|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
On Tuesday, Oct. 22, the Mountain View City Council majority is expected to finalize the latest version of its attempt to drive residential motor homes out of town. The proposed ban is a bad idea, not only because it would leave many of our residents with no place to live in Mountain View, but because no one really knows where they would be allowed to park their vehicles.
Over the past few years, the growing number of vehicle residences in Mountain View and other Bay Area communities has upset a lot of people. Some people are upset because they don’t want to see what they consider blight in our community. Others, such as the Mountain View Housing Justice Coalition, are upset because so many of our neighbors cannot afford to live in the town where they work, attend school or most recently rented an apartment. Our city and companies have created a housing crisis, yet we haven’t done enough to serve its victims.
As I’ve written before, very few of Mountain View’s motor home dwellers are chronic homeless, with mental health and substance abuse problems. The chronic homeless also deserve help, but we need to recognize that Mountain View’s vehicle residents are here for the same reasons as the rest of us: jobs, school, family and weather. A majority are employed and/or go to school; others are retired. Many built our community, paying property taxes directly or indirectly until high rents drove them onto the streets.
The current version of the proposed ban, the “narrow streets” ordinance, would outlaw oversized vehicle parking, with narrow exceptions, in most of Mountain View. But on Sept. 24 the council majority approved the restrictions without knowing exactly which streets would be restricted. They don’t know if motor homes will end up massing on other Mountain View streets. In fact, the proponents of the ban rewrote their motion the following week, in a highly irregular modification of council minutes, in conflict with the official recording of the Sept. 24 meeting. They hadn’t realized what they were voting on.
Regardless of the footprint of the enacted ban, I believe this policy is intolerant. While site-specific restrictions — near driveways, for example — are necessary for traffic safety, a generic ban will be inhumane and unconstitutional if there’s no place for people to go. While Mountain View’s safe parking initiative is well-intentioned, it would provide only a fraction of the spaces needed — only 36 motor home spaces next summer. Indeed, by requiring every vehicle to leave by 9 a.m. every day, and by denying electrical service, it is designed to fail.
The real question is what kind of community do we want Mountain View to be. As far back as I can remember, Mountain View has treasured our diversity, not just cultural and ethnic, but socio-economic. I have heard many people say that they moved here so their children could grow up with kids from other backgrounds.
I don’t have much hope that the pro-gentrification majority on the council will have second thoughts on Tuesday, but there is an alternative. Ordinances don’t take legal effect for 30 days, and voters will have the opportunity to block implementation and place the ban on a 2020 ballot by collecting signatures of 10% of the city’s voters on referendum petitions within those 30 days. The Mountain View Housing Justice Coalition, at mvhousingjustice.org, is making plans to circulate petitions immediately after final passage by the council.
Let’s work together to help vehicle residents get off the streets without driving them out of town.
Lenny Siegel is a former Mountain View mayor and City Council member.
Crews extinguish half-acre vegetation fire near Shoreline Park in Mountain ViewJune 15, 2026 2:33 pm
MVLA school board members clash over committee assignments, conflicts of interestJune 15, 2026 2:39 pm
We are the kind of community that removed you from office because what you espouse is a pathway to endless blight and a decline in the livability for those who are also working hard just to make it.
WE are the kind of community that wishes you would go away. We voted you out yet you hang around mouthing off as if you were God – that we are not entitled to our opinions because yours is so much better – in your unfortunately not so humble opinion.
What Bored M said, times a 1000.
King Lenny says what kind of community are we? Really Lenny! You can not force your vision of what you think, onto others. We have a right to have a say, and think for ourselfes, or to be questioned by the likes of you, for what we want for our city and quality of life to be.
I know several mothers who have little kids that live by Rengstorff park. They have been afraid to go to that playground for the last 3 years because of the RV encampment, right across the street. Why are you dismissing these people who actually live here, in housing that has been approved by the city to be lived in by people.
People need to understand who Lenny is, he is power hungry and wants to transform Mtn.View into a city like San Francisco, L.A, etc. He is building a political base to launch him back into the city council. He will have all these 300 RV registered to vote, 300 times 2 people in each RV, you have 600 votes right there. You figure the people who voted for him last time, plus the RV people, that will easily assure him of getting back onto the council. He will have all his other local, activist groups help his campaign, get out the vote for him.
Once back onto the council, there will be Council member Hicks and Rameriz waiting for him. There are 3 votes ready to turn over the RV ban, he only needs 1 more vote to do that. Either by another new council member, or to pressure Kamei to change her vote.
It will be so critical/important to keep King Lenny off the council, because this RV residence will only be the start for him, and our city. Think sidewalk tent encampments.
The 2 incumbents who will probably be seeking re-election will be Maticak and Abe-Koga, we have to get everyone to vote them back in, and to make sure we do not elect anyone else who will overturn the RV ban. Tell your friends, and make sure they vote!!
Pay careful attention to the Voice, as they will be writing many opinion stories trying to influence the voters, and to tell you who to vote for come election time.
I’m starting to think that there are members of this Voice organization who live in RVs here in town. This explains to me why they continue to give this man a platform to spew his opinions on how to have every street in Mountain View lined with RVs.
Seriously need to remove Mayor Lisa Matichek next election – I have been following MV politics and very disappointed with her so far!! This is such a Trump-adminstration-like move to punish people for being poor. Shame on your MV Council!! The city and council helped create housing crisis by managing it badly and is now causing problems for families struggling for a home and our under funded schools – yet they don’t care and are punishing the most vulnerable.
I agree about the voting confusion. Maticheck also badly managed last week’s study session that I watched on video. She seemed to miscount the support (to benefit her opinion) at the end where one of the council members had to interrupt and and say “hey, no, just to clarify, I do support” but she still filed it under “as being in the middle” which left some council members visible shaking their heads. This was regarding the huge influx of kids in the 2 MV school districts and who will pay for it.
This is the problem MV council help cause with allowing more corporate companies to run unfettered) but seem to think its the school’s problem to figure it out (the schools are already hurting) out how to get upwards of a billion dollars to build 4 new schools. Check out the comments on the video to the superintendents about “these are YOUR constituents” and “go to state legislature and get laws changed”. WHAT?!?! And here I thought the council represented ALL residents, but apparently not families with kids in schools, just builders and corporations. Totally appalling. Watch it for yourself https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_blrttmtL4
@Shame on MV council,
I get it, you live in an RV.
There are 4 council members who voted for the Ban, Lisa Matichak is up for re-election and you want her out and King Lenny in so you can have the RV Ban repealed so you can once again live rent free on the streets and the hell with what the residents of our city thinks.
So which RV is yours?
Please, I beg you, every patriotic Boomer here: screenshot these comments before the neo-Marxist censors remove them! It’s the only way to save our Republic. Trump himself commands you, trust the plan! #wwg1wga
@mvrenter: No, the high rent in our city did not cause this RV problem.
Palo Alto, Los Altos, Cupertino, and many more of our neighboring cities have higher rents than us yet they do not have any RV squatting issues.
What we had happen here is, when Lenny Siegel was on the council, the council told the Police chief to not enforce our parking ordinances against these people. What happened next was, our neighboring cities where chasing these RV’s out of their city, and telling them to come here because we did not enforce our ordinances here and we provided tax payer funded services to them. Our city tax payers have already spent over $1,000,000.00 on them.
You have no data to suggest anything you say who these RV people are. All we hear from people like Seigel is the common all to familiar divisive rants about intolerance, we need diversity, high rents, etc. We know from what our police chief has said is, that problems with these RV issues has been getting worse every year. We had drug dealings done in them. We have people making a business of renting out RV’s to these people.
I do not agree with you. There is nothing intolerant about enforcing our laws, just like every other city.
Did you ever wonder why Siegel never did anything about our neighboring cities when they chased out these RV’s? so they could never get a foot hold in their city? I know why.
Siegel could have asked the ACLU to cc these other cities with the same letter like they did with our city, and tell them to stop chasing out the RV’s, or they will be sued. But they did not do that, did they. Hmmm.
Lenny Siegel will never have my vote.
Has Mr. Siegel done a ride along with MVPD yet as they have been conducting outreach among the vehicle dwellers – as many of the other city council members (past & present) have done?
Is the city of Mountain View collecting any fees from the owners of the RVs that are being run as rental units on public streets?
This gentleman spoke recently at the city council meeting, as quoted in the Palo Alto Daily Post:
https://padailypost.com/2019/09/26/council-approves-restrictions-on-rv-parking/
“People living in RVs also spoke at the meeting. Barton Lunsford, a personal trainer, said he was unable to save any money paying $3,000 a month in rent. He moved into an RV so that he isn’t broke when he gets old, he said.”
While I appreciate Mr. Lunsford’s desire to want to save money “so he isn’t broke when he gets old” – as I think many of us may feel the same way about not wanting to be broke when we get old. However, prior to opting to grift off the Mountain View taxpayers by choosing to live in an RV parked on a public street, there are other – some might say more honest options available – such as taking in roommate(s) to share costs and/or moving to a less expensive location, maybe not far away, but not necessarily in your ideal city.
Why should the Mountain View taxpayers be footing the bill for those people who simply decide that they want to save money for when they get old, and they like living in Mountain View, so they have decided to co-opt space on a public street & call it home – all while no longer paying for any public services…no water, no sewer, no trash, no PG&E, no property taxes, no special assessments, etc. All police, fire, and city services are funded by our taxes – so, it’s super nice to get a free pass on all of that because you want to save money for when you get old.
Someone is paying for those services.
It would be nice to know how many of the vehicle dwellers are like Mr. Lunsford – as a reference point.
If the mv voice is allowing a candidate to make a political position, are they filing a campaign donation as well?
Hahaha you people have completely lost the plot. Thankfully your ridiculous ranting and conspiracy theories will only help the residents of Mountain View that reflect its true values. All I have to do is show people what the Matichak and Abe-Koga base is like by sending them this hate-filled comments section, and they’ll vote against them in an instant. Thanks!
I worked on Lenny’s last two campaigns. I completely disagree with Lenny on this issue. The City of Mountain View has been very tolerant in allowing RVs on city streets long enough. As a professional transportation planner, city streets were not designed to accommodate essentially permanent parking for RVs. There are indeed traffic safety issues, particularly since we as a city are encouraging more bicycling in the city. This is just one of many issues why the City Council is voting for a ban of overnight RV parking. The existing City council has been exploring more temporary safe parking locations, and the City of Mountain View should work with neighboring cities to provide our fair share. Lenny has been a champion for increased affordable housing in Mountain View, and this is the long term solution we should all be working towards.
(I’m actually on the edge of the Monta Loma neighborhood)
Dear “No to King Lenny!”,
Why, perchance, do you wonder which RV is mine or anyone else you disagree with? Do you fantasize about coming over, banging on my door, and… what? Do you wanna argue and get red in the face, shriek and moan about how I don’t belong here? Do you want your opinion to enjoy my attention as you reel out your tired line of complaints, ignorances, and other assorted ulcers? Or is it something darker and more shameful you’re after, eh? Some mewling submissive power fantasy where you get to act big to cover up being small. You’re throwing stones for attention in an empty glass house, buddy, and it’s transparent. Grow up.
“residential motor homes”
Lenny, you are mistaken: R in RV stands for “recreational”, not for “residential”, and RVs belong to RV parks, not to the residential areas.
There is an infrastructure there, water an electricity hook-ups, that residential areas do not have.
Lenny dont go away mad just go away
Lenny has my vote. RVs are a symptom of outrageous rent increases. Hard-working tenants who have never missed a payment would see their rent raised beyond any reasonable % for no benefit to the tenant at all. Measure V (csfra) protected me from losing my home and I bet many renters like me realize that living in an RV on our streets is the next step if the caa and landlords get their way. In fact if renter protections are on the ballot at all, I’ll personally help RV dwellers go vote.
Cite whatever you want. My landlords tried to double my rent. CSFRA saved me from eviction. I’d buy an RV if it happened. The RV ‘dwwllers’ are me.
@ Billy Bob
I agree with you 100%. I wish the Voice would stop posting Lenny’s rants about how everyone here is intolerant because we don’t want broken-down RVs parking in front of our houses that we worked hard to pay for.
Until the day that Lenny allows these RV people to inhabit his driveway, I think he should stop virtue-signaling to the rest of us. When he was in office, he made our streets less safe by insisting that laws on the books not be enforced because he didn’t like them. In case Lenny isn’t aware, that is the behavior of a tyrant. If we have laws he doesn’t like, he should go to THE CITIZENS and ask what they want. If they give him an answer he doesn’t like, then I guess he should suck it up and deal with it.
Lenny thinks that he is better able to decide what people should do with their property than the people who actually own and PAY FOR that property. Don’t get me wrong. He is happy to have access to all the tax money those houses generate so he can fritter it away on social programs that favor a small minority. What he ISN’T willing to do is spend that money so ALL residents can benefit.
Until Lenny figures out that he isn’t the arbiter of right and wrong in this town, he has no place on the city council.
Lenny, you must feel terrible guilt about helping those housing developers build homes on polluted land that is on a federal list of most toxic in the country. Bet you wake up in the middle of the night dreaming about a young family with a little girl that has cancer, thanks to the carcinogens under their townhouse. You pushed for it and made it happen.
How do you sleep at night? Does fighting for poor people in RVs help you sleep better? Probably not, because you’ve done something truly evil and you know it.
However, you can still redeem yourself. You know what to do.
I think the voters of Mountain View made it clear what kind of community they wanted when Lenny was voted out by a landslide, Pat was voted out as well and Ken didn’t even run. RV was one of the top issues in the last election.
I volunteer at local nonprofits. I donate thousands of dollars to CSA, Second Harvest Food Bank and other local charities. I pay lots of city fees/taxes to support the millions of dollars Mountain View is spending on the homeless!
So don’t tell me that I am not compassionate just because I want to live in a safe and clean neighborhood.
Lenny and his supporters constantly give their views of the demographics of RV dwellers. For example, in this article, he asserts that “very few of Mountain View’s motor home dwellers are chronic homeless, with mental health and substance abuse problems.”. Also, “a majority are employed”. Are these assertions based on data? If so, he should provide the source. Or is it just his gut feeling?
The City of Mountain View has spent millions of dollars on the homeless issue, including countless staff hours. I commend the city for its work, which is much more than any of our neighboring cities have done. But it’s a difficult problem as the Santa Clara County homeless count shows that the Mountain View homeless count has risen 51% since 2015.
But Lenny sees only the negative. In this article, he proposes no solutions. He even criticizes the safe parking initiative, even though as a councilmember, he consistently voted for it.
I feel the current council has a much more balanced and thoughtful approach for addressing this continuing problem, so I was happy to be one of the people who voted Lenny out. Let’s work together to make sure he loses by an even bigger landslide in the next election.