNOW, A CUB SCOUT TROOP, RIGHT.
UH, THAT, THAT WANTED TO JUST GO OUT AND PLOP DOWN SOMEPLACE.
AND, AND, AND NOW I'LL JUST, I'LL JUST TELL YOU THAT THE, THE RESPONSE FROM THE, THE HOMELESS ADVOCACY GROUPS WILL BE THAT IT HAS A DISPARATE IMPACT ON HOMELESS PERSONS VERSUS SURE.
UH, SO WHILE IT IS A, A CAMPING ORDINANCE AND, AND APPLIES TO EVERYONE, UH, IT DOES HAVE AN IMPACT ON HOMELESS OKAY.
PERSON'S EXPERIENCE, HOMELESSNESS.
AND THEN I, I JUST WANNA GET BACK TO THE, UM, UH, LEVEL ONE MISDEMEANOR QUESTION BECAUSE I WASN'T QUITE SURE.
SO IF, IF SOMEONE WERE, UH, BROUGHT BEFORE THE JUDGE ON A LEVEL ON THIS LEVEL ONE MISDEMEANOR, THE JUDGE HAS, UM, A MINIMUM OR NOT.
SO THE JUDGE COULD LITERALLY, UH, SAY YOU'RE, YOU'RE FOUND TO BE GUILTY AND YOUR PUNISHMENT IS, IS NOTHING THERE.
THERE ARE A FEW MANDATORY COURT FEES.
UM, BUT YES, IT COULD BE OTHER THAN THE MANDATORY MINIMUM COURT FEES, WHICH MIGHT AMOUNT TO, UH, I WOULD'VE TO ASK THE JUDGE, BUT MAYBE 70 BUCKS, 60 BUCKS, UM, THAT COULD IMPOSE NO OTHER FEE.
UM, NO PROBATION, NO JAIL TIME, EVEN ON A CLASSROOM MISDEMEANOR.
AND THE, AND THE MANDATORY FEES WOULD APPLY EVEN TO A LEVEL THREE MISDEMEANOR, THE SAME FEES? YES, I BELIEVE SO.
[00:50:01]
ANYONE ELSE? VICE MAYOR.JUST A CLARIFICATION, YOU CALL THIS A CAMPING ORDINANCE, BUT ISN'T IT REALLY TO PROVIDE SLEEPING ARRANGEMENTS BECAUSE PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE A PLACE TO SLEEP WHEN THEY GET TIRED AND THEY WANNA BE SAFE.
SO WHAT, UH, SO IT'S, IT'S BOTH, UH, TITLED CAMPING AND SLEEPING IN CERTAIN PLACES.
UM, AND FOR SHORT, I CALL IT THE CAMPING ORDINANCE.
SO WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER, YOU TALKED ABOUT 24 HOURS, AND I THINK COUNSELOR CANELLA MENTIONED 24 HOURS, IF IT'S JUST FOR SLEEPING, IF THEY'RE THERE FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS, IT'S STILL CONSIDERED SLEEPING OR JUST THEN IT'S CAMPING.
SO, UM, THE CAMPING IS DEFINED, UH, RIGHT HERE IN THE ORDINANCE.
CAMPER CAMPING MEANS TO PLACE PITCH USER OCCUPY CAMP FACILITIES, OR TO LIVE TEMPORARILY IN CAMP FACILITIES OR OUTDOORS.
SO SLEEPING'S JUST SLEEPING AND YOU CAN SLEEP WITHOUT ANYTHING.
UM, IT'S NOT, UH, WHICH IS ALSO PROHIBITED.
SO EACH OF THESE, UH, STATE YOU CAN'T CAMP OR SLEEP, UM, OR OTHERWISE OCCUPY THE, THE PROPERTY, UH, BY STORING OR USING CAMP FACILITIES.
UH, SO THAT'S, THAT'S IN, IN EACH, SO BOTH ARE PROHIBITED, I GUESS WOULD BE THE ANSWER.
AND THEN MY LAST QUESTION, GOING BACK TO, UH, WHAT WAS MENTIONED ABOUT, UH, THE JUDGE, THE JUDGE CAN'T SET ASIDE THE FINES, BUT NOT THE FEES.
IS THAT'S TOTALLY, IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD EMPOWER THE JUDGE TO DO? BECAUSE IF SOMEONE'S TRULY HOMELESS, AND IF THE JUDGE FINDS OUT THAT THE, UH, INDIVIDUAL IS, HAS NO SOURCE OF INCOME, IS AND DIDN'T, WASN'T SLEEPING IN A $300,000 MERCEDES VAN SOMEWHERE, AND WHERE THEY OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT TRULY HOMELESS, OR THEY WOULD HAVE SOME KIND OF MEANS, COULD WE AS A COUNCIL PROVIDE THE JUDGE WITH THE MEANS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS TO SET ASIDE THOSE FEES? OR THE, IS THAT, SO THERE'S OUR, AND THAT'S WHY I'M TALKING THE MANDATORY, A FEW OF THE MANDATORY COURT FEES CAN'T BE SET ASIDE FOR CRIMINAL CHARGES.
UM, ONE OPTION WOULD BE TO, UH, I THINK AS I SUGGESTED BEFORE, HAVE A, BE A, A FIRST OFFENSE, BE A CIVIL OFFENSE ON A CIVIL OFFENSE.
I DON'T BELIEVE THERE ARE, AND WE, AGAIN, WOULD HAVE TO CHECK WITH THE, THE COURT AND THE STATE LAW.
THERE ARE ANY MANDATORY, UM, COURT FEES NECESSARY FOR A CIVIL OFFENSE.
AND SO I BELIEVE IT COULD ALL BE SET ASIDE ON A CIVIL OFFENSE.
UM, AND THOSE SET, THAT, THOSE RULES ARE SET ASIDE BY, MANDATED BY THE OFFICER OF THE COURT, THE A AOC, THE, UH, YEAH, YEAH.
NOT, NOT CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCES.
YOU KNOW, THIS IS A, A BIGGER ISSUE THAN THIS JUSTICE ORDINANCE.
SO MY QUESTION IS, HAVE WE REACHED OUT TO THE VARIOUS STAKEHOLDER GROUPS, SAHA BEING ONE OF THEM, UH, CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION AND OTHER GROUPS THAT FOCUS ON CIVIL RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES AND HOMELESSNESS TO GET THEIR INPUT ON THIS PROPOSAL? IT WAS SENT TO A COUPLE OF THEM.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS SENT TO SAHA, UM, UH, AND NOT THE A C L U, UM, BUT YES, IT WAS SENT OUT TO A COUPLE GROUPS.
WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED ANY COMMENTS BACK YET.
UH, BUT THIS IS JUST AGENDAS FOR INITIAL DISCUSSION.
AND SO WE DO HOPE TO HEAR BACK FROM THOSE TYPES OF GROUPS, GROUPS, UH, TO YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC, WHAT GROUPS IT WAS SENT TO.
UH, IT WAS SENT TO THE, UM, SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR EQUAL JUSTICE, UM, AND I BELIEVE THE COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES, UH, TWO GROUPS THAT WE HAVE DEALT WITH, UH, RECENTLY ON THE CAMPING ORDINANCE.
CAUSE I WOULD BE VERY INTERESTED IN THEIR FEEDBACK.
WE, WE EXPECT TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THEM AT SOME POINT, IF NOT TONIGHT AT THE MEETING.
BUT, UM, AND THEY WILL CERTAINLY, AND IF THEY DON'T, I ALREADY HAVE PROMISED TO SEND THEIR FEEDBACK TO CITY COUNCIL, AND I'LL SPEAK MORE ABOUT SOME OF MY CONCERNS WHEN WE HAVE COMMENTS.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO, MA'AM.
I'M GONNA TAKE THE CARDS FIRST SPEAKER, AND IF YOU'LL COME UP TO THE PODIUM AND THERE'S A TIMING LIGHT OVER ONTO YOUR RIGHT.
UH, AND YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES.
YOU START WITH YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF RESIDENCE, UH, FOR SPEAKERS, KELLY ANN MITCHELL TO BE FOLLOWED BY HEATHER, WHO WERE GIFTING THEIR TIME TO ME.
WE WERE TOLD WE COULD DO THAT.
WELL, SOMEBODY FILLED OUT A CARD NAMED KELLY ANN MITCHELL.
HERE, I WANTED TO TURN MY TIME OVER.
WHAT ABOUT HEATHER? SO, OKAY, SO YOU THINK, HOW MUCH TIME DO YOU THEN YOU, YOU THINK YOU WANT NINE MINUTES? IS THAT RIGHT? UP TO POSSIBLY LESS.
[00:55:02]
HOW MUCH TIME MAYOR? NINE.I AM A RESIDENT OF WEST SEDONA, AND I HAVE BEEN A PART OF THE SEDONA COMMUNITY FOR 24 YEARS.
I AM CO-FOUNDER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SEDONA AREA HOMELESS ALLIANCE MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COUNCIL.
THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK.
I HAD A FEW HOURS TO TYPE THIS UP TODAY, AND SO PLEASE FORGIVE ME FOR READING MOST OF THIS.
WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THIS BEING ON THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING BY ACCIDENT AT THE LAST MINUTE.
SAHA WOULD ENJOY A WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS ON THE SUBJECT OF HOMELESSNESS BECAUSE WE ARE IN FACT, ONE OF THOSE STAKEHOLDERS PUTTING HOMELESSNESS ON THE BACK BURNER.
LAST YEAR REALLY ONLY ENSURED A BIGGER PROBLEM THIS YEAR.
SAW HOW CELEBRATES SEVEN YEARS OF SERVICE IN DECEMBER THIS YEAR.
AND WE KNOW THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE, AND WE HAVE OUR FINGERS ON THE PULSE OF THAT COMMUNITY.
I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO ADDRESS THE COMMENT ABOUT THE PIT POINT IN TIME.
COUNT THE POINT IN TIME COUNT TAKES PLACE ONCE A YEAR, ONE DAY A YEAR, GENERALLY ON JANUARY 20TH, AND PEOPLE RUN AROUND AND TRY TO COUNT PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS AND ONLY THOSE BEING WILLING TO BE COUNTED, ARE COUNTED.
THE NUMBERS THAT ARE REPEATED ARE ALWAYS SO RIDICULOUS.
WHAT I WOULD LIKE YOU TO KNOW IS THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 125 LOCAL MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN LIVING IN SEDONA AND AN ADDITIONAL 350 IN THE VERDE VALLEY.
WE'VE BEEN QUOTING THOSE NUMBERS FOR THREE YEARS NOW, SO THAT'S PROBABLY A LOW ESTIMATE.
WHEN PEOPLE ASK HOW WE KNOW HOW MANY WE HAVE IN SEDONA, WE'RE ABLE TO TELL THEM BECAUSE WE HUG EVERY ONE OF THEM.
WE HAVE TOUCHED EVERY ONE OF THEM.
WE SERVE APPROXIMATELY 70% ADULT MEN AND WOMEN, 20% BIRTH THROUGH 18 YEAR OLD, AND 10% ELDERLY.
WE CONSIDER SOMEONE IN THE LOCAL CATEGORY, A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN HOMELESS IN SEDONA FOR TWO YEARS OR LONGER, OR SOMEONE WHO WAS LIVING IN A HOME IN SEDONA AND HAS NOW BECOME HOMELESS, WHICH SOME OF THEM HAVE PRETTY NICE VANS TO LIVE IN RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY'RE HOMELESS, SO I HOPE WE'RE NOT GONNA JUDGE ON THAT.
WE ALSO SERVE ADDITIONAL MEMBERS OF PEOPLE THAT WE CATEGORIZE AS TRANSIENT LOCAL, WHO IS SOMEONE THAT LIVES HOMELESS IN SEDONA, PART OF THE YEAR LEAVES, BUT ALWAYS RETURNS.
THOSE NUMBERS OFTEN INCLUDE PEOPLE FROM THE VERDE VALLEY AND COTTONWOOD ALSO, AND HUNDREDS OF TRANSIENT PEOPLE COME THROUGH OUR, A AREA ANNUALLY THAT ARE IN NEED OF HELP, WHO USUALLY STAY A FEW MONTHS AND DO NOT RETURN.
HOMELESS PEOPLE ARE A SECTOR IN EVERY COMMUNITY, AND THERE HAS BEEN A HOMELESS COMMUNITY HERE IN SEDONA FOR A VERY LONG TIME, BUT SOME ARE MORE VISIBLE NOW.
WE SERVE SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO HAVE LIVED HOMELESS IN SEDONA FOR UP TO 30 YEARS.
WE CANNOT PUSH A SECTOR OF OUR OWN COMMUNITY INTO SOMEONE ELSE'S COMMUNITY.
AND QUALITY SERVICES ARE A MUST TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF BOTH THE HOME AND THE HOMELESS.
PEOPLE CANNOT PERFORM IN A POSITIVE WAY AND MAKE BETTER DECISIONS IN THEIR LIFE WITHOUT PROPER SLEEP.
I THINK WE NEED TO CHANGE THE WORDING ON SOME OF THIS BECAUSE ACTUALLY WE ALL KNOW WHAT CAMPING IS.
SLEEPING OUTSIDE HOMELESS IS NOT FUN.
GOING FOR THREE DAYS WITHOUT SLEEP WILL HAVE PROFOUND EFFECTS ON A PERSON'S MOOD AND COGNITION.
LACK OF SLEEP, IMPAIRS COGNITIVE FUNCTION, INCREASES HEART RATE, REDUCES POSITIVE EMOTIONS AFTER STAYING AWAKE FOR 72 HOURS AFTER ONLY THREE OR FOUR NIGHTS WITHOUT SLEEP, YOU HALLUCINATE SLEEP DEPRIVATION LEAVES YOUR BRAIN EXHAUSTED, SO IT CAN'T PERFORM ITS DUTIES AS WELL.
YOU MAY ALSO FIND IT MORE DIFFICULT TO CONCENTRATE OR LEARN NEW THINGS.
THE SIGNALS YOUR BODY SENDS MAY ALSO BE DELAYED.
DECREASING YOUR COORDINATION, INCREASING YOUR RISK FOR ACCIDENTS OF MANY KINDS.
[01:00:01]
LEAD TO POOR COGNITIVE FUNCTION, INCREASED INFLAMMATION OF THE BRAIN, AND REDUCED IMMUNE FUNCTION.IF SLEEP DEPRIVATION CONTINUES, IT INCREASES YOUR RISK FOR CHRONIC DISEASE.
A HUMAN BODY CAN LIVE FOR 11 DAYS WITHOUT SLEEP.
THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION MAKES THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT RULING, BINDING FOR THE STATES IN THE COURT'S JURISDICTION, ALASKA, ARIZONA, CALIFORNIA, HAWAII, IDAHO, MONTANA, NEVADA, OREGON, AND WASHINGTON.
IT ALSO SETS AN INFLUENTIAL NATIONAL PRECEDENT.
AS LONG AS THERE IS NO OPTION OF SLEEPING INDOORS, THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT CRIMINALIZE INDIGENT HOMELESS PEOPLE FOR SLEEPING OUTDOORS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY.
ON THE FALSE PREMISE THAT THEY HAD A CHOICE IN THE MATTER.
THE APPEAL COURT SAID HOMELESS PEOPLE CANNOT BE CRIMINALLY PUNISHED FOR SLEEPING OUTSIDE IF NO ALTERNATIVES EXIST.
THE LAWSUIT CHALLENGES ENFORCEMENT OF BOISE'S CAMPING AND DISORDERLY CONDUCT ORDINANCES, WHICH ALLOW PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS TO BE TRICKED, OR EXCUSE ME, TICKETED OR OTHERWISE CRIMINALLY PUNISHED FOR SLEEPING IN PUBLIC SPACES.
THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT RULED THAT IN ABSENCE OF ADEQUATE ALTERNATIVES, CRIMINALIZING PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS FOR SLEEPING IN PUBLIC CONSTITUTES CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT, AND THEREFORE VIOLATES THEIR EIGHT AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
THE SUPREME COURT'S DECISION NOTING THAT CRIMINALIZING PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS DOES NOT ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING CAUSE OF HOMELESSNESS, DOES NOTHING TO DISSOLVE THE HOMELESSNESS CRISIS AND VIOLATES THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.
IN A STATEMENT ON THE DECISION PRESIDENT AND CEO DI DIANE YEL SAID, CITIES MUST STOP ATTEMPTING TO CRIMINALIZE AND HIDE THEIR COMMUNITIES OF HOMELESS PEOPLE AND INSTEAD WORK TOWARDS PROVIDING SOLUTIONS.
SLEEP IN COMBINATION OF WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM HAS TO BE OFFERED TO CHANGE WHAT IS HAPPENING ON OUR STREETS.
OPTICS MATTER TO US TOO, ALTHOUGH IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT IN SEDONA, AS WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL ECLECTIC COMMUNITY, AND THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY DON'T HAVE A DESIRE TO BE IN THE SPOTLIGHT.
THEY DON'T HAVE A DESIRE TO BE SEEN BECAUSE OF A LACK OF A DAY BUILDING OR TRANSITIONAL SERVICE BUILDING.
THEY'RE FORCED TO LIVE IN THE PUBLIC, TO EAT IN THE PUBLIC, TO SHOWER, TO BATHROOM, ET CETERA.
OUR LOCAL STREETS AND OUR PUBLIC LIBRARY ARE THE DEFACTO SERVICE AREAS, AND EVERY DAY WE THANK OUR LIBRARY AND THEN WE GO BACK AND WE APOLOGIZE TO THEM.
SAHA DOES NOT SUPPORT AN ENCAMPMENT OR A LIVE-IN SHELTER BECAUSE BOTH WOULD LIKELY BE FILLED WITH PEOPLE FROM OTHER AREAS AND STATES WHO WOULD LIKE TO LIVE IN SEDONA.
THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR LOCAL HOMELESS DESIRE.
WE DO NOT SUPPORT A, WE DO SUPPORT A SAFE SLEEP LOT BECAUSE PEOPLE NEED TO SLEEP.
AND BECAUSE OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES TO KNOW WHERE PEOPLE ARE SLEEPING, IT WOULD ALLOW PEOPLE TO SAFELY SLEEP WITHOUT FEAR SO THAT THEY COULD GO TO WORK OR TO SCHOOL THE NEXT DAY.
IT ALSO HAS THE ADDED BENEFIT OF IDENTIFYING THOSE TRULY STRUGGLING IN OUR COMMUNITY FROM THOSE WHO HAVE COME PURPOSELY TO DISRUPT OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE WE DO HAVE SOME HOMELESS IN THAT CATEGORY.
ALSO, WE HAVE A PROPOSED PROJECT CARAVAN, A SOFT PROPOSAL THAT I HAVE LEFT WITH EVERYBODY.
WE WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT BECAUSE LIKE I SAID, OUR COMMUNITY DESERVES TO FEEL SAFE.
AND IF WE KNOW WHERE EVERYBODY'S SLEEPING AT NIGHT, WE ARE GONNA FEEL SAFER.
UM, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADD A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WAS MENTIONED AS FAR AS THE FINES.
WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE FINES IS OUR PEOPLE RECEIVE LIKE $70 FINES, WHICH THEY'RE UNABLE TO PAY.
A WARRANT IS PUT OUT FOR THEIR ARREST, AND IT'S A BIG CYCLE.
AND SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO KEEP OUR EYES ON.
I HAVE TO STOP NOW, OR IS THAT FIVE MINUTES? WELL, IT WAS 10.
ONE THING I, I HEARD ALL THE EXCEPTIONS PROPOSED.
IT'S TOO MUCH FOR MY MIND TO GRASP.
I NEED TO TAKE A MAP OF SEDONA, TAKE ALL THE EXCEPTIONS, CROSS OUT WHERE OUR PEOPLE CAN'T SLEEP AND SEE WHAT'S LEFT.
SO PLEASE DO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A FIRST STEP.
LORI, CAN YOU RE REMAIN? MAY, MAY I ASK LORI QUESTION? YES, YES.
YOU, YOU'RE THE CLOSEST PERSON I KNOW THAT IS THE, HAS THE
[01:05:01]
EXPERIENCE FOR OUR CITY AND I APPRECIATE ALL THAT YOU HAVE DONE IT JUST FROM YOUR FIRST PAGE ALONE AND THOSE NUMBERS THAT YOU PROVIDED REALLY MEANS A LOT TO ME AND I APPRECIATE THAT.I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, AND I THINK I'VE HAD THIS QUESTION WITH YOU FOR A WHILE, UH, AND YOU'VE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO GIVE ME SOMETHING CLOSE TO A GOOD ANSWER.
UH, IT'S BEEN MY PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE.
I'VE HAD A LOT OF, IN MY PRIOR LIFE, HAD EXPERIENCE WITH HOMELESSNESS, NOT MYSELF, BUT PEOPLE THAT I ENGAGE WITH.
THEY JUST WANNA BE LEFT ALONE.
AND I RESPECT THAT, EXCEPT FOR EXTREME WEATHER, WHICH I KNOW THAT YOU'RE EXCEPTIONAL WITH.
ESPECIALLY IN THE COLD WEATHER.
YOU'RE OUT THERE TRYING TO GIVE BLANKETS.
DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT WE COULD DO FOR PEOPLE? I MEAN, IF THEY REFUSE ANY HELP FROM US, WHAT IS AN ANSWER THAT YOU WOULD, YOU COULD POSE TO US, OR AT LEAST TO ME, UH, THAT COULD HELP WITH THAT WHEN WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO JUST REFUSING EVERYTHING, BUT YET THEY COULD BE BOTHERSOME TO, TO OTHERS.
SO I'M NOT CLEAR WHAT COULD BE BEING OFFERED AS FAR AS I KNOW NOTHING IS BEING OFFERED, BUT I WOULD TELL YOU, AND I WOULD REALLY LIKE YOU TO UNDERSTAND THIS, MOST PEOPLE LIVING OUT, THEY'RE ALREADY TERRORIZED.
THEY DON'T WANNA ENTER GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, WHICH IS WHY WE HANDLE THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY.
ANOTHER THING I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND, FOR EVERYBODY WE'VE SERVED AND WE HAVE SERVED HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE, ANYBODY THAT IS SAYING I'M CHOOSING TO BE HOMELESS, ARE NOT FINISHING THE SENTENCE.
AND SO THIS IS A VERY, UH, UNCOMFORTABLE SUBJECT, BUT I WILL GIVE YOU THIS.
FOR INSTANCE, THERE'S SOMEBODY IN TOWN THAT'S BEEN HOMELESS FOR YEARS IN SEDONA AND ALWAYS SAYS TO PEOPLE, I'M CHOOSING TO BE HOMELESS.
YOU SIT DOWN AND TALK TO HER, SHE'S GONNA TELL YOU I'M CHOOSING TO BE HOMELESS CUZ I CAN'T BE GUARANTEED TO ROOM WITH THREE EXITS.
AND I'VE BEEN RAPED SINCE I WAS A BABY UNTIL CHILDHOOD.
SO I CAN'T BE INSIDE A BUILDING.
SO PEOPLE AREN'T SAYING I'M CHOOSING TO BE HOMELESS BECAUSE I WENT SUCH A PANIC WHEN APS WOULD PULL UP TO, TO TURN MY ELECTRICITY OFF.
THERE'S SO MANY FOR EVERY, I'M CHOOSING TO BE HOMELESS.
THERE'S THE REST OF THE SENTENCE THAT THEY ARE NOT SAYING.
THE NEXT CARD I HAVE ISM J I'M SORRY.
COULD I ASK LORI QUESTION? OH, LORI, WELL, YOU GOT ONE MORE QUESTION FOR YOU.
UM, WITH LIKE THE VICE MAY, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU WHAT EVERY, WHAT YOU'RE DOING AND ONE SAHA IS DOING.
UM, YOU'RE THE STATEMENT THAT YOU READ, WHICH YOU GAVE US COPIES OF YOU SAID, UH, SAW DOES NOT SUPPORT AN ENCAMPMENT OR A LIVE-IN SHELTER BECAUSE BOTH WOULD LIKELY BE FILLED WITH PEOPLE FROM OTHER AREAS AND SO ON.
SO THAT WOULD BE AN ATTRACTION FOR PEOPLE TO COME HERE THAT WOULDN'T OTHERWISE.
UM, BUT YOU HAVE YOUR PROPOSAL HERE FOR, UH, I FORGET WHAT YOU CALL IT, A SLEEP UM, CENTER OR SOMETHING.
SO CAN YOU DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE TWO AND HOW YOU THINK THAT ONE WOULD BE LIKE AN ATTRACTIVE MM-HMM.
UH, MOST PEOPLE IN THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY DON'T WANT TO LIVE IN ENCAMPMENTS AND, UH, AND SO YOU NEVER REALLY SAW THAT AROUND SEDONA IN THE PAST, UM, THREE TO FOUR YEARS THAT HAVE BEEN GROUPS OF PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME THROUGH SEDONA AND DECIDED TO PURPOSELY CREATE INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES.
SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE BEEN SEEING AS FAR AS, UH, OUT AT, UH, WHAT IS IT NOT CAVE CREEK, SPRING CREEK AND, AND BILL GRAY ROAD AND 5 25 25 AND ALL THOSE, THOSE ARE PEOPLE COMING INTO TOWN THAT ARE INTENTIONALLY WANTING TO CREATE COMMUNITIES.
THAT'S FINE FOR SOMEBODY ELSE TO DECIDE.
WE DON'T PURPOSELY, UH, OR WE DON'T, UH, SUPPORT THAT AT ALL.
AND ANOTHER REASON WE DON'T, IT'S OUR MAIN MISSION IS TO RECONNECT OUR LOCAL HOMELESS BACK INTO THE COMMUNITY.
THERE'S NOT ONE OF OUR LOCAL HOMELESS THAT WANT TO LIVE IN AN ENCAMPMENT OR LIVE IN A LIVE IN SHELTER.
THEY SO APPRECIATE WHEN WE'RE ABLE TO GET ROOMS WHEN
[01:10:01]
THE TEMPERATURES FALL BELOW FREEZING.UM, BUT THEY HAVE NO DESIRE TO LIVE IN, IN THAT TYPE OF SETTING.
AND THERE ARE LOTS OF PEOPLE THAT DO THOUGH, UH, NOT LOCALS.
AND SO WE'VE ALWAYS FELT THAT IF WE CREATED EITHER ONE OF THOSE, THAT WE WOULD GET MANY PEOPLE IN THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY THAT WOULD LOVE TO LIVE IN SEDONA.
SO WHEN YOU SAY ENCAMPMENT, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A PLACE THAT PEOPLE MIGHT GO TO ACTUALLY DO REAL CAMPING AS WELL AS PUTTING HOMELESS PEOPLE WITH THEM, WHICH THEY WOULDN'T BE FEEL COMFORTABLE OR NOT, WE'RE NOT PUTTING HOMELESS PEOPLE WITH THEM.
SOME HOMELESS PEOPLE CAME IN AND TRIED TO CREATE SOME INTENTIONAL COMMUNITIES.
BUT THEN THEY FOUND OUT IT CAME WITH THE SAME RULES THAT SOCIETY HAS
SO, AND I HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET, I DO, BECAUSE TO ME, THIS, THIS WOULD BE REALLY KEY IF WE COULD UNDERSTAND HOW WE COULD PROVIDE SOME KIND OF ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PEOPLE TO FEEL SAFE MM-HMM.
AND YET IT WOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THAT GETS OUT TO COTTONWOOD AND CALIFORNIA OR WHATEVER.
YOU KNOW, YOU CAN, YOU CAN GO TO SEDONA, THEY GET THIS GREAT PLACE WHERE YOU COULD STAY.
WELL, WE WOULD NEVER NOT WANT TO SERVE ANYBODY THAT NEEDS SERVICE, THAT WOULD NEVER BE, UH, UNDERSTOOD HOW WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS.
WHAT WE DO KNOW IS NO, WHAT WE DO FEEL IS IF WE CREATED THIS SAFE SLEEP LOT, UM, PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO SIGN UP FOR IT, OBVIOUSLY.
AND WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS BEFORE, TO SOME OF THE TRAVELERS THAT CAME THROUGH RIGHT AWAY, THEY WERE LIKE, OH NO.
CUZ IT WOULD BE LIKE, PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO BE QUIET AFTER NINE OR 10.
AND THEY'RE LIKE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE WANT.
AT THAT MOMENT WE REALIZED THIS IS ACTUALLY A WAY FOR US TO DETERMINE WHO REALLY NEEDS THIS HELP.
UM, SO I'M, I'M, I'M GONNA READ THIS.
BUT, UM, JUST ONE LAST QUESTION ABOUT IT AS A PREVIEW.
SO IT'S, YOU'RE NOT ANTICIPATING THIS WOULD BE AN ENCLOSED SPACE.
IT WOULD NOT BE WALLED IN, IT MIGHT BE COVERED.
YOU'RE THINKING MORE LIKE A OUR SOFT PROPOSAL IS TO START AT THE, UH, PARKING LOT AT POSSE GROUND, UH, WHERE THE, UH, PLAYGROUND IS, IT HAS BATHROOMS. UH, WE COULD GUARANTEED WE'D BE OFF PROPERTY AT SEVEN.
THAT'S ALL INCLUDED, YOU KNOW, IN THE PROPOSAL.
UM, AFTER WE WERE ABLE TO PROVE WHAT A GREAT IDEA IT WAS AND HOW WELL IT WORKED, WE WOULD LIKE TO EXPAND UP TO SUNSET PARK.
THAT WAY AT THAT TIME, WE COULD START SEPARATING FAMILIES FROM THE, THE REST OF THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY.
WE FEEL THAT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO FOCUS ON.
BUT IT'S NOT WALLS WITH DOORS CAUSE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
THIS WOULD BE PEOPLE SLEEPING IN THEIR CARS, YOU KNOW, THEY WOULD HAVE HANGERS ON THEIR THINGS AND SAY HOW LONG THEY WERE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, CHECK IN EACH NIGHT.
AND, UH, WE'RE HOPING IT WOULD INCLUDE AN AREA WHERE WE COULD ALLOW TENTS ALSO.
AND KATHY HAS ANOTHER QUESTION.
THE POINT YOU MADE BEFORE IS WELL TAKEN THAT, UM, SOME PEOPLE SAID, NO, I DON'T WANT A PLACE THAT'S QUIET AFTER 9:00 PM AND I'M ASSUMING THAT THEIR GOALS ARE DIFFERENT THAN SOMEBODY WHO IS SAYING, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS IS, I JUST NEED TO GET SLEEP CUZ I HAVE TO GO TO WORK TOMORROW.
OR I NEED TO GET SLEEP BECAUSE I'M, I HAVEN'T HAD SLEEP IN THREE DAYS.
HOW, WHAT WOULD YOU THINK MIGHT BE AN APPROPRIATE WAY OF DE DEFINING THAT, OF UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE GROUPS? AND WE USED THE TERM BEFORE OF A MEANS TEST.
I DON'T ACTUALLY LIKE THAT TERM, BUT FOR LACK OF A BETTER ONE.
WHAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE STANDARD OR QUESTION OR WAY TO GET TO THE HEART OF THAT? MM-HMM.
WELL, WHEN YOU LOOK AT YOUR PACKET, YOU'LL SEE WHAT EVERYBODY HAS TO SIGN AND WHAT THEY'RE AGREEING TO.
AND WE ALREADY KNOW, IF YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO AGREE TO OUR GUIDELINES, THEN THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR YOU.
UM, THAT'S GOING TO ALLOW US TO DETERMINE WHO NEEDS WHAT PARTICULAR HELP THOSE OTHER PEOPLE.
THEY MIGHT NEED A DIFFERENT TYPE OF HELP.
NOW MY QUESTION GOES TO KURT ON THIS SPECIFICALLY.
WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE A PLACE TO REFER PEOPLE.
IF THERE WERE SOMETHING LIKE THAT AND THERE WERE THOSE RULES OF REGULATIONS, WOULD THAT MEET THE STANDARD OF IF YOU DON'T GO THERE, THEN YOU ARE, YOU DO HAVE TO BE MOVED ON OUT OF
[01:15:01]
SEDONA CUZ THERE IS NO APPROPRIATE CAMPING PLACE OR SOMETHING IF THERE WERE THAT MANY RULES INVOLVED? YOU SEE WHERE I'M TRYING TO GO WITH THAT QUESTION? YEAH.SO I MEAN, IT WOULD DEPEND ON EXACTLY WHAT IT'S AVAILABLE, BUT THE, THE BOISE CASE SIMPLY SAID THAT IT NEEDED A PLACE TO SLEEP.
BUT I WOULD IMAGINE IT WOULD AT LEAST BE A, SOMETHING THAT'S DECENT, SAFE, AND SANITARY, KIND OF LIKE A HUD STANDARD.
UM, BUT ADDITIONAL RULES COULD, COULD CERTAINLY BE PART OF IT AS WELL.
YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THIS IS GETTING INTO A POINT WHERE WE NEED TO HAVE THIS ANOTHER TIME.
I'M SEEING MORE QUESTIONS GENERATED HERE AND AND WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO READ THIS THING YET.
SO LET'S JUST KIND OF SAVE THAT PART.
CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUICK QUESTION? OKAY.
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE SLEEPING IN THEIR, WHAT IS THE, FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE, WHAT, HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE SLEEPING IN A TENT VERSUS A VEHICLE? I MEAN, WHAT PERCENTAGE HAVE VEHICLES OF SOME SORT? I THINK ABOUT ONE THIRD OF OUR PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO A VEHICLE.
AND SO EVERYBODY ELSE IS IN A TENT OR SOMETIMES JUST UNDER A BUSH.
UM, I HAVE A FAIR AMOUNT OF EXPERTISE, UM, PERHAPS NOT MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE HERE, BUT I, AS AN ATTORNEY, I'VE BEEN PRETTY IMMERSED IN THE HOMELESSNESS AREA, REPRESENTING PEOPLE ON THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUES AND AS A CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, AND ALTERNATIVELY, AS A PROSECUTOR, ADVISING POLICE DEPARTMENTS ON HOW TO INTERPRET BOISE.
UH, I WAS THE PROSECUTOR IN COTTONWOOD AND CLARKDALE.
I'M NO LONGER, BUT, UH, AND THEN SETTING UP MENTAL HEALTH COURTS, DEALING WITH THE HOMELESS POPULATION AND COTTONWOOD.
SO I COME WITH, WITH AT LEAST THAT EXPERIENCE, UM, THE NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION AND, UH, IS A CORRECT DECISION.
BASICALLY, IT SAYS THE GOVERNMENT CAN'T PUNISH ACTS NECESSARILY NECESSARY TO LIVE FOR DESTITUTE HOMELESS PERSONS.
AND, UH, IN, IN PARTICULAR, IN AN AREA WHERE MUNICIPALITY HAS NO OVERNIGHT SERVICES.
WE CAN'T CRIMINALIZE ACTS NECESSARY TO LIVE.
UM, IT APPLIED TO DESTITUTE HOMELESS PERSONS.
IF YOU READ THE CASE, EACH PLAINTIFF IS DESTITUTE AND THEY HAVE NO RESOURCES.
UM, I APPLAUD SEDONA AND, AND, UH, THE CITY ATTORNEY FOR SEARCHING FOR SOLUTIONS TO THE UN UNCONSTITUTIONALITY.
UM, AND ALTHOUGH THIS DRAFT CURES MUCH OF THE NINTH CIRCUIT ISSUES, IT, UH, THERE'S, IT CREATES SOME NEW, I THINK, UH, SUBSTANTIAL PROBLEMS. SEVERAL POINTS.
FIRST IS THE DRAFT OVERNIGHT, UH, ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW OVERNIGHT CAMPING ON SPECIFIC PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR ANYONE, EVEN THE RICH FOR 24 HOURS AND INDEFINITELY, IF THE CAMPER MOVES THEIR SITE, PEOPLE OF MEANS WHETHER TRAVELERS OR MILLIONAIRES COULD, IN THEORY LIVE A TRANSIENT BY SEMI-PERMANENT LIFE ON SEDONAS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
AND I, I, I THINK IT CREATES A HOST OF PROBLEMS BECAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE SUCH A DESIRABLE PLACE TO COME AS, AS WE ALL KNOW.
AND IF, IF PEOPLE FIND OUT, HEY, YOU CAN CAMP ANYWHERE YOU WANT, JUST NEED TO MOVE EVERY NIGHT, UM, THAT CREATES PROBLEMS THAT WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATED IN TRYING TO CURE THIS VERY REAL PROBLEM.
UM, UH, THE ORDINANCE COULD, IN MY OPINION, BE NARROWED SIGNIFICANTLY.
UM, IT COULD START WITH A GENERAL PUBLIC PROPERTY CAMPING BAN, BUT CREATE DELINEATED EXCEPTIONS FOR THOSE WHO ARE TRULY DESTITUTE.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT, IF YOU WANNA CALL THAT A MEANS TEST OR, OR WHATEVER.
UM, BUT, UH, POLICE, WHEN I ADVISED THE COTTONWOOD POLICE DEPARTMENT, I, I WOULD TELL THEM, HEY, YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT IN A CONSENSUAL ENCOUNTER WITH SOMEONE TO TALK TO 'EM AND SAY, DO YOU, DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO GET A HOTEL? UM, DO YOU HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO DRIVE TO LEGAL, CAMPING OR NOT? UH, THOSE TYPES OF, OF CONVERSATIONS, UM, THOSE, THOSE ARE PERFECTLY LEGAL TO HAVE.
UM, ALSO, I THINK THE, THE PROBLEM, THERE'S A BIG PROBLEM WITH AN OUTRIGHT BAN ON CAMPING OF VEHICLES.
I, I DON'T THINK, I THINK THAT WOULD STILL RUN AFOUL, THE BOISE, UM, DECISION DEPENDENT ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
IT COULD BE THAT SOMEONE HAS $5 WORTH OF GAS IN, IN THEIR TANK.
SO, UH, THOSE ARE PROBLEMS. UM, SO YOUR TIME IS UP, IS CAN YOU JUST SUBMIT THINGS IN WRITING TO US SINCE THIS IS A, AN INITIAL CONVERSATION.
I'M SURE WE'D BE HAPPY TO TAKE THEM ALL INTO CONSIDERATION.
WE'LL COMMUNICATE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.
WHAT'S THAT? WHAT, JUST EMAIL TO THE CITY ATTORNEY? SURE.
SO WE CAN GET BACK INTO A DISCUSSION AMONG OURSELVES NOW IF YOU'D LIKE.
[01:20:01]
OKAY.YOU, UM, I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT CITY COUNCIL HAS DONE TO GIVE US SOME PROPOSED AMENDMENTS.
I THINK IS A FIRST STAB AT JUST STARTING TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO AND HOW DO WE ADDRESS IT.
UH, I, I'VE HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS TONIGHT AND, AND I THINK THERE'S SOME GOOD SUGGESTIONS IN THERE AND SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA COME TO THE SOLUTIONS TONIGHT AND THE ANSWERS, UH, FOR EVERYTHING TONIGHT.
UH, OR WE'RE SUPER BRAINY BECAUSE, UH, NOBODY'S COME UP WITH THAT YET.
UH, I, I, I FEEL LIKE SOME OF THE COMMENTS I'M HEARING ARE GEARED TOWARD OUR OWN HOMELESS POPULATION AS A SPECIFIC GROUP THAT WE WANT TO PROTECT AND MAYBE BE MISSING THE POINT THAT, AND I'D HAVE TO ASK CITY COUNCIL.
UH, IF SOMEBODY COMES IN AND SAYS, WELL, YOU SIGN ALL THIS, BUT SOMEBODY WHO CHOOSES NOT TO SIGN IT STILL HAS THE RIGHT TO CAMP SOMEWHERE, PERHAPS, DEPENDING UPON IF THEY'RE DESTITUTE OR WHATEVER THE DEFINITION IS OUTSIDE OF THE PROPOSED SLEEP PLOTS.
SO I, I THINK WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS REALLY DO A LITTLE BIT MORE THOUGHTFUL, UH, WORK ON THIS, GET SOME MORE INFORMATION, LOOK AT WHAT THE COURTS ARE DECIDING IN SOME OTHER PLACES THAT WE SEE EXPERIENCE OCCURRING, AND THEN, UH, COME BACK AND CONTINUE TO DISCUSS IT.
UH, I'M NOT LOOKING TO TAKE ANY ACTION TONIGHT MYSELF.
I DON'T THINK IT'S FOR ACTION, BUT I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR US TO LOOK AT THIS, INSTRUCT COUNSEL PERHAPS, TO CONTINUE HIS EFFORTS IN THIS AND, UH, BRING IT BACK IN THE FUTURE FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION WITH CHANGES THAT MAY OR MAY NOT BE, UH, CAUSED BY INPUT THAT WE GET FROM OTHER GROUPS.
THEN YES, I WOULD AGREE THAT WE'RE NOT READY TO MOVE ON ANYTHING TONIGHT BECAUSE I, I THINK THAT, WELL, CERTAINLY THE POINTS THAT BOTH OF OUR SPEAKERS IN THE PUBLIC SESSION, UM, BROUGHT UP WERE REALLY GREAT.
HE HAS SOME IDEAS THAT I THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND, WHICH BRINGS ME TO THE POINT THAT I, I, I THINK THAT WE NEED MORE OF STAKEHOLDER INPUT ON THIS.
UM, THIS CAME UP, WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT HOMELESSNESS LAST JANUARY AT THE RETREAT, UH, THE COUNCIL RETREAT FOR PRIORITY SETTING.
YOU CAN'T, THOUSAND TOPICS LITERALLY ON THE, ON THE TABLE FOR THAT DISCUSSION.
BUT I DO THINK THAT WE NEED TO GO DEEP ON THIS AND WE NEED TO START REALLY PUTTING SOME, UH, CITY RESOURCES HERE.
WHEN I SAY CITY RESOURCES, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THOSE ARE OR THE EXTENT OF THEM YET, BUT I DO THINK TWO THINGS THAT I'M INTERESTED IN ARE A BETTER COUNT.
THERE'S A WIDE DISCREPANCY OF NUMBERS IN TERMS OF THE HOMELESS POPULATION THAT CONSIDER THEMSELVES RESIDENTS OF SEDONA, THE HOMELESS POPULATION IN THE GREATER AREA THAT ARE SOMETIMES SEEKING SERVICES IN SEDONA AND HOMELESS POPULATION THAT IS TRANSIENT AND DOES NOT, IS NOT A PERMANENT PART OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT, BUT IS HERE AND, AND HAS TO BE KNOWN AS WELL.
SO I I, I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME RESOURCES GO INTO BETTER UNDERSTANDING THE COUNT AND WHO THE POPULATION IS CUZ HOW DO WE KNOW HOW TO SERVE THEM OR WHAT IS NEEDED OR WHAT, UM, NONPROFITS WE MAY NEED TO PARTNER WITH IF WE DON'T KNOW WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEIR NEEDS ARE.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME SORT OF, THIS GOES BACK TO, AGAIN, THE INPUT FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS, YOU KNOW, AND IT WAS GREAT THAT YOU PUT THAT OUT TO GET SOME COMMENTS.
I WOULD, UM, HOPE THAT WE FOLLOW UP TO GET COMMENTS BACK, BUT THAT WE EXPAND THAT AS WELL TO INCLUDE THE A C L U, UH, TO INCLUDE OUR LOCAL CHURCHES TO INCLUDE THE LIBRARY, WHICH WE KNOW, YOU KNOW, IS DEALING WITH HOMELESS SITUATION.
UM, PROBABLY MORE SO THAN ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION THAT EXISTS HERE.
UH, I, I THINK, UM, ATTORNEYS LIKE MR. J HAVE A LOT TO ANSWER AND OF COURSE, OUR OWN ORGANIZATION OR LOCAL ORGANIZATION OF SAHA THAT IS SERVING AND HAS A DIRECT LINE OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE POPULATION.
SO I, I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALL OF THAT HAPPEN BEFORE WE GO FURTHER.
UM, THAT BEING SAID, YOU WERE LOOKING FOR DIRECTION ON SOMETHING THAT YOU PROPOSED, YOU KNOW, TODAY.
AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE SPECIFICS OF THAT VERY BRIEFLY, WHICH IS, AGAIN, THE, THE 24 HOUR LIMIT.
I, I REALLY THINK IT WOULD NEED TO BE MOVED OUT.
AS YOU SAID YOURSELF, YOU'D BE OPEN TO 48 OR 72 HOURS.
I DO THINK, AND THIS GOES TO WHAT MR. JORDAN SAID AS WELL, UM, THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME SORT OF SOMETHING THAT ADDRESSES THAT.
YES, IT'S NOT JUST CAMPING THAT CAN HAPPEN AND BE OPEN TO ANYBODY.
THERE HAS TO BE SOME WAY OF UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS PERSON HAS THAT REAL NEED AND NO OTHER RESOURCES, NOTHING ELSE OPEN TO THEM, BUT SLEEPING ON THE STREET, WE HAVE TO HAVE A WAY, AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW TO MAKE THAT ASSESSMENT.
[01:25:01]
STILL DON'T LIKE THE CLASS ONE MISDEMEANOR BECAUSE THAT'S A CHARGE THAT STAYS ON A RECORD OF A CLASS ONE MISDEMEANOR.I, I'M STILL LEANING TOWARD THAT, THAT EVEN THOUGH I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT ABOUT THE, UM, BREADTH OF OPEN TO THE JUDGE IN, IN, UM, APPLYING IT, I THINK A LOWER CLASSIFICATION.
AGAIN, WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PUNISH PEOPLE FOR BEING HOMELESS, BUT WE ARE TRYING TO SAY, HERE'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD MOVE YOU.
THIS IS NOT THE WAY IN WHICH IS APPROPRIATE TO BE DEALING WITH THE HOMELESSNESS.
AND IF YOU CONTINUE TO DO IT THERE, YOU KNOW, THERE THERE'S GONNA BE A CHARGE FILED.
BUT I THINK WE REALLY HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT.
I'M STILL WORRIED ABOUT THE, THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF, UH, BEING VIOLATED.
AND I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT ADDRESSED IN SOMETHING THAT COMES FORWARD.
UH, I TALKED ABOUT THE STAKEHOLDER INPUT, WHICH TO ME IS VITAL.
AND, UM, AND, UH, AGAIN, IDENTIFYING THE LARGEST DISCREPANCY IN THE NUMBERS.
SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS I'D LIKE ADDRESSED IN SOMETHING THAT COMES FORWARD.
BUT IN THE MEANTIME, JUST TO REITERATE, I REALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME RESOURCES GO INTO A BETTER COUNT AND, UH, SOME RESOURCES GO INTO SOMETHING THAT BRINGS THE PEOPLE THAT CAN SPEAK TO THIS TOGETHER SO THAT WE HAVE THAT INPUT BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD.
UM, AND THIS IS, I GUESS SOMETHING FOR THE COUNCIL.
WHEN WE HIRED OUR JUDGE BACK ALMOST A YEAR AGO, WE TALKED ABOUT THE MENTAL HEALTH COURT.
WE HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THE JUDGE ABOUT THAT.
AND KURT, HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING ABOUT HIM? UH, OR THE, THE COURT SYSTEM? NO.
KAREN, HAVE YOU? NO, NOT ON NOT A MENTAL HEALTH COURT.
OR SOME, SOME SEMBLANCE OF THAT.
AND HE'S, UH, HE'S UP FOR REVIEW I THINK IN A MONTH OR SO.
I THINK, WELL, YOU KNOW, IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOMELESS AS WELL.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT THAT'S ALSO PART OF HOMELESSNESS AND MENTAL HEALTH.
I, I DON'T SAY IT DOESN'T, BUT I THINK, BUT IT'S SOMETHING I, I SHOULD BE DISCUSSION IS STRAYING A BIT OFF COURSE FROM WHERE WE SHOULD BE TONIGHT.
UH, IT'S STILL AN ISSUE FOR ME.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE WITH THAT.
I DON'T KNOW IF I'M WILLING TO CHANGE THE 24 HOUR LIMIT, BUT I'D LIKE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT IT.
AND OF COURSE, LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE THINGS THAT WE DO, CUZ WE DON'T WANT TO VIOLATE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS.
SO, UH, I THINK, WELL I WOULD SUPPORT CONTINUING TO MOVE FORWARD TO DO AS MUCH RESEARCH AS WE CAN WITH OUR PARTNERS OUT THERE IN SAHA BEING ONE OF THEM, AND SEE WHERE THIS GOES.
BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED, UH, WITHIN A GOOD TIME PERIOD.
WELL, AS I SAID EARLIER, I THINK THIS IS A PART OF A LARGER ISSUE THAN WE CAN'T JUST KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
BECAUSE AS I READ THE POLICE BLOTTER, MORE AND MORE INSTANCES OF PEOPLE, UH, BEING TRESPASSED AND OTHER ISSUES, BEHAVIORAL ISSUES ARE COMING FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.
I I THINK THIS IS ALSO A VERDE VALLEY ISSUE, NOT JUST A SEDONA ISSUE, THAT WE NEED TO BRING IN DISCUSSION WITH OUR, OUR PARTNERS AND OUR, OUR OTHER COMMUNITIES TO SEE WHAT, HOW WE CAN HANDLE THIS AND, AND WHAT THEY'RE EXPERIENCING AND WHETHER THERE NEEDS TO BE A, A LARGER VIEW IN A LARGER SET OF SOLUTIONS.
NOT PUSHING OUR PROBLEMS TO OTHER COMMUNITIES, BUT BRINGING OTHER COMMUNITIES TOGETHER WITH US.
I, I DON'T THINK THAT, UH, HAVING, I'M REALLY DON'T LIKE THE IDEA THAT WE'RE CHARGING PEOPLE.
AND I THINK THAT VIOLATES BOISE.
I THINK THE WHOLE POINT OF DECRIMINAL BOISE WAS ABOUT DECRIMINALIZATION.
SO I, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT KEEPING THIS SECTION MEETS THE BOISE STANDARDS.
I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING GRADUATED PENALTIES THAT YOU PROPOSED EARLIER.
I LIKE THE IDEA OF STARTING OUT WITH THE WARNING AND CIVIL PENALTIES AND MAYBE GOING UP TO, UH, CRIMINAL PENALTIES IF CONDUCT CONTINUES AND GETS OUTTA CONTROL.
I I THINK THAT THE, THE OVERALL, THIS IS JUST ABOUT CAMPING, BUT I THINK THERE'S ALSO MORE THAN JUST A CAMPING ISSUE HERE.
SO I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS, UH, ALL OF OUR CODE AND WHERE, UH, VEHICLES ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT AS WELL.
AND I DEFINITELY BELIEVE THAT IT HA WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME WAY OF DETERMINING
[01:30:01]
DESTITUTE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER PEOPLE HAVE RESOURCES AND CAN AFFORD.I I ALSO THINK ABOUT HOW WE JUST RECENTLY, LAST COUPLE MONTHS HAD OUR SMALL GRANTS DISCUSSION AND WE GAVE $3,000 TO SAHA FOR, UH, ROOMS, RUMORS FOR DURING THE WINTER.
AND I'M THINKING THE WINTER IS COMING SOONER THAN LATER, EVEN THOUGH IT'S STILL 90 DEGREES OUT DURING THE 10 OR MORE OR HIGHER.
AND I THINK WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHETHER THAT'S SUFFICIENT.
CUZ I KNOW LORI SAID IT WASN'T WHEN WE DISCUSSED IT EARLIER.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO THINK ABOUT THAT CONVERSATION AS THE WINNER APPROACHES, UH, BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT THIS IS A BIGGER AND BIGGER ISSUE FOR US.
AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING IN OTHER ARIZONA CITIES AS OPPOSED TO PORTLAND AND SEATTLE AND LOS ANGELES.
I ALSO THINK THIS IS A, A REALLY GOOD START.
I, UH, ESPECIALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK THAT, UH, YOU PUT IN ON THIS CART TO, UH, COME UP WITH SOME SUGGESTIONS.
IT'S A REALLY TOUGH AREA TO DEAL WITH.
UH, I THINK THE COMMENTS, UH, THAT THE TWO PEOPLE WHO SPOKE IN PUBLIC, UM, HAD SOME REALLY INTERESTING THINGS TO CONSIDER.
AND I, I, I ALSO AGREE THAT, UM, WE SHOULD TAKE SOME TIME TO REALLY EXPLORE, UH, THE STAKEHOLDERS, UH, INPUTS AND SO FORTH.
UM, AS FAR AS THE, UH, SPECIFIC DIRECTION, ABOUT 24, 48, 72 HOURS OR, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, LEVEL ONE OR TWO OR THREE OR WHATEVER MISDEMEANOR, UM, I, I WANT TO, I THINK I'LL JUST DEFER ON THAT.
I'VE ASKED MY QUESTIONS IF PROBABLY MY POINT OF VIEW IS CLEAR FROM THAT.
UM, BUT I WILL SAY THAT I'M VERY PLEASED TO SEE THAT ALL THREE OF OUR NEWLY ELECTED, UH, COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE IN THE AUDIENCE.
AND THIS IS PROBABLY NOT SOMETHING THAT'S GONNA GET WOUND UP WHILE I'M STILL HERE.
SO, UM, UH, I THINK IT'S, IT'S GONNA BE DECIDED WELL, WHENEVER IT COMES TIME TO BE DECIDED.
UM, SO I'LL, I'LL JUST, UH, LEAVE IT AT THAT.
UH, I KNOW THERE WAS ONE OTHER THING THERE WAS, OH, I KNOW, I WANNA SAY, SO THE ONE THING I DO WANT TO ADD ABOUT THE, UM, UH, THE MISDEMEANOR THING IS, UH, I, I DO TRUST OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT, UH, TO USE THAT VERY JUDICIOUSLY.
SO EVEN IF IT, UH, IF WE, YOU ALL AGREED THAT IT SHOULD BE A, A LEVEL ONE MISDEMEANOR, SO THAT YOU HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY, UM, UH, DISCOURAGE THE, THE, THE, THE TRUE, UH, PEOPLE WHO ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE, UM, OR DOING THE WRONG KINDS OF THINGS, UM, I, I, I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE, UH, SOMEONE TRULY DESTITUTE BEING CITED BY OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT.
UM, THEY'RE, THEY'RE LIKELY, UH, MAYBE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THE NEXT, UH, SESSION ABOUT THIS, YOU CAN INVITE THE CHIEF TO, UH, COME AND MAKE SOME COMMENTS ABOUT, UH, HOW THEY INTERPRET AND, UH, APPLY THE LAW.
UM, BUT IT, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THAT, UM, UH, THE, THE FACT THAT SOMEONE WOULD APPEAR BEFORE THE JUDGE WOULD VERY, VERY LIKELY, ESPECIALLY GIVEN OUR PAST HISTORY, WE HAVEN'T CITED VERY MANY PEOPLE, IF ANY, IN THE, IN SEVERAL YEARS FOR THIS.
AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK GOOD POLICING DOES.
AND I THINK WE CAN TRUST OUR POLICE TO DO THAT.
SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING I WANTED TO BE SURE TO ADD TO THIS CONVERSATION.
YEAH, THIS IS SUCH AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION TO BE HAVING BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL KNOW THAT HOMELESSNESS IS A PROBLEM THAT WE CAN'T SOLVE.
NO ONE HAS EVER SOLVED IT, AND IT GROWS REGARDLESS OF WHAT PEOPLE DO.
UM, WE BUILD, WE DON'T BUILD, IT GROWS ANYWAY.
UM, NO JURISDICTION SOLVED IT.
YEARS OF TRYING GENUINE, DEEP, GENUINE EFFORTS OF, UH, EVER-CHANGING MENU OF, OF APPROACHES TO, TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS.
UM, WELL MEANT AND SUCCESSFUL TO SOME DEGREE, BUT HOMELESSNESS IS WITH US.
UM, THAT SAID, I THINK THERE'S THINGS THAT CAN BE DONE AND NEED TO BE DONE.
I, I TOTALLY
WE FUNDED A VAN, WE FUNDED, UM, THE FREEZING WEATHER, AND I'M PRETTY SURE ALL OF US, IF, IF THE 3000 ISN'T ENOUGH TO KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED, THAT WE
[01:35:01]
CAN DISCUSS THAT.AGAIN, I THINK THAT'S A, A VERY POSITIVE, STRAIGHTFORWARD AND, UM, NECESSARY.
THE SHOWERS, ALL OF THOSE THINGS ARE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD STILL BE DOING.
UM, WHATEVER THE POLICE BLOTTER SAYS, I NOTICE A LOT OF REPEAT OFFENDERS ON THEM.
UM, LORI WAS VERY CLEAR ABOUT DIFFERENT KINDS OF HOMELESSNESS THAT YOU HAVE.
YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO REALLY JUST NEED TO SLEEP.
YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO JUST WANT A PLACE TO BE SAFE.
AND THEN YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO HAVE OTHER NEEDS, OTHER DESIRES, AND YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE IN FACT, TRULY, TRULY DISTURBED PEOPLE WHO AREN'T GOING TO PROBABLY WANT TO DO A LOT OF WHAT, WHAT WE COULD POSSIBLY EVER REASONABLY OFFER.
UM, I, I THINK JUDGING FROM THE CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH KURT AND AND PRIOR AND HERE IS WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FIND A PLACE, UM, LEGALLY WHERE PEOPLE CAN SLEEP BECAUSE WE'VE GOT ALL THESE PLACES WHERE THEY CAN'T SLEEP.
UM, I WOULD LIKE, I THINK, I THINK A STAKEHOLDER GROUP IS A GOOD, IS A GOOD INITIATIVE.
I WOULD, I WOULD, I DON'T THINK KAREN AND HER STAFF, OUR STAFF CAN DO ANYTHING AT THIS TIME.
I THINK THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO JUST CONVENE AND CALL TOGETHER.
IF THE STAKEHOLDER, IF PEOPLE WANT, IF LORI OR MICK OR SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO PULL TOGETHER STAKEHOLDERS TO, TO SORT OF TALK ABOUT THIS AND, AND MAKE IT MOVE FORWARD, I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING I WOULD CERTAINLY WELCOME.
UM, RIGHT NOW IN THIS TIME TO GET SOMETHING MOVING, UM, I WOULD, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT RESIDENTS SOMEHOW ALSO BE INCLUDED SINCE WE, WE HAVE RESIDENTS WHO ARE GENERALLY VERY, VERY HAPPY WITH ALL THE THINGS WE MOVE FORWARD TO, TO PUT FORWARD ON THE TABLE IN SOLUTION TO OUR PROBLEMS. SO, UM, UNLESS THERE'S AN INTEREST BY, BY THE, THE INTERESTED PEOPLE THEMSELVES TO SORT OF PULL SOMETHING TOGETHER IN TERMS OF BEGINNING TO GET TOGETHER TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE RAISED AND THAT ACTUALLY ARE IN THE REAL WORLD, THEN I, I THINK THIS HAS TO WAIT UNTIL OUR PRIORITY SESSIONS WHERE THE NEW COUNCIL CAN HAVE A CHANCE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT PRIORITIES THAT EXIST WE DON'T WANNA DO AND WHAT PRIORITIES, AND TO SUBSTITUTE THIS FOR WHAT, WHAT WE WANT TO SUBSTITUTE FOR TAKING ON.
WHAT I SEE IS A, IS A PRETTY HEFTY, PRETTY HEFTY ISSUE.
UM, I THINK, I THINK KURT REACHED OUT TO TWO CIVIL RIGHTS GROUPS, VERY ESTABLISHED IN ARIZONA, VERY ESTABLISHED IN OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY AND IN ARIZONA COMMUNITIES.
UM, I THINK THAT THAT'S A FINE GROUP.
I DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO REACH OUT TO THE A C L U AS SORT OF ANYTHING DIFFERENT.
AND UNLESS KURT THINKS THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE, I THINK THOSE OTHER GROUPS BASICALLY DO THE SAME KIND OF THING AND THAT THERE WOULD BE INVALUABLE IN GETTING BACK TO US.
UM, IT, CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ARE ESTABLISHED BY THE COURTS AND THAT'S WHAT'S BEING DONE.
UM, I I, I THINK KURT AND CERTAINLY MICK HAS A LOT OF OF EXPERIENCE INTERACTING WITH, UM, JURISDICTIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
AND I THINK THAT, THAT, THAT COULD BE USEFUL INFORMATION.
I'M GOING TO, I'M GOING TO SORT OF SIDE WITH, UM, KURT'S INITIAL, UM, RECOMMENDATION ON THE, ON THE CHARGES.
I THINK THE JUDGE HAS GREAT JU UH, DISCRETION IN, IN LEVING AND FINES AND I, I I'M NOT GOING TO SORT OF MICROMANAGE OR I MEAN, I AGREE.
IT'S, IT DOESN'T SEEM TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE IF SOMEONE'S DESTITUTE TO PUT A $70 FINE AND TO ISSUE AWARD FOR THEIR ARREST, IT IT, BUT I WOULDN'T.
BUT TO THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T SEEM TO GET THERE VERY OFTEN IS, IS WHAT I'M RELYING ON.
[01:40:01]
MANY PROCESSES AND REAL LIFE, UM, EXPERIENCE IN, IN NEVER GETTING IN, VERY RARELY GETTING TO THAT.AND I THINK WHEN, WHEN WE GET TO IT, I MEAN, I COULD BE WRONG.
I SEE SOME, SOME NA SOME SHAKING OF THE HEADS FROM EXPERTS.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT PERHAPS IN TERMS OF, OF WHAT, WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS TO PEOPLE WHO ARE DESTITUTE WHEN THEY GET CAUGHT UP IN THIS DOES IT CAN'T MAKE THEIR LIVES EASIER.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR, HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT, BUT I WANNA BE VERY CLEAR THAT WE, THERE ARE REAL LIMITS TO WHAT WE CAN AND WHAT WE CAN DO.
AND I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO THINK VERY SERIOUSLY ABOUT, AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD START AND I THINK A GROUP WOULD BE A GOOD START.
IF IT CAN BE DONE NOW WITH, WITH THE BEGINNING OF A STAKEHOLDER GROUP, I THINK IT WOULD BE WONDERFUL.
BUT IF IT CAN'T, I THINK IT HAS TO WAIT UNTIL WE WE GET TO OUR PRIORITY SESSION UNLESS KAREN SAYS THAT SHE CAN TAKE THAT ON.
NOW ARE YOU ASKING ME, I'M ASKING KAREN, CAN YOU TAKE IT ON NOW? NO MA'AM, WE CANNOT.
SO THAT'S, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS AND I WILL AGREE WITH JESSICA PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING SHE SAID.
BUT I THINK THIS IS NOT, OBVIOUSLY IT'S NOT AN EASY ISSUE TO DEAL WITH BECAUSE NO ONE, AS SHE POINTED OUT, HAS BEEN PARTICULARLY SUCCESSFUL IN DOING IT, UH,
AND I THINK THE, THE, UH, RETREAT IS, IS GOING TO BE THE PLACE TO TALK ABOUT IT MORE TO DECIDE JUST HOW MUCH, UH, YOU WANT TO DEDICATE TO THIS.
AND I, AND I ALSO LIKE THE IDEA OF A PRIVATE GROUP.
KAREN SAYS SHE CAN'T PULL IT TOGETHER.
AND I THINK THIS, THIS IS HAPPENED IN OTHER INSTANCES.
WE HAVE A HOUSING COMMITTEE THAT WAS PULLED TOGETHER BY A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL.
I THINK THAT'S THE PLACE TO GO.
AND, AND ALSO I, I FOUND IT REALLY INTERESTING THAT LORI BROUGHT UP THE COUNT IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE IN JANUARY AND, AND THAT WILL BE CRITICAL I WOULD THINK TO, TO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO.
SO, SO IT, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD PLACE TO START WITH TRYING TO DETERMINE THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM AND WHO YOU CAN HELP AND, AND WHO MAYBE WHO YOU CAN'T.
I, I DON'T KNOW, BUT VERY DIFFICULT ISSUE.
IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF SERIOUS THOUGHTFULNESS AND DELIBERATION ON WHAT IS EXACTLY THE BEST THING TO DO.
AND OF COURSE WE CAN REACH OUT TO THE OTHER CITIES IN THE VERDE VALLEY AND SEE IF THERE'S, WE CAN WORK TOGETHER IN ANY WAY, BUT WE CERTAINLY DON'T WANNA, UM, THINK THAT OUR PROBLEM WILL BE SOLVED SOMEWHERE ELSE.
UM, SO SANDY, COULD I JUST CLARIFY ONE THING I SAID SURE.
YEAH, I DON'T WANNA LEAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT NOTHING CAN BE DONE TO ADDRESS THE HOMELESSNESS AND THAT ALL ALL EFFORTS FAIL.
WHAT I MEANT IS THAT THE ISSUE OF HOMELESSNESS HAS NEVER BEEN SOLVED.
THERE ARE APPROACHES TO ADDRESSING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF HOMELESSNESS FOR SOME PEOPLE THAT, THAT, THAT SEEMED SUCCESSFUL.
I KNOW KURT MENTIONED THAT SALT LAKE CITY SOLVED HOMELESSNESS FOR SOME SHORT PERIOD OF TIME BY BUILDING, I DON'T KNOW, SOME HUGE NUMBER OF, OF, OF FACILITIES.
BUT SINCE THAT TIME IT IS, IT HAS RISEN ITS HEAD AGAIN.
SO IT'S NOT THAT NOTHING CAN BE DONE.
I DON'T WANNA GIVE THAT OPINION, THAT PERCEPTION.
I, I LISTED THINGS THAT I THOUGHT WERE VERY GOOD INITIATIVES.
I JUST THINK THAT LIKE THE REST OF US, THE HOMELESS POPULATION IS VERY, VERY DIVERSE AND SOME OF THE NEEDS OF SOME OF THAT POPULATION ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BE MET BY WHAT GOVERNMENTS CAN DO.
SOME OTHER ASPECTS THAT NEEDS IN THAT POPULATION CANNOT BE MET.
SO IT'S VERY IMPORTANT I THINK WHEN WE TALK ABOUT IT, TO TALK ABOUT WHICH SEGMENT WE EXPECT TO BE ABLE TO ASSIST.
I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY CUZ I DON'T WANT OUR, OUR VOLUNTEERS WITH THE HOMELESS TO, TO GET THE WRONG IMPRESSION THAT I DON'T THINK
[01:45:01]
ANYTHING CAN BE DONE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT I THINK AND THAT THAT'S I EXACTLY THAT I DON'T EITHER.THERE'S, WE CAN DO SOMETHING, I'M NOT SURE WHAT AND IT'S LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE IS A COMPLEX ISSUE.
THERE ARE HARDLY EVER ANY SIMPLE ANSWERS TO ANYTHING AND CERTAINLY NOT SOMETHING AS COMPLEX AND DIFFICULT AS HOMELESSNESS TO DEAL WITH.
SO, UH, I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO SEE WHAT WE CAN DO, BUT IT'S GOTTA BE REASONABLE, SO.
ANYTHING ELSE, TOM? THANK YOU MA'AM.
MAYOR, I JUST WANNA SAY THIS IS BEFORE SOME MENTION OF THE RESIDENTS, UM, CUZ THE, THE TOPIC ADDRESSED THE HOMED AND THE HOMELESS AND THE, ONE OF THE, UH, STAKEHOLDERS IS THE HOMED, UH, THAT NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERED AS WELL.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE SURE IT, IT, THERE'S GONNA BE SOME KIND OF A COMPROMISE THAT'S GONNA HAVE TO BE DERIVED SOMEHOW DOWN THE ROAD THAT IF IT'S GONNA BE SUCCESSFUL, ALL BETWEEN THE HOME TO THE HOMELESS.
SO I THINK BOTH PARTIES ARE GONNA NEED TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT GROUP, WHATEVER THAT GROUP IS.
UM, DO YOU HAVE DIRECTION, KURT AND KAREN? YES.
WE'LL, WE'LL CONTINUE TO RESEARCH IT.
UM, AT LEAST I WILL IN MY END AND WE'LL WAIT FOR FURTHER DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL AT THE COUNCIL OR TREATMENT.
AND, AND IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ONE OF THE OTHER CRITICAL FACTORS IS GETTING BACK THE ANSWERS FROM THE ORGANIZATIONS YOU'VE CONTACTED ALREADY BEFORE WE, BEFORE WE DECIDE WHERE WE ARE WITH IT.
AND THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS, UH, AB 28 71.
DISCUSSION POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING THE, OH NO, SORRY, THAT'S WHEN WE JUST DID REPORTS
[8.d. Reports/discussion regarding Council assignments]
DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS.ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING FROM, UH, I DO SCOTT, BRIEFLY, JUST TO LET YOU KNOW AS MY UNOFFICIAL POSITION OF THE WHAT AS THE UNOFFICIAL LIAISON FOR KSB, I JUST WANNA REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THEY ARE HAVING A 50TH ANNIVERSARY, UH, UH, EVENT AT MARY FISHER THEATER ON, UH, OCTOBER 19TH AT 4:00 PM AND THE TICKETS ARE AVAILABLE, UH, FROM KSB.
I JUST, IS THAT A MARY DE FISHER OR IS IT THE NEW THEATER? I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE NEW THEATER.
JUST TO MAKE SURE WE'RE SITTING RIGHT INFORMATION OUT.
FIND THE TICKETS AT THE SAME PLACE.
WE'RE IN THE SAME PLACE, SO, OKAY.
THE NAME I THOUGHT WOULD HAD CHANGED A LITTLE BIT, SO.
WELL, THERE'S TWO SEPARATE THEATERS AND YEAH, BUT THEY'RE BOTH THERE.
YOU CAN'T GO WRONG GOING TO THAT PLACE, SO.
[8.e. Discussion regarding ideas for future meeting/agenda items.]
HOW ABOUT DISCUSSION REGARDING IDEAS FOR FUTURE MEETING AGENDA ITEMS? WE HAVE A MEETING TOMORROW AT THREE O'CLOCK.I HAVE ONE I, ONE, UH, REQUEST.
UH, WITH THE ALMOST COMPLETION OF THE CHAPEL ROAD SHARED USE PATH, WHICH I'M THRILLED ABOUT.
THERE WAS, UH, A DISCUSSION ALMOST 18 MONTHS AGO ABOUT THE BICYCLE TRAIL THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF THE LOWER CHAPEL AND COUNCIL DECIDE HAD MADE MENTION TO PUT ANY DISCUSSION OFF UNTIL THAT SHARED USE PATH IS COMPLETED SO THAT WE COULD DISCUSS, COUNCIL WOULD DISCUSS THE, UH, THE FUTURE NEED FOR THAT PATH.
I'D LIKE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANYBODY THAT WOULD, WHEN A SECOND, UH, BRINGING IT FORWARD FOR FUTURE DATE WHENEVER STAFF THINKS IT'S APPROPRIATE TO DISCUSS IT.
SO WHENEVER YOU FEEL IS NECESS, IT'S, UH, AVAILABLE.
SO I KNOW WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS COMING UP IN THE CALENDAR, SO I DON'T EXPECT IT TO BE RIGHT AWAY.
WOULD THAT BE PART OF A SIM DISCUSSION BECAUSE IT'S SHARED USE PATHS OR WOULD THIS BE A SEPARATE DISCUSSION? IT, IT COULD BE.
WE COULD INCORPORATE IT INTO THE SIM DISCUSSION.
WELL, SO THAT WE WON'T HAVE A SEPARATE ONE THEN.
WELL, THE SIM DISCUSSION IS GONNA TAKE PLACE ON OCTOBER 20.
NO, I KNOW, BUT IT'LL BE PART OF THAT, NOT A SEPARATE.
WELL, FOR NOW I THINK MAYBE WE'LL SEE IF IT'S FITS IN THERE.
IDENTIFY IF THERE NEEDS TO BE MORE.
I THINK WE COULD BE PREPARED TO SHOW THE MAP.
IF COUNCIL NEEDS ADDITIONAL TIME, WE CAN DEFER TO A SEPARATE DISCUSSION.
IF COUNCIL IS SATISFIED THAT YOU HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION AT THIS SAME MEETING TO MAKE A DECISION OR GIVE DIRECTION, THEN WE COULD DO IT IN THAT MEETING.
WITHOUT OBJECTION, WE'RE ADJOURNED.