|
Letter of Opposition re Item 11A
<br />October 15, 2019
<br />p. 2
<br />In the midst of a severe housing crisis characterized by dramatically rising rents', a shrinking
<br />affordable housing supply2, long waits for housing subsidies, scarcity of shelter beds, and an
<br />increase in the city's homeless population, the City of Santa Ana, through this proposed
<br />Ordinance, targets its most vulnerable residents. For the homeless residents in the City of Santa
<br />Ana, many with disabilities, their vehicles are their only reliable place for shelter from the
<br />elements and the only place for them to store their belongings. As there are inadequate
<br />alternatives for many of the City's unhoused population to turn, notwithstanding the City's
<br />efforts to build homeless shelters, the City nonetheless proposes to repeatedly ticket and harass
<br />these individuals for seeking shelter in their vehicles or simply for owning vehicles and having
<br />nowhere else to park. The City also proposes to target homeless vehicle owners, ticket them and
<br />impound their vehicles for unpaid tickets. Stunningly, the City proposes to threaten homeless
<br />vehicle owners with cost -prohibitive fees (including injunctive relief and civil penalties'), arrest
<br />and misdemeanor charges, with fees of $1,000, plus other court fines and fees, for the alleged
<br />illegal lodging. The City's hurried efforts to approve this Ordinance, evidences that the City's
<br />efforts are to criminalize and punish these individuals for their status as homeless persons.
<br />Thus, the Ordinance as proposed is blatantly unconstitutional. As drafted, the Ordinance is not
<br />narrowly tailored to meet time, place, and manner standards. It also violates various
<br />constitutional rights, including the Fifth Amendment prohibiting the deprivation of property
<br />without due process and just compensation, as well as the Eighth Amendment prohibition on
<br />Cruel and Unusual Punishment. The Ordinance also violates the substantive and procedural due
<br />process rights prohibiting reckless endangerment, the Right to Equal Protection, and the Right
<br />to Travels, afforded to all individuals under the United States and California Constitutions. To
<br />satisfy the Due Process Clause, the City must sufficiently define an ordinance to provide
<br />adequate notice of the conduct proscribed and provide sufficient guidelines for the police so that
<br />arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement does not occur.' As written, the Ordinance states, "the
<br />recreational vehicle shall not be used for overnight camping, lodging, or accommodation
<br />See www.rentjungle.com/average-rent-in-santa-ana-rent-trends/ (last visited on October 15, 2019) (providing that
<br />as of April 2019, the As of April 2019, the average rent for a one -bedroom apartment in the City is $1,938 per
<br />month, while the average rent for a two -bedroom apartment is $2,582 per month.)
<br />2See 30th Anniversary Out of Reach Report, National Low Income Housing Coalition,
<br />https://repons.nlilic.org/sites/default/files/oor/OOR 2019.pdf (last visited on October 15, 2019) (providing that
<br />workers in Orange County need to earn $39.17 an hour to afford the rent for a typical two -bedroom apartment in
<br />Orange County. The typical fair market rent (FMR) for a two -bedroom unit here is $2,037 per month, ranking
<br />Orange County among the nation's top 10 most expensive metropolitan areas in the nation. The annual income
<br />needed to afford a two -bedroom FMR is $81,480 and a minimum wage worker needs to work at least 131 hours per
<br />week-3.3 jobs to afford a 2-bedroom FMR apartment.)
<br />' See Ord. NS-2976, at §36-152 ("Use of criminal enforcement and/or administrative citations shall not prevent or
<br />preclude the City from seeking injunctive relief and civil penalties in court for violations of this Division."),
<br />emphasis added.
<br />4 Plyler v. Doe (1982) 457 U.S. 202, 216-17.
<br />s Cal. Const. Art. §§7, 24 (specifically protects the intrastate right to travel); Memorial Hospital v. Marieopa County
<br />(1974) 415 U.S. 250; Pottinger v. Miami (S.D. Fla. 1992) 810 F.Supp. 1551 (finding that enforcement practices that
<br />deprive individuals of a basic necessity of life may be found to burden the right to travel unconstitutionally.) See
<br />also Tobe v. City of Santa Ana ("Tobe"), (1995) 9 Cal. 4th 1069; Joyce v. City & Cty. ofS.F, (N.D. Cal. 1994) 846
<br />F.Supp. 843, 860 ("the right to travel has found its strongest expression in the content of attempts by states to
<br />discourage the in -migration of indigents.")
<br />G Tobe, supra, 9 Cal.4th at pp. 1106-1107.
<br />601 Civic Center Drive West • Santa Ana, CA 92701-4002 • (714) 541-1010 • Pax (714) 541-5157
<br />
|