Title
Recommendation to Provide Direction to City Staff on Emergency Supportive Housing for Three City-Owned Vacant Homes at Alameda Point. (Community Development 10061833) [Continued from April 19, 2022]
Body
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Emergency Supportive Housing program proposed by staff and approved by the City Council in November of 2021 was not able to come to fruition. After a community meeting where there was some support for the program, but mostly opposition, the City of Alameda’s (City) service provider, Bay Area Community Services (BACS), evaluated the program further, and decided not to move forward with the project at this time.
Addressing homelessness and affordable housing needs in the community continues to be a City Council priority. Staff has developed several alternative options to move forward with Emergency Supportive Housing in vacant City-owned housing units at Alameda Point. There are currently six City-owned vacant housing units available at Alameda Point. Staff is recommending that up to a maximum of three units be used for the proposed program. The options put forward by staff at this time include:
• Contract with the Village of Love or another organization to operate a maximum of three homes that are currently vacant at Alameda Point located at 2815 Newport, 2700 Lemoore, 2845 Pearl Harbor, 2821 Barbers Point, 2601 Barbers Point Unit D, and 2825 Pearl Harbor (collectively, the Vacant Homes) as Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds from the prior proposal, including a total of 14 to 19 beds, within three homes;
• Contract with the Village of Love or another organization to operate: (i) one home for Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds from the prior proposal, including five to six beds, and (ii) two homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for two families/households who are homeless taking referrals for families from local agencies and non-profits serving or interacting with unhoused families, such as (among others) organizations that assist recent emigrants from Afghanistan with locating housing, Alameda Unified School District (AUSD), Alameda Point Collaborative and Building Futures for Women and Children (Building Futures); or
• Contract with the Village of Love or another organization to operate a maximum of three homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for three families/households who are homeless taking referrals for families from local agencies and non-profits serving or interacting with unhoused families in the manner described above.
Of these options, staff recommends that the City contract with the Village of Love to operate (i) one home for Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds to include five to six beds, and (ii) two homes for Emergency Supportive Housing for families who are homeless taking referrals for families from other agencies including the School District, local agencies and non-profits serving or interacting with unhoused families, as described above.
BACKGROUND
As the unhoused population grows throughout the region, the needs of this unhoused community also grow. Alameda County’s homeless population grew by 43% (from 5,629 to 8,022) as shown by the 2017 and 2019 Point-in-Time (PIT) counts required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Alameda’s homeless population increased 13% from 204 to 231 individuals during the same period. However, due to COVID-19, the PIT count was delayed by nearly a month to February 23, 2022.
Alameda is in need of housing for its unhoused residents. There is a particular need for Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless single adults. Data from the 2019 PIT count found that while 95% of homeless families in Alameda County were sheltered, only 16% of homeless single adults in Alameda County were sheltered. With the implementation of overnight services at the Day Center and the Safe Sheltering programming provided by Village of Love, the City offers only 12 to 16 year-round shelter beds available to single homeless men, and only about 23 year-round shelter beds offered to men, women, and/or women with children. In the inclement weather season, an additional 22-27 beds are offered through winter warming shelter services. COVID-19 pandemic conditions and whether couples are sharing accommodations in the Safe Sheltering program further impacts the number of year-round and seasonal beds available in the city.
City Council has identified addressing homelessness as one of its key priorities. In January of 2021, work began on a five-year plan to address homelessness. The strategic plan, The Road Home: A Five-Year Plan to Prevent and Respond to Homelessness in Alameda, was approved by the City Council on October 5, 2021 (Road Home).
One of the key challenges and needs described in the Road Home was to offer housing-focused, low-barrier services. The Road Home describes this type of services as essential and needed in the city. Specifically, the report notes that the city needs emergency shelter that accepts everyone with no or only limited conditions, and that many people in the city are not getting connected to services and support.
Strategy 2.2 of the Road Home recommends providing low-barrier, housing-focused temporary housing. Strategy 2.3 recommends expanding outreach and supportive services to unsheltered households.
In August 2021, in the interest of expediency due to the approaching inclement weather season, staff invited two organizations, BACS and the Village of Love, to submit a proposal to offer Emergency Supportive Housing at the Vacant Homes owned by the City. The two organizations were selected based on their depth of experience providing social services, and emergency and transitional housing to the homeless. Both organizations submitted a response, which was reviewed by staff. Staff interviewed both organizations and found both to be capable of offering emergency housing. BACS was selected as a recommended service provider for the project based on its history operating a comparable housing model, the strength of the written proposal and the high caliber of interview responses.
On November 16, 2021 City Council approved execution of an agreement with BACS to provide Emergency Supportive Housing services for up to two years at the Vacant Homes. This agreement was never fully executed due to BACS’ hesitancy to move forward with the contract based on concerns strongly voiced at the community meeting. At the same November City Council meeting, City Council also approved staff to negotiate and execute an agreement with Alameda County in an amount ranging from $30,000 to $45,000 to assist with remodeling and repair of the Vacant Homes. This contract is still in process. In addition, City Council approved the appropriation of $2,837,000 in ARPA funds for the BACS service provider contract, and for remodeling and repairs within the Vacant Homes, including the purchase of furniture, fixtures, equipment and related supplies.
On November 29, 2021, staff held a community meeting to discuss the proposal to provide Emergency Supportive Housing at the Vacant Homes. While some comments from the public were strongly supportive of this program, a much larger community contingent strongly voiced concerns, including safety and the potential for increased incidents of inappropriate behavior. Concerns were also voiced about the concentration of social services at Alameda Point and that too many individuals would be housed in each home. After the community meeting, BACS declined to pursue further work on this project in response to the community reaction. As a follow up to the community meeting and to clarify information for the public, staff prepared a Fact Sheet for Emergency Supportive Housing at Alameda Point (Fact Sheet), which was distributed to an interest list created for this project and posted on the City’s website. Following receipt of direction from City Council in response to this staff report, staff intends to update the Fact Sheet to reflect facts relevant to the revised Emergency Supportive Housing project to be pursued by staff.
When reevaluating potential housing options, for Emergency Supportive Housing project, staff spoke with Building Futures, APC and the Village of Love, all service providers currently operating in the city and serving the city’s unhoused population, about the possibility of partnering with the City on this project. The Village of Love was interested in working with the City on the particular project described in this staff report.
On March 10, 2022 staff held a second community meeting to discuss the proposals being presented to City Council in this staff report. Staff created a meeting on Zoom and informed the community via the City website, Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor and an email to City Council members. In addition, meeting information was sent by email to those who had attended the first meeting and had provided a legible email address. A total of 43 individuals registered for the meeting.
This second community meeting had comments in support and against the project. Community members voiced a need to direct resources towards providing immediate support to unhoused individuals, such as hotel vouchers, transit passes and EBT cards, particularly for people at the Main Street encampment. Community members continued to raise concern about the concentration of services at Alameda Point. Community members also commented about removing homes from the rental market, and advocated for improvements to be made to rental homes in the neighborhood. Concerns were raised regarding lead paint in the homes. Questions were also raised regarding the ability to implement this project under guidelines for CEQA, the Historical Advisory Board, and Naval restrictions. Many of these legal and code-related questions were previously addressed in the Fact Sheet produced after the November meeting. A small number of comments were regarding concerns about background checks and how individuals would be selected for the homes, the number of pets to be housed, and how to provide services to those who are resistant to services. A summary of the community feedback is included in Exhibit 2.
DISCUSSION
Emergency Supportive Housing at the Vacant Homes at Alameda Point would allow for seniors and the medically vulnerable to find indoor shelter. Any units offered for homeless housing would prioritize this population as much as possible within the accessibility constraints of the homes, which are older and include two floors with stairs. A portion of the funding set aside for remodeling/repair could be used to improve accessibility on a limited basis, and other funding sources could be explored. The Vacant Homes have the potential to provide 14-19 beds for homeless individuals. This number has been reduced from 30-32 beds, based on community input.
Following guidelines established in the Road Home, programming would employ a low barrier approach using a “Housing First” model. This is a well-accepted, national, evidenced-based best practice that eliminates barriers to housing, ensuring individuals and families can exit homelessness as quickly as possible. Housing First is an approach designed to quickly and successfully connect households experiencing homelessness to permanent housing without preconditions and barriers to entry, such as sobriety, treatment or service participation requirements. Supportive services are offered on a voluntary basis to maximize housing stability and prevent returns to homelessness as opposed to addressing predetermined treatment goals prior to permanent housing entry.
Within this Housing First approach, an official identification, such as a driver’s license, would not initially be required. However, support would be provided to assist the individual in obtaining a form of identification, possibly within a prescribed period of time, which is a necessary step in securing housing. Upon entry, participants would be searched on the Megan’s Law website to screen for registered sex offenders, who would not be permitted occupancy within the Emergency Supportive Housing. The program will follow all relevant laws and regulations, including Penal Code § 290 and Proposition 83.
If one or more of the Vacant Homes is used for Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals (i.e., not families), safety concerns would be addressed by 24-hour / seven-days-a-week staffing where staff will not sleep during a shift, and a phone line answered 24 hours a day / seven days a week. The project would maintain a general no-visitor policy and would only allow authorized guests into the Vacant Homes. Program staff would set behavioral expectations for participants, including standards for pets, and would promptly address problems with participants. Also, the communal nature of residing in the home would help residents learn/improve skills necessary to live independently, such as housekeeping and sharing common areas.
The potential for a successful program is anticipated if Vacant Homes are used for housing unhoused families. Following best practices for family shelters, a home would be used to house one family, thus allowing the City to serve a total of two to three households.
Village of Love has expressed interest in operating all or any of the Vacant Homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for unhoused individuals and unhoused families. Village of Love staff believe the homes would enhance their program and allow them to expand their work in helping the local unhoused population successfully obtain permanent housing.
The Vacant Homes are in need of some repair and remodeling to accommodate the Emergency Supportive Housing use. Anticipated repair/remodel work includes installing key systems to allow for rapid re-keying, painting, installing ramps to accommodate disabled residents, new flooring, furniture, including beds, appliances, supplies (bed linens, bath towels, dishes and utensils, toiletries, etc.), and other basic household items.
Staff is recommending that the City continue to pursue the development of Emergency Supportive Housing for the unhoused at the Vacant Homes and is seeking direction from City Council regarding program specifics. To that end, Staff also recommends that the City contract directly with the Village of Love to be the program’s service provider, particularly since the City already enjoys a successful partnership with the Village of Love with respect to the provision of homelessness services and the Village of Love is already familiar with the city’s unhoused community members. In that instance, staff would return with an agreement with Village of Love (or another organization if City Council directs) for Council’s approval consistent with City Council’s direction. If City Council directs staff to pursue another service provider, staff will need to prepare and issue a request for proposal (RFP), which would require additional time and resources and delay implementation of this homeless housing program within the city.
Options for programming include:
1. Contracting with the Village of Love to operate three homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds to include 14 to 19 beds;
2. Contract with the Village of Love to operate (i) one home for Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds to include five to six beds, and (ii) two homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for families who are homeless taking referrals for families from local organizations serving or interacting with unhoused families as described above; or
Contract with an organization to operate three homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for three families who are homeless taking referrals for families from local organizations serving or interacting with unhoused families as described above.4. Go out for with a Request for Qualifications to expand the number of potential operators and then move forward with either #1 or #2 with an alternative operator.
If option two above is chosen, staff recommends using the vacant ranch home instead of a larger Big White (i.e., one ranch home, one Big White and one townhome), and if option three is chosen, staff recommends using the vacant ranch home, plus the other vacant townhomes instead of the two larger Big Whites (i.e., one ranch home and two townhomes).
Of the options presented, staff recommends option two and contracting with the Village of Love to operate (i) one home for Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals in a Big White, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of bed to include five to six bed, and (ii) one townhome and one ranch home for two unhoused families/households taking referrals for families from local organizations serving or interacting with unhoused families as described above. Once direction from City Council is given to staff regarding the particular population of unhoused to serve, which will inform the selection of the particular Vacant Homes to use for the program, staff will work with the selected service provider and other community stake holders to develop program details, such as how families are referred to and qualify for the program. Staff will then implement the program with financial contracts with the service provider brought back to City Council.
ALTERNATIVES
• Contract with the Village of Love or another organization to operate three homes as Emergency Supportive Housing for homeless individuals, prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds to include 14 to 19 beds.
• Contract with the Village of Love or another organization to operate (i) one Big White home as Emergency Supportive Housing prioritizing seniors and the medically vulnerable, with a reduced number of beds to include five to six beds, and (ii) two homes (ranch home and townhome) as Emergency Supportive Housing for families who are homeless taking referrals for families from local organizations serving or interacting with unhoused families as described above.
• Contract with an organization to operate three homes (one ranch home and two townhomes) as Emergency Supportive Housing for three families who are homeless taking referrals for families from local organizations serving or interacting with unhoused families as described above.
• Contract with the Village of Love or another organization to pursue an Emergency Supportive Housing program and direct staff to target a different homeless population and/or a different combination of homeless populations.
• Contract with another service provider organization after issuing and RFP and/or direct staff to target a different homeless population and/or a different combination of homeless populations.
• Decline to pursue an Emergency Supportive Housing within any of the Vacant Homes at this time.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
In November 2021, City Council appropriated $2.8 million in American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) funds for Emergency Supportive Housing. It is estimated that operating one home for individuals and two homes for families will cost between $750,000 and $1,000,000. Repairs and painting the homes are estimated between $200,000 and $250,000. No additional appropriations are needed for the options presented here.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS-REFERENCE
This action is consistent with the Social Services Human Relations Board Charter and Ordinance authority “to improve social services in the community” (Alameda Municipal Code § 2-11.5) and the Report on Homelessness Policies and Programs.
This action is consistent with Goal 2 of the “Road Home - A Five-Year Strategic Plan to Prevent and Respond to Homelessness in Alameda Secure a Housing Future for All Alamedans.”
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not apply to actions approved by or carried out by the City in furtherance of providing emergency shelters, supportive housing, or affordable housing. See Gov. Code §§ 8698.4(a)(4), 65583.
This action is further exempt from CEQA because 1) it involves existing facilities where negligible or no expansion of existing or former use is contemplated (CEQA Guidelines § 15301), and 2) involves eligible in-fill development (CEQA Guidelines § 15332).
CLIMATE IMPACT
The Social Vulnerability Assessment section of the Climate Action and Resiliency Plan states:
“adaptation strategies should consider how [the homeless] will receive emergency communications and how they will be sheltered. Proper, safe housing for all is an adaptation and resilience strategy. Planning strategies should always consider these vulnerable populations in adaptation efforts.”
RECOMMENDATION
Approve one of the options for Emergency Supportive Housing within three City-owned Vacant Homes at Alameda Point. Community Development recommends authorization to implement option two.
CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager recommends that City Council consider approval moving forward with a contract with Village of Love if the City Council desires to move forward on the Emergency Housing proposal. The City Council approved setting aside approximately $2.8 million in ARPA funding for renovations and management of the Emergency Supportive Housing. In addition, the City Council approved approximately $4.6 million in ARPA funding for the housing being done at the Bottle Parcel.
The two funding sources can be used for renovations, construction and be used for operations into 2026.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Nelson Maxwell, Community Development Director
By,
Veronika Cole, Community Services Manager
Lois Butler, Economic Development and Community Services Manager
Financial Impact section reviewed,
Jennifer Tell, Principal Financial Analyst
Exhibits:
1. Glossary of Terms
2. Community Listening Session Notes
cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager