HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/6/2023 Item 4a, Walker
Wilbanks, Megan
From:kathie walker <kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, September 1, 2023 3:27 PM
To:Advisory Bodies; Purrington, Teresa
Subject:Planning Commission Meeting 9/6/2023 - Safe Parking Site
Attachments:SAFE PARKING PROGRAM Santa Barbara County.pdf; Planning Commission
9.6.2023.pdf
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Please find the attached correspondence and attachment for the Planning Commissioners.
1
1
September 1, 2023
Planning Commissioners,
The safe parking program should be in a parking lot, consistent with the safe parking programs in other
communities. The city has modeled the program after the Santa Barbara County program, managed by
New Beginnings, which has numerous parking sites in secure parking lots, not on a public street.
The proposed site on Palm Street is in an unprotected area, surrounded by a public sidewalk, the
Veteran’s Hall, the Shell gas station with convenience store, and a motel. The site can be accessed by
anyone throughout the night, and it is impossible to monitor who is coming and going from the site
unless there is a full-time security guard on site. Residential homes are also very close to the site. The
businesses and residents will be impacted based on the experiences of those around the safe parking
site near the railroad up until the program ended on 8/28/2023.
I. San Luis Obispo Zoning Regulations: C-T Commerical Tourist Zone
The proposed location on Palm Street is located in the C-T (Commercial Tourist) zone, and the proposed
use is not consistent with the Commercial Tourist Zoning Regulations in San Luis Obispo.
The “Purpose and Application” of the C-T zone “is intended to provide accommodations and
services for the traveling public and implement General Land Use Policies 3.6.1 and 3.6.21 to promote
San Luis Obispo as an attractive place for short-term stays, as well as an attractive destination for long-
term visitors, with conference and visitor-serving facilities that have a low impact upon the environment
and upon the existing land forms and landscapes, and that provide low-impact visitor activities and low-
impact means of transportation. Integration of visitor-serving uses with other types of uses is
encouraged. Visitor-serving uses are especially appropriate where such uses have already
concentrated.”
Setting up an overnight site for homeless people to sleep in their vehicles and RVs on a public street,
with portable toilets and a dumpster, does not promote our city as an attractive place or destination for
visitors, does not have a low impact upon the environment or existing landscapes, and does not provide
activities for visitor-tourists, as outlined in the Zoning Regulations. Tourists are encouraged to walk, and
frequently do walk down Monterey Street at Grand Avenue, which intersects with the propose d parking
site at Palm Street and Grand Avenue. The proposed site location is specifically in the area of upper
1 San Luis Obispo General Land Use Policies
3.6.1. Basis for Tourism The City shall promote San Luis Obispo as an attractive place for short-term stays, as well
as an attractive destination for long-term visitors featuring its community character, natural qualities, historic
resources, and its educational and cultural facilities. The City should emphasize conference and visitor-serving
facilities which have a low impact upon the environment and upon existing land forms and landscapes, and which
provide low-impact visitor activities and low-impact means of transportation.
3.6.2. Locations The City shall encourage integration of visitor-serving uses with other types of uses, including
overnight accommodations Downtown, near the airport, and near the train station; small-scale facilities (such as
hostels or bed-and-breakfast places) may be located in Medium-High Density Residential and High-Density
Residential Districts, where compatible. Visitor-serving uses are especially appropriate where such uses have
already concentrated: along upper Monterey Street; at the Madonna Road area; at certain freeway interchanges;
and in the Downtown.
2
Monterey and Grand Avenue, which is outlined in the General Land Use Policy as an “already
concentrated” area for visitors to the city, which makes the area even less appropriate for the proposed
use. (See San Luis Obispo zoning map, attached)
The PF (Public Facilities) zone would be more appropriate for the proposed site, such as the parking lot
at Damon Garcia Sports Fields or Laguna Lake Park. There is a single entrance/exit at the lots which
would make monitoring easier and support safety for the participants and the community. A secure
parking lot is consistent with safe parking programs in many other areas, including those in Santa
Barbara, Goleta, Fremont, and Mountain View, which the city has, at various times, mentioned are
models for this program. None of those programs use public streets for safe overnight parking sites.
II. California Vehicle Code Section 21101 Authorizes Temporary Closing of Streets
The project proposes closing a city street for at least 13 hours (6 p.m. - 7 a.m.) within a 24-hour period
over the course of 120 days, or about four months, on an annual basis2. The city cites California Vehicle
Code 21101 and City Council Resolution No. 11152, which, the city claims “authorizes the Public Works
Director to approve temporary closure of city streets when in the opinion of the Public Works Director
the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of persons who are to use that portion of the
street during the temporary closing.”
The Vehicle Code section 21101(e) provides that “Local authorities, for those highways under their
jurisdiction, may adopt rules and regulations by ordinance or resolution . . . on the following m atters:
(e) Temporary closing a portion of any street for celebrations, parades, local special events, and other
purposes when, in the opinion of local authorities having jurisdiction or a public officer or employee that
the local authority designates by resolution, the closing is necessary for the safety and protection of
persons who are to use that portion of the street during the temporary closing.” (emphasis added)
(Note: The Vehicle Code uses the terms “street” and “highway” synonymously. (Vehicle Code §§ 360,
590).)
In the Agenda Report, the city leaves out a pertinent portion of the text of Section 21101(e), which li sts
the related activities that permit a local authority to temporarily close a portion of any street:
“celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes.” The California 4th District Court of
Appeals found that the “other purposes” outlined in Section 21101(e) must be “limited by the specific
list of events preceding it” which are “celebrations, parades, and local special events”. (See Committee
to Relocate Marilyn v. City of Palm Springs (2023) 88 Cal.App.5th 607.)
In the Palm Springs case, the Court rejected the city’s broad construction of the statutory phrase “other
purposes” in California Vehicle Code Section 21101(e) under the maxim ejusdem generis (of the same
kind). It found “if a statute contains a list of specified items followed by more general words, the general
2 “Duration: The cumulative duration of safe parking as part of the CAPSLO Rotating Safe Parking Program at the
subject location shall be limited to no more than 120 days annually, beginning within one year of the approval date
of this Director’s Action Permit, and annually thereafter (Condition No. 3).” (Page 19 of 43 of Planning Commission
Agenda Report for 9/6/2023.)
3
words are limited to those items that are similar to those specifically listed” . . . “the general phrase
"other purposes” must be limited by the specific list of events preceding it.”3
The events listed in Section 21101, which allow temporary closure of a city street under this Section are
“celebrations, parades, or local special events.” Closing a public street to create a site for homeless
people to sleep in their vehicles and RVs does not equate to a celebration, parade or local special event,
and is therefore not consistent with Section 21101(e), as alleged by the city in their Agenda Report.
There is also considerable case law regarding Section 21101 overall, that limits the authorit y of city
governments to close public streets for purposes outside of the “intended meaning” of California
Vehicle Code 21101.4 A city’s authority over street travel is narrowly construed in favor of state
legislation.5 “The use of highways for purposes of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a
common and fundamental right, of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.
(Rumford v. City of Berkeley (1982) 31 Cal.3d 545, 550)
State courts consistently look to the preemption of the entire field of traffic control by the state and
have concluded that the restricted nature of the delegation of power to prescribe traffic rules means
that a city has only power expressly provided for in the Vehicle Code. (Rumford v. City of Berkeley, supra,
at pp. 549-550.) The city of San Luis Obispo is overstepping its authority by claiming they have the right
to temporarily close a public street for a purpose (overnight parking site for homeless to sleep) that is
outside of the expressed language in Section 21101(e) (celebrations, parades, local special events or an
event directly related to those).
Additionally, California Vehicle Code 21101.6 says that despite Section 21101,
3 “Vehicle Code section 21101, subdivision (e), grants local authorities the power to “temporarily” close portions of
streets, but only for limited reasons—for “celebrations, parades, local special events, and other purposes,” where
the closure is necessary to safeguard and protect persons using the street. All of the proceedings warranting a
temporary street closure share a common characteristic... Given that the word “temporarily” precedes a list of
short-term events that are always relatively brief in duration, the most natural construction of “temporarily” is
that it likewise indicates the street closures must be brief in duration... We reject the City’s broad construction of
the statutory phrase “other purposes.” “Under the maxim ejusdem generis (of the same kind), ‘if a statute
contains a list of specified items followed by more general words, the general words are limited to those items
that are similar to those specifically listed.’” (Rincon Bandof Luiseño Mission Indians, etc. v. Flynt (2021) 70
Cal.App.5th 1059, 1091–1092; see J. Arthur Properties, II, LLC v. City of San Jose (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 480, 486
[“‘when a particular class of things modifies general words, those general words are construed as applying only
to things of the same nature or class as those enumerated’”].) Applying that cannon of construction here, the
general phrase "other purposes” must be limited by the specific list of events preceding it. (Committee to
Relocate Marilyn v. City of Palm Springs (2023) 88 Cal.App.5th, 607.) Emphasis added.
4 “[W]e consider portions of a statute in the context of the entire statute and the statutory scheme of which it is a
part, giving significance to every word, phrase, sentence, and part of an act in pursuance of the legislative
purpose.” (Brennon B. v. Superior Court (2022) 13 Cal.5th 662, 673; see Kaanaana v. Barrett Bus. Servs., Inc.(2021)
11 Cal.5th 158, 169 [“words used in a statute are considered in context, not isolation”].)
5 Vehicle Code section 21 embodies the state’s preemption over the field of traffic control. It states, “Except as
otherwise expressly provided, the provisions of this code are applicable and uniform throughout the state and in
all counties and municipalities therein, and a local authority shall not enact or enforce any ordinance or resolution
on the matters covered by this code...unless expressly authorized by this code.” (Veh. Code, §21, subd.(a).)
4
“local authorities may not place gates or other selective devices on any street which deny or
restrict the access of certain members of the public to the street while permitting others
unrestricted access to the street. This section is intended to codify the decision of the Court of
Appeal in City of Lafayette v. County of Contra Costa (91 Cal.App.3d 749)”6
In the Agenda Report, the city of San Luis Obispo also cites City Council Regulation 11152 which allowed
the city to temporarily close some streets for “Open SLO” during the COVID-19 pandemic, so that people
could dine outside, such as outside of Guiseppe’s Restaurant. Again, the right to access the areas on
closed public streets is open to everyone and not just a certain segment of the community. The current
project proposes temporarily closing a public street and only allowing access to participants of the safe
parking program, which is not consistent with the law.
III. Safe Parking Programs in Santa Barbara Compared with Proposed Site in SLO
The safe parking program in Santa Barbara (“SB”) is more regimented than the one proposed by
CAPSLO.
The city of SLO and CAPSLO’s program at the railroad station did not require case management. It’s not
clear whether they are revamping the program again to require case management of all participants but
as of 9/1/2023, their website still indicates “Case management is not required to participate in services.”
There are several material differences between the SB program and CAPSLO’s proposed safe parking
program. For example, SB clients are assigned a specific space in a specific lot which keeps the program
organized and provides accountability, since the participants are required to use that space at least four
6 In City of Lafayette v. County of Contra Costa, the city voted to close Happy Valley Road (by way of an
automatic gate) to through traffic except for drivers with an established need. The city sought a judicial
declaration that it had the right to close the road and that it was entitled to do so by the installation of
an automatic gate. The court held that the entire area covered by the Vehicle Code had been preempted
by state law and that in the absence of express legislative authority, the city had no authority to restrict
the right to travel on one of its streets. (Id., at pp. 754-757.)
5
times a week and must notify staff within 36 hours if they are going to be absent from their assigned
space. CAPSLO does not assign specific spaces to participants, and participants are not required to use
the space for any specific duration.
SB provides outreach workers and lot monitors who conduct numerous nightly checks of each site to
assess usage and maintain safety. CAPSLO does not have outreach workers or security conducting
nightly checks of the site to maintain safety.
SB follows strict rules and failure to follow rules results in removal from the program. CAPSLO’s program
seems more lenient and instead of removal, issues a “Rule Notification” to participants that break the
rules.7
SB specifies the lot is for sleeping only. CAPSLO allows participants to leave and come back, visit with
other participants, and use the lot for other purposes, such as socializing, in addition to sleeping.
SB does not allow clients to approach any lot owner, staff member, visitor or anyone else authorized to
be in the lot. CAPSLO does not have any rules in this regard.
CAPSLO allows up to 20 vehicles whereas the SB sites allow a more manageable number of 15 vehicles
or less.
I’ve attached information about the Santa Barbara program to this email so you can compare the two
programs yourself. (SAFE PARKING PROGRAM Santa Barbara County, attached.)
The less regimented approach by CAPSLO may be the reason for many of the problems encountered by
those who live or work near the site by the railroad station. I drove by the lot on 8/27/2023 at 1:15 p.m.
and in the three minutes I was there, I saw a seemingly homeless man go into an unlocked portable
toilet onsite. I do not feel comfortable attaching photos of the incident to this email, in respect of the
privacy of the individual, but will provide them to you privately if you feel they are needed. Obviously,
there should be resources for homeless people to access bathrooms, and I’m not familiar with what’s
available in San Luis Obispo. My observation is merely related to the safe parking site, which has been
repeatedly represented by the city and CAPSLO as overnight-only, with port-a-potties and dumpster
locked during the day. Neither was locked when I was there in the afternoon while the program was still
operational.
IV. The Findings in the Resolution Are Incorrect
I’d like to address some of the Findings of the proposed Resolution which are not accurate:
7 CAPSLO – The City of San Luis Obispo Safe Parking Program . . . 12. Rule Violations & Paneling. For violations of
any of the site rules and guidelines, CAPSLO will issue you a Rule Notification and record all incidents on site within
the CAPSLO Database. CAPSLO may ask you to leave and submit a panel request for reentry into SLO-SPP services if
any of the following occur: a. Repeatedly violating the guidelines and not taking corrective suggestions from staff.
b. Violence or threats towards staff, volunteers, neighbors, or other guests. c. Breaking another guest's
confidentiality. d. Theft or destruction of property on-site or in the surrounding neighborhood; Acts of vandalism,
disruptive behavior, stealing, or violence to nearby businesses or residences. e. Conducting a business out of the
program site, legal or illegal. f. Any other actions or behaviors have been deemed a threat to their safety and
health or others. (
6
Finding 1: “As conditioned, the program will not harm the general health, safety, and welfare of people
living or working in the vicinity because conditions of approval have been included to ensure
compatibility with surrounding uses and provide for the facilitation of participants’ transition to
permanent housing.”
On the contrary, the proposed use does harm those living and working in the vicinity. The reason the
railroad site was discontinued is because businesses and residents around the site documented the
detrimental effect and harm the site had on them and/or t heir businesses. According to multiple people
near the railroad safe parking site, they have continued to be negatively affected by homeless
participants at the railroad site up until it closed on 8/28/2023, through increased theft in their business
and other criminal activity directly related to the homeless participants, fires lit by participants at the
site, trespassing into their businesses to use their restrooms for extended periods, participants using the
site outside of designated hours and disturbing visitors and customers, and other things as documented
by recent statements of those affected.
Finding 2. “The temporary closure of a portion of Palm Street is consistent with intent and provisions of
California Vehicle Code Section 21101 that is authorized through City Council Resolution No. 11152 (2020
Series), and the County Board of Supervisors Ordinance No. 3459 (2021 Series) which establishes the
Shelter Crisis within the County of San Luis Obispo, pursuant to Government Code Section 8698.2”
The temporary closure of Palm Street is NOT consistent with the intent of the provisions of California
Vehicle Code Section 21101 or City Council Resolution No. 11152. The city does not have the legal
authority to temporarily close Palm Street, a public street, because state law takes precedence over city
and county legislation, and California Appellate Court has ruled that “other purposes” enumerated in
Section 21101(e) must directly relate to celebrations, parades, and special events. An overnight
homeless parking site does not relate to a celebration, parade or special event, by any stretch of the
imagination.
There is significant caselaw related to Section 21101 overall, that narrowly construes a city’s ability to
close a street for one group or segment of the community, based on the principle that city streets
belong to the public, and cannot be closed to exclude some residents while allowing others.
Finding 8. “As conditioned, the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Zoning Regulations
as described within the property development standards for the C -T zone. The proposed safe parking use
is compatible with the project site and other land uses in the vicinity because the program consists of
temporary overnight parking on a public street where existing on-street parking is currently allowed.”
It’s shocking that the city makes the assertion that the proposed project complies with the Zoning
Regulations for the Tourist-Commercial (C-T) zone. It actually violates the Zoning Regulations for the C-T
zone, and completely ignores the “premise and application” of the zone as defined in the Zoning
Regulations which specifies that use in the C-T zone is intended to:
• promote San Luis Obispo as an attractive place for short-term stays, as well as an attractive
destination for long-term visitors,
• with conference and visitor-serving facilities that have a l ow impact upon the environment and
upon the existing land forms and landscapes, and that
7
• provides low-impact visitor activities and low-impact means of transportation (such as walking
from hotels to restaurants and/or downtown).
Additionally, the proposed overnight camping use is not compatible with the project site and other land
uses in the area because overnight camping in a vehicle is not permitted on a public street in San Luis
Obispo according to Ordinance 10.34.020.8 On-street parking is currently allowed on Palm Street, but
sleeping or camping in your vehicle or RV is prohibited there, or on any city street, between 10 p.m. and
6 a.m. Further, the vehicles at the proposed site are not parking in “existing on -street parking” because
the site is being modified to allow 10 vehicles to park at a 45-degree angle, adjacent to the curb.
Nevertheless, the most important aspect of the matter is that the proposed use is not consistent with
the city’s own Zoning Regulations for the Tourist-Commercial zone.
V. Planning Commission Must Deny the Project
The proposed project must be denied based on inconsistency with the city’s Zoning Regulations,
specifically with the “purpose and application” of the Commercial Tourist zone, where it is proposed to
be located. (Finding 6 and Finding 8) Additionally, it is not legal to temporarily close a public street under
California Vehicle Code Section 21101 for the proposed use of establishing a site for homeless to sleep in
their vehicles overnight. (Finding 2) However, I urge you to support the program in an appropriate
location consistent with the city’s Zoning Regulations, such as in a P-F Public Facilities zone or when
there is an approved contract with a faith-based or other organization to operate in their parking lot,
consistent with safe parking programs in other communities, especially Santa Barbara’s program.
Thank you,
Kathie Walker
P.S. The overnight safe parking program in Santa Barbara offers a three-day training program and a Safe
Parking Program Manual, which is described as a guide created for other communities seeking to begin
their own program to assist the vehicular homeless. The manual outlines best practices, challenges, tips
and “pearls of wisdom”. I’m curious about whether the city of San Luis Obispo participated in this
program to learn how Santa Barbara’s program is so successful.
8 SLO City Ordinance 10.34.020: Overnight camping prohibited on city streets and city-owned parking areas. A.
Prohibition. No occupied vehicle shall be parked for the purposes of allowing the occupants thereof to establish a
temporary or permanent residential use, camp or sleep within the vehicle during the hours of ten p.m. to six a.m.
For the purpose of this section, any occupied motor vehicle parked on the public streets or specified public areas
during the times mentioned herein, which (1) contains a person or persons sleeping therein, or (2) contains
bedding or camp paraphernalia arranged for the purpose of, or in such a way as will permit, the occupants thereof
to remain overnight shall be deemed to be in violation of this section.
B. Applicability. This section shall prohibit the parking of vehicles for purposes of overnight camping on any city
public right-of-way, including all public streets, and any city-owned parking areas within the city of San Luis Obispo.
Camping or sleeping in vehicles on private property or areas not within the public right-of-way, public streets, or
any city-owned parking areas is subject to the requirements of Section 17.16.015.
8
San Luis Obispo Zoning Map
SAFE PARKING PROGRAM®
A PROGRAM OF NEW BEGINNINGS COUNSELING CENTER
324 East Carrillo Street, Suite C
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Administrative Headquarters: (805) 963-7777
SafePark ing (805) 963-8135 (Fax) SafePark ing
r A o G F A M" Safe ParkingTM Program Office: (805) 845-8492 r R a G A A M
Coordinator Cell Phone: (805) 450-8476
SAFE PARKING PROGRAM® OVERVIEW
New Beginnings Counseling Center currently operates a program to provide safe overnight parking for
qualifying individuals and families who are living in their vehicles. Program participants must be currently
living in -heir vehicle and be a resident of Santa Barbara County. Additionally, participants must have
current criver's license, vehicle insurance, and registration. The program is a cooperative between New
Beginnin-gs, local law enforcement, faith -based organizations and merchants, non -profits, the Cities of
Goleta and Santa Barbara, and the County of Santa Barbara, where the participating institutions provide
parking places for vehicle dwellers and/or collaborate with us in the successful implementation of the
program
The procram currently offers 136 spaces at 24 dispersed locations in the greater Santa Barbara area. Each
lot offers free nightly parking for one to 15 vehicles, depending on location. The purpose of the program is
to providty the level of stability needed for vehicle dwellers to effectively make positive changes in their lives
and become re-employed and re -housed as quickly as possible. In addition to parking, New Beginnings
offers social services and case management to help them achieve this end.
HOW IT WORKS
Faith -based organizations, non -profits and businesses interested in participating in the program sign a
contract with New Beginnings and agree to a basic set of rules for the vehicle dwellers on their property,
The participating institutions are currently free to augment or edit the rules as they see fit in accordance
with County and/or City codes.
Clients s=eking to participate in this program receive an intake assessment. Potential clients are screened
via an in-depth interview designed to identify immediate crises and needs, and establish long-term goals.
Typical issues include the following:
❖ Determine immediate crises, both personal and vehicle -related
❖ Verify identification or assist in obtaining identification
❖ Income verification if any — employment, government, food stamps, etc.
❖ Determine monthly expenses and bills
❖ Obtain pertinent info and ID regarding children and dependents
❖ Determine legal issues pending
❖ Determine medical issues/establish medical history
PROGRAM OPERATIONS, RULES AND REGULATIONS: iO4'\;
Eaci client at -.ends case management meetings to determine how they are progressing toward Si arking
reeting their goals. In addition, lot monitors/outreach workers conduct nightly checks of the rROGRAM`
part cipating lots to assess usage, identify potential problems, and maintain safety for all. Below is a list of rules and
regLiations th 3t the client must agree to in order to be able to qualify for our services.
PARKING RULES, RESTRICTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE SAFE PARKING PROGRAM:
1. Program participants must be currently living in their vehicles in the Santa Barbara or Goleta area and
0ey must have current license, registration, and insurance.
2. Giuns or firearms of any kind are strictly prohibited, and the use of alcohol and/or drugs will not be
tolerated. Failure to abide by this rule will result in immediate removal from the assigned location.
3. Urinating, defecating, or disposing of such waste on the property is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. Failure to
abide by this rule will result in immediate removal from the assigned location.
4. Absolutely no violent acts, verbal or physical. If you have an issue with another client contact the office
and we will handle it administratively.
5. Any concerns, complaints, or suggestions regarding the lot must be communicated with the Safe Parking
office directly and handled administratively. Clients are NOT authorized to approach any lot owner, staff
rrember, visitor, or anyone else authorized to be present in the lot.
6. G Tents must always maintain a working phone or email, in order to be in contact with case managers.
7. C ients must utilize the permitted space a minimum of 4 nights per week in order to retain a space in the
program. Safe Parking Program staff must be notified within 36 hours of any absences from the lot, except
in cases of emergency.
8. Camping tarps or camping equipment beyond the top of the vehicle are prohibited.
9. Cooking outside the vehicle is absolutely not allowed.
10. AN trash will be disposed of offsite and the area will be kept tidy.
11. Lcud music is not permitted.
12. Parking lot is for sleeping use only.
13. Overnight stays will be limited to the hours assigned. Adherence to in and out times is mandatory.
14. Users must keep (barking) dogs in their vehicle at all times. Animals must be kept on a leash at all times
on the property. Animal waste must be must be picked up immediately and disposed of properly.
15. Under absolutely no conditions will the client(s) invite other vehicle dwellers to occupy the site or invite
a■y visitors or any type of patrons into the parking lot.
16. If bathroom facilities are provided, showering or bathing is not permitted.
17. The owner of the parking lot cannot be held liable for damages caused by a third party to the parked vehicle or
its occupants.
18. A:)solutely no more than one vehicle allowed per individual or family staying at the site.
19. A:)solutely no use of the facility services i.e., ELECTRICITY, water, trash or any of the hoses at the site.
Failure to comply with this rule will result in immediate termination from our program.
20. Please respect the privacy of the surrounding neighbors and their property.
21. Cilldren will be watched and kept safe at All Times --- No ExceptionsHM
22. Do not park within 3 blocks of the lot you are assigned to at any time.
23. If you do not renew your permit within 7 days after the expiration date you will be suspended from the
program and must make an appointment to discuss reinstatement.
Mote: Please notify us immediately if you are leaving either for a week or permanently, and if you have been issued a
M=y to a site please return it when you leave. We are not responsible to remind clients when to renew permits. We do
rot automatically renew permits.
Ack"
C -ient Confidentiality and Privacy Policies SafeParking
c'.afe Parking p-ogram staff will not divulge whether someone is or is not a participant in the program. Program ""0"""M
staff will not di\.ulge any personal identifying information of any individual or family participant of the program without consent
ffom the client/s. The Safe Parking program has incorporated into its policies and procedures a process that will ensure the
=nf dentiality cf program participants' identifying information; records pertaining to any individual or family provided with
assistance; and treatment services offered under any project associated with New Beginnings. Furthermore, the address or
Imation of any participant assisted through the Safe Parking program will be anonymous except upon written authorization for
the informatior to be made public from the client/program participant to the person or persons responsible for the operation of
the program.
10 We, consent to participate in the shelter component of the Safe Parking Program, and Me Accept and agree to
r_spect, acknowledge and adhere to the rules, policy, and procedure; guidelines and regulations that are stated above
and will accept full responsibility of the consequences of the outcome if there is a violation to this contract.
(signature of client)
(date)
;�gnature of client) (date)
'signature of case manager) (date)
addition to these rules, all clients sign a release of information and a waiver of liability towards our company and
,-our organiza-ion, indicating that neither party is responsible for damages to the vehicle, and allowing us to share
,� ert informaion. New Beginnings Counseling Center carries liability insurance for each Safe Parking lot location.
ONCLUSION
closing, we hope you will consider participating in this program. If you have any questions about this introductory
_eceet, please call the Safe Parking Program Coordinator Cassie Roach at (805) 845-8492 or (805) 450-8476.
;so, if your organization would like to communicate with one of our local lots that are currently working with us we
-a-)u.d be happy to connect you with those organizations. It is important to gain various perspectives on the program
i-i order to mace a balanced decision that is in the best interest of your organization, while also thinking about the
reeds of homeless individuals in our community who are forced to live in their vehicles.
To reach New Beginnings Counseling Center to speak with the Executive Director, Kristine Schwarz, please call
1905) 963-7777 x144. If we do not hear from you, we will follow up in the next several weeks with a phone call to
colFer further information and answer any questions you might have.
Tlhank you for your interest in our program.