This reminds me of days when cities would respond to complaints of all the off leash dogs and created dog parks that nobody used as they continued to break the laws of those times.
We need some basic laws about people living on our streets. You can't do it in a tent but you can in a car? C'mon!

I love Mountain View! It's nice to know that if I ever decided to stop paying rent, I can live in my car and city and all its tax paying citizens will support me!

I'd also like to know, of all those living in cars and RV's, how many previously rented or owned a home in MV.

I'm sure there are plenty that are driving over here because of all the services the city offers and that no one here gives them the boot.

MV has laws, MVPD has their hands tied by city council. They can't enforce RV 72 hour RV parking violations with a piece of chalk. The RV dwellers are too smart, they can wipe off the chalk.

MVPD has 1 part-time employee that handles abandoned vehicles (RV's not included). Police are waiting for direction from council. Overnight parking restrictions would work with an increased budget for towing. Or, figure out a way to ticket 72 hour parking violators. Obviously pretty simple, but without budget and direction from council it's a non-starter.

Turns out to tow a RV, a specialty towing company needs to be called and they want their money up front, before the tow. The cost is up to $3500.00 or more.

City won't increase budget for towing. Optics look bad, hurts their chance for re-election. Renters and RV dwellers are their base support. Case of tail wagging the dog.

“The strongest argument for socialism is that it sounds good. The strongest argument against socialism is that it doesn't work. But those who live by words will always have a soft spot in their hearts for socialism because it sounds so good.”

These support programs only work, if we have a policy for RV parking on public streets. The fact that nobody wants to move to the church parking lots is a good indication that our attempt to get these RV's off the public streets and the people (the homeless as they are called in our MV statistic) into support programs and eventually into housing is not working. These homeless people are not interested in a safe parking lot with support services. In San Diego vehicle dwellers do not have a choice. You get ticketed if you sleep on public streets, so you are forced to join everybody in the safe lots and the program has great success in getting everybody help. The other point that has been made over and over: the majority of RV dwellers is not really homeless, they live here during the week and go home on the weekends. They save money, by not staying in a hotel. And if the requirement to have a valid registration is keeping them from joining the Lots of Love program then they really shouldn't be parked on any MV street. I am hoping that this is one code still enforced in this city. I had great hopes for this program, but without any policies for sleeping in cars on public streets it won't have any effect on our homeless issue.

A big thank you to the participating churches. You rock! Shame on the mean-spirited people of Miramonte who would not even give it a try.

Now that this program is up and running all other overnight vehicles need to be given notice to participate in the program or leave Mountain View.

Once again thank you to Lots of Love and the participating churches.

I think folks commenting are mixing up the issues. It does not sound like lots of love is attempting to take on the RV issue, but rather working folks living in a CAR. I don’t believe they are trying to place RVs in these church parking lots, at least from what I can tell.

I realize it’s a bigger issue, but at least they are trying to do something, all I see here is “not in my city” which I think is a shame. I can’t believe neighbors would threaten to,sue the church for having a fully screen and vetted person trying to get back on their feet sleeping in a car or two parking in their lot at night...what have we become? I wish folks would show some grace and allow The Highway Community to do what churches are suppose to do, help people.

In my neighborhood, 72hour parking rule is enforced by neighborhood watch effectively and efficiently. It clears away disputes and parking chaos in the area so far. I assume police officers are legal authority enabled to enforce laws under any conditions. If they can chose which law to enforce, can people chose which law to follow?

@Polomom hit it right on. This is a case of you can't have one without the other. People cite the success stories of San Diego and Santa Barbara's programs but look closer and you will see that they have clear ordinances in place that address vehicular dwelling/oversized vehicles on streets:

Web Link
Web Link

On 3/6/18 it was disappointing that our council had voted NOT to implement interim measures to curb the growing problem until these programs are proven effective. I for one am voting for new council members that understand a balance is needed and not get emotionally myopic about "criminalizing homelessness" or "moving problems around".

Or they are cowards who are afraid of doing the sometimes tough job they asked voters to allow them to do. They have done nothing. Not one single thing.

Who among them has the guts to begin the discussion and craft an ordinance?
Who among them is listening to the overwhelmingly loud voices of so so many residents? Who among them is not a do nothing politician?
Anyone?
HELLO?!?!

Please use November to vote out Leneord Siegal and Patricia Showalter!! They support people Living in their cars. Neither went on a police sit-along Prior to their march 6 vote regarding RVs! Both are out of touch and Lenny is in the wrong city. John inks is for restrictions on these RVs! Let’s save our city before it’s too late. Asking our police force to deal with this huge issue without proper ordinances is a complete joke. I can’t imagine how hard it is for them to balance appeasing counsel and helping the community that wants something done.

I am proud to live in a city that has a compassionate and practical approach to homelessness, rather than the much more common knee-jerk response that many commenters here advocate (kick 'em out!). There are several RVs parked on my block, and they are just as clean, neat, and trouble-free as the bricks-and-mortar houses. We need the people who are living in these vehicles: they are here because they have jobs! Many if not most jobs in MV do not pay enough to cover sky-high rents. Do we really want to exclude everyone who makes less than $100,000 a year? I don't think so! If this nonprofit can provide services such as safe parking to those who need them, I think that's fantastic. Kudos to all involved.

Nora, living in cars or RV's is not a solution for housing people. I am sure we can all agree that it would be better to have these individuals in a real house with plumbing and electricity. Having a centralized Lots of Love program will give our services an opportunity to contact these people, point them to the right organizations, take care of their basic needs and on top of all this remove the opportunistic RV dwellers that are just here because it is free and nobody bothers them. Nobody wants to kick them out, but if the city is putting aside over $ 300 K, offers sewer dump services and now supports local churches with the Lots of Love program it is time for these RV dwellers to also show some goodwill and respond to these programs. The failure of the sewer dump program ( not enough sign ups) was a first indication that we are dealing with people who do not want to be helped. So the question is now: Do we just let everybody do what they feel like, you can live on public streets anywhere you want? Maybe mobile homes are next, Shoreline Blvd has a wide enough parking strip/bike lanes.

Nora, are you aware that many, if not MOST, of these RV dwellers have NEVER been Mountain View residents, nor do they work in our city? They come from other cities (and even other states) because the word is out that Mountain View taxpayers are picking up the tab. We cannot be responsible for carrying the load for cities that are happy to push this cost onto us. There are even out of town contractors who tow junk RVs onto our streets for their employees to live free during the week. Several of these contractors are based in the East Bay and are delighted to push this problem onto us.
I believe - most people are VERY WILLING to help local families with children, the elderly and the disabled to find job and/or housing assistance. However, not all RV dwellers are “needy”. One outrageous example is the engineer making $175k but parks his RV (and undoubtedly also an auto) in Mountain View for whom WE TAXPAYERS are paying to have his sewage dumped, clean his street area, give him water and power, and have 90% of our police presence at the RV dweller sites. The fact that he states he showers at work and eats there, does nothing to diminish the taxpayer money that is spent on him. Do you REALLY think we taxpayers want to do this for him and others like him? I am also NOT interested in helping those who are criminals (theft rings, prostitution, drug rings and child molesters as reported by the local police) nor am I interested in helping those who refuse to help themselves (the man who says he can get a job but would rather spend time with his grandchildren).
The very few families with children who live in these 400+ RVs (I understand there are only 11 or 12 children total in these RVs) and were Mountain View residents should be the ones we help first. Their children don't deserve living in these conditions, and Lots of Love is prepared to assist them. The criminal element, and the other types of scammers, will be the ones resisting help. They'd rather live free and have Mountain View pick up their expenses - and they should be gone.
I'm glad the RVs on your street are clean and orderly, but do you really believe that's the majority of the 400+ on our streets? Is that a good way to live? There are services to help these people, if they cooperate.
The complaints on this forum run from obvious crimes, trash on the streets, blocking sidewalks, sewage dumping in our drains, to stealing water from private home hoses, etc. More RVs will mean more disturbances and trouble - and will do nothing to make it better for the legitimate RV dwellers.
The police have their hands tied by a majority of this Council being too cowardly to do anything. (The exceptions are Lisa Matichak and Margaret Abe-Koga.) Now that there is screening to weed out scammers, and there is help available through Lots of Love and Community Services Agency, Mountain View needs to pass a regulation that prohibits any vehicle over 6' high on city streets.

Interesting that the criteria is off-putting to those living on the streets...
"program explicitly bans drugs, alcohol or weapons. Participants must also have a working vehicle with valid registration, insurance and a driver's license. Any applicant also has to be signed up with the Community Services Agency to eventually get permanent housing."

If RV owners are uninsured/unregistered they need to be towed. If they are insured/licensed etc, and they refuse the option at this church, they should be ticketed with notice they will be towed This is a great program for people in need, the City should not be known as a destination for RV dwellers who flout the law with no consequences. Lots of Love....TOUGH LOVE.

I have seen no specific evidence that "MVWoman" is using facts and not just her own local observations. If we expect to employ people at wages that do not support them living anywhere nearby, how do we expect them to afford remote housing and commuting? If a person loses their apartment, how do we expect them to qualify for a new job and new housing in another City? Since Palo Alto also has an RV problem, I question whether a large number are actually coming from out of state. That is different than evading our fees by being registered out of state. Let's give the program a chance to work. We should also remember that unless one's rent or mortgage is paid off or paid in advance: "There but for the Grace of God...".

CORRECTION - when I posted earlier comment so had no idea 'Lots of Love' did NOT address RV dwellers, just those living in cars.

With that said, as a first step City of MV needs to establish similar criteria to 'Lots of Love program', if RV dwellers refuse to register with CSA, cannot present valid license, insurance/registration, cannot identify themselves as displaced Mountain View residents and refuse to cooperate with police and social workers they need to move on. I have been told many of them refuse to engage, so we have no idea who is living in these RV's, how many have criminal records, number of children and those with substance abuse issues. If they refused to engage, they need to go...

Old Steve, if you read the several articles on this subject over the last year, talked to any MV Policeman or even attended the League of Women Voters forum on this topic, you'd be aware that I am stating known facts.

You also misinterpreted my appreciation of this Lots of Love program. I am in FAVOR of it, and encourage all to take part. However, it requires screening (which makes a great deal of sense) and the criminal element is not interested in meeting the criteria. Those few legitimate prior renters/homeowners in Mountain View deserve our help, but they have to do their part as well. The non-locals who come here just to scam the taxpayers, those who can afford housing but would rather have MV taxpayers support them on the street, the criminal element who would never pass a screening, etc. should move along. Our tax money would be better spent on those prior MV renters/homeowners who have lost their home here through no fault of their own.

That said, I agree that we all cannot have what we want just because we want it. There is only so much housing available, and yes, the cost does go up and also becomes out of reach for those in low paying jobs. I'd like to see a lot more companies move to the Valley, where housing is cheaper and more land available. Then perhaps workers could get decent jobs and they could actually afford a stable home for themselves and their families. No city can built out until the price is low enough for everyone who wants to live in that city. It is a nice idea - but economically and physically impossible. Demanding the impossible only delays any progress that could be made for the betterment of those suffering now.

MVWoman, I was at the League of Women Voters event. As I remember it, the audience was asked whether they wanted to devote more resources to helping vehicle dwellers or whether they wanted stricter enforcement. Overwhelmingly the audience was in favor of more resources.

I also remember a particularly hateful woman asking about whether the people living in vehicles were former residents or not...

The problem with relocating companies to the Central Valley has several facets, so I will stick to just one: Our Central Valley helps feed the world, so we should pave it over instead of building more dense housing here?? Sarc

@Mountain View Voice - Was the City represented (Council Members, Administration...) at the Highway Community Church meeting in June? If so, were they supporting/defending that program?