Loading...
Agenda Item # 9.1 - Mary Silva | Received 05/31/2023From:Mary Silva To:City Clerk Subject:EXTERNAL - Regarding the draft ordinance Date:Wednesday, May 31, 2023 11:23:34 AM CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email. the City Council, needs to be more practical and progressive … this scenario with the draft ordinance does absolutely NOTHING to help people get help to get them out of this situation! We need people with integrity, and wisdom and courage to do what’s right… I am not seeing this with our City Council through the years and now… problems get ignored or swept away that’s why it keep getting worse! Many are In circumstances not of their making.. and treating them like so much rubbish to be swept away is not the solution .. “Please encourage your council members to vote NO on the draft ordinance as is, and please come to the next City Council meeting, Monday June 5th, 6pm at Gilroy City Hall. You can also email us at CityClerk@cityofgilroy.org A draft ordinance was presented that is based on the premise that the unhoused residents of our community are inherently criminal and "we" need to protect "our" children and community from "them." It is an attempt to ban folks who are too poor to afford housing from “sitting, sleeping, or laying” and “storing, using, or placing” personal possessions in and within 500 feet of parks, schools, playgrounds, and daycares; within 100 feet of bridges, creeks, railroads, and underpasses; and within 10 feet of doorways and loading docks. As Jan Bernstein Chargin stated perfectly, "In other words, it bans activities of daily living in the areas most likely to be used by people who lack stable housing." This ordinance will corral unhoused people into residential neighborhoods, business and commercial districts, and into the few public spaces not covered by the ordinance. The unhoused have the same rights as those of us who can afford shelter. We have the same needs as the unhoused. It is unconstitutional to discriminate against anyone based on the assumption or presumption of a possible future criminal act. This ordinance is discriminatory. Existence is not a crime. Being impoverished is not a crime. We need solutions, not punishment. There needs to be a substantive investment in resources and services, as well as a moratorium on sweeps, designated areas for sanctioned encampments, and/or a safe park. We know that sweeps are harmful and counterproductive. If we have places for people to be while they are working through the housing process, we can get this done! About 150 people have been housed since July. Together we can make even further progress. Can't we tolerate the presence of encampments while we work together to get people housed? Can't we TALK to the people involved? Most agree to stay away from schools, participate in cleanups, maintain their sites, in exchange for not having to fear a sweep, when we communicate with them, person to person.” Sincerely, Mary J. Silva