Approved

Item 15 - Adopting Title 8 Colorado Safe Parking Initiative

Emergency Ordinance O-2022-6 – Adopting Title 8, Chapter 15, Of The Municipal Code Of The City Of Lakewood, Colorado, In Connection With Establishing A Pilot Program For The Colorado Safe Parking Initiative

Videos

Public Meeting Video

Files

Staff Memo ( 0.11 MB )
Ordinance O-2022-6 ( 0.15 MB )
Benefits of Safe Parking Fact Sheet ( 0.42 MB )
CO Safe Parking Fact Sheet ( 0.5 MB )
How to Connect to Provide Public Comment
By iPad, iPhone, or Android device on the Zoom App, enter webinar ID: 849 5732 0840
By Telephone: 720-707-2699
Webinar ID: 849 5732 0840, #
Participant ID: #
Press *9 to Request to Speak, you will be prompted when to speak.
Press *6 to Unmute 

Comments & Feedback

Comments
 
This case is closed, online commenting is no longer available.
Online comments closed at 12:00 PM MDT 6/13/22.
The short version: This proposal is not what the Council said they would do. Not only that, it reflects no reference whatsoever to what was proposed, nor to any existing successful initiative. The writers of this proposal made no effort whatsoever to find a reasonable compromise within what was discussed at the Council meeting where this was made an emergency process. I had given up long ago on the Lakewood City Council. I despaired of this Councils ability to accomplish anything good for Lakewood. I was recently encouraged and even excited when I attended a council meeting to support SPI. What the Mayor and Council nearly all said , and agreed to, seemed to indicate that actually doing some good, and in particular finding a compassionate and neighborly way to address the increase of people without a regular residence, was a high priority. What a refreshing change. It is very much appreciated. This proposal is not that. It's a return to the strife and obstruction that has marked the Lakewood City Council's deliberation for a long time. an incredibly discouraging and disappointing- if not really surprising- development. I am very much in agreement with Pastor Ben's comments on the specific limitations and disadvantages of this proposal, and with his suggestion that : This emergency ordinance to do only TWO things: 1. Make safe parking lawful and 2. Base the lawfulness of safe parking on whether or not a lot is operated in partnership with and approval from the Colorado Safe Parking Initiative. And that the Council work with CSPI to understand and emulate what has already been done and is working elsewhere. And finally, a reminder: The Mayor and City Council are elected by the people of Lakewood. The City Attorney's office staff is not. The council has had a renewal and is making progress with a turnover of personnel. One wonders if a similar solution should be considered in the City Attorney's office.
June 13, 2022, 10:47 AM
Glen Newell
8 / 11 Council Members have viewed this comment
A vehicle provides protection from the elements, a degree of security from harassment, a place to sleep, a place to safely store a limited number of belongings and a way to charge crucial electronics such as a cell phone or computer. People living in vehicles need less support from the community around them and are one step closer to being re-homed again. This is a better alternative than being directly on the street. There is every reason why the City Council should approve the Safe Parking Initiative.
June 9, 2022, 2:08 PM
Kurt Brumbaugh
8 / 11 Council Members have viewed this comment
I am grateful to see this work come so far, and I wanted to offer specific feedback and questions to consider and discuss that might improve what is currently within this draft of a plan. Please be aware of my support and excitement that this is going on, and my commitment to begin this work when my church is ready to start it—even as my feedback below will come across as incisive and direct. I believe there are problems here that must be addressed even as I am grateful for what has been done so far. Here it goes: 1. Why are only two faith-based organizations allowed to participate in this “pilot?” That seems to be a strange limit, and even stranger to make it exclusive to faith-based organizations. I recommend striking that language. 2. These community notification standards are arbitrary. There is no stated reason that substantiates 1000 feet radius as a sufficient notification range. Why not have participants notify all property owners adjacent to the property and the Residential Neighborhood Organization (if there is one) that the property is located within? 3. Please define what is meant by “on-site management” at all times. This, among other requirements without definition are not helpful to put on paper. 4. Forcing all participants to provide a plan on how they intend to get into housing is onerous when there isn’t enough housing for everyone who is experiencing homelessness (Colorado has an affordable housing deficit of over 250,000 units) 5. If a plan must be in conformity with Colorado Safe Parking Inititative, why is the city adding additional arbitrary standards that the CSPI already requires of its partners? I will pause here to note that staff has NOT reached out in their research to the CSPI in their development of this plan. 6. Bi-monthly reports seem unnecessary when CSPI partners are required to make reports and collect data that is given to CSPI. It also creates an administrative burden on participants in this pilot program. The city is asking for free labor from those who are providing a service to the city by participating in this program in the first place. Now if the city wants to offer funding support for this… 7. Also, it is absurd to expect participants to know how to demonstrate what costs to the city of Lakewood are in the event of services calls, etc. Perhaps the city could tell us what these things cost instead? 8. The sunset provision is unnecessary—we don’t sunset other zoning or municipal code changes, do we? Generally, my recommendation to my city councilors is to consider observing partners like myself who intend to follow the standards and requirements of CSPI itself, rather than accepting city staff’s creation of new arbitrary hoops for us who want to do this work to jump through. Also, I intend to be easy to contact for questions from anyone in the city who would like to talk through some of this at a granular level. [email protected]
June 8, 2022, 6:49 PM
Rev. Ben A. David Hensley
9 / 11 Council Members have viewed this comment
I wholeheartedly support this ordinance moving through and I look forward to everyone on Council passing it. This is a small step towards helping our unhoused community and neighbors. Please consider passing and expanding comparable initiatives in order to support our fellow community members.
June 6, 2022, 10:04 AM
John Claus
10 / 11 Council Members have viewed this comment
I very much support this Safe Parking pilot program! I believe it gives enough flexibility for the hosts to learn from their experience. I hope that the council will revisit this issue before it expires in two years so we can more quickly iterate lessons learned into a more permanent program. Thanks!
June 5, 2022, 9:01 PM
Joshua Comden
10 / 11 Council Members have viewed this comment
I urge the City Council to approve this ordinance permitting safe parking for the unhoused in our community. The program would be more impactful if it wasn’t limited to just two faith based organizations. The need is much greater than that, but it demonstrates that our City is committed to trying a variety of approaches to assist our residents in this severe housing crisis. Thank you for supporting this concept and I urge you to quickly explore and implement more policies and programs designed to increase affordable, safe, and stable housing.
June 3, 2022, 3:14 PM
Kip Kolkmeier
10 / 11 Council Members have viewed this comment
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Your Question has been submitted.