Loading...
2021/04/06 City Council Agenda Packet"We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow." ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL, ROHNERT PARK FINANCING AUTHORITY (RPFA), SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A SPECIAL MEETING will be held on Tuesday April 6, 2021 at 2:00 P.M. * COVID-19 NOTICE * Consistent with Executive Orders No. N-25-20 and No. N-29-20 from the Executive Department of the State of California and the Sonoma County Health Official’s March 17, 2020 and March 31, 2020 Shelter in Place Orders, this City Council Special Meeting will not be physically open to the public and City Councilmembers will be teleconferencing into the meeting via Zoom Video Communications software. How to observe the Meeting: To maximize public safety while still maintaining transparency and public access, members of the public can observe the meeting on Cable Channel 26 or by visiting meeting central on our website https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/city_council/meeting_central How to submit Public Comment: Members of the public may provide public comment related only to this agenda by sending comments to the Clerk by email at publiccomment@rpcity.org Comments are requested by 10:00 a.m. on the day of the meeting, but can be emailed until the close of the Agenda Item for which the comment is submitted. Email comments should be a maximum of 350 words, which corresponds to approximately 3 minutes of speaking time. The comments will be read for the record, with a maximum allowance of 30 minutes of total public comments, subject to the Mayor’s discretion. If a comment is received after the agenda item is heard but before the close of the meeting, the comment will still be included as a part of the record of the meeting but will not be read for the record or considered in connection with the agenda item American Disability Act Accommodations: Any member of the public who needs accommodations should email the ADA Coordinator at vperrault@rpcity.org or by calling 707-588-2221. The ADA Coordinator will use their best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety in accordance with the City procedure for resolving reasonable accommodation requests. Information about reasonable accommodations is available on the City website at https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/departments/human_resources/a_d_a_and_accessibility_resources City Council/RPFA agendas and minutes may be viewed at the City's website: www.rpcity.org . PUBLIC HEARINGS: Council/RPFA may discuss and/or take action on any or all of the items listed on this agenda. If you challenge decisions of the City Council or the Rohnert Park Financing Authority of the City of Rohnert Park in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else 1.CITY COUNCIL/RPFA/SUCCESSOR AGENCY JOINT SPECIAL MEETING - CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL (Adams_____Linares_____Stafford_____Elward_____Giudice_____) 2.REGULAR ITEMS 2.A Discussion and Direction Regarding an Alternative Response Model to Mental Health/Crisis Calls for Service, and Homelessness Issues Not Requiring a Law Enforcement Response A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Council Discussion/Direction Item 2.A. Item 2.A. PowerPoint Presentation 2.B Discussion and Direction on Options for Expanding the City’s Homeless Services and Supplemental Information Regarding Staffing Requirements to Expand the City’s Homelessness Services A. Staff Report B. Public Comments C. Council Discussion/Direction Item 2.B. Item 2.B. Supplemental Item 2.B. PowerPoint Presentation 3.ADJOURNMENT raised at public hearing(s) described in this agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Rohnert Park at, or prior to the public hearing(s). RIGHT TO APPEAL: Judicial review of any city administrative decision pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5 may be had only if a petition is filed with the court no later than the deadlines specified in Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, which generally limits the time within which the decision may be challenged to the 90th day following the date that the decision becomes final. SIMULTANEOUS MEETING COMPENSATION DISCLOSURE (Government Code Section 54952.3): Members of the City Council receive no additional compensation as a result of convening this joint meeting of the City Council and the Rohnert Park Financing Authority. NOTE: Time shown for any particular matter on the agenda is an estimate only. Matters may be considered earlier or later than the time indicated depending on the pace at which the meeting proceeds. If you wish to speak on an item under discussion by the Council which appears on this agenda, please refer to page 1 for more details on submitting a public comment. Any item raised by a member of the public which is not on the agenda and may require Council action shall be automatically referred to staff for investigation and disposition which may include placing on a future agenda. If the item is deemed to be an emergency or the need to take action arose after posting of the agenda within the meaning of Government Code Section 54954.2(b), Council is entitled to discuss the matter to determine if it is an emergency item under said Government Code and may take action thereon. AGENDA REPORTS & DOCUMENTS: Electronic copies of all staff reports and documents subject to disclosure that relate to each item of business referred to on the agenda are available for public inspection on https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/city_council/meeting_central. Any writings or documents subject to disclosure that are provided to all, or a majority of all, of the members of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda after the agenda has been distributed will also be made available for inspection on our website following the meeting. DISABLED ACCOMMODATION: Any member of the public who needs accommodations should email the ADA Coordinator at vperrault@rpcity.org or by calling 707-588-2221. The ADA Coordinator will use their best efforts to provide reasonable accommodations to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety in accordance with the City procedure for resolving reasonable accommodation requests. Information about reasonable accommodations is available on the City website at https://www.rpcity.org/city_hall/departments/human_resources/a_d_a_and_accessibility_resources CERTIFICATION OF POSTING OF AGENDA I, _________________________, ____________________, for the City of Rohnert Park, declare that the foregoing agenda was posted and available for review on ______________ ______, _________, at Rohnert Park City Hall, 130 Avram Avenue, Rohnert Park, California 94928. The agenda is also available on the City web site at www.rpcity.org. Executed this _____ day of ________________, _________ at Rohnert Park, California. _____________________________ Office of the City Clerk ITEM NO. 2.A. 1 Meeting Date: April 6, 2021 Department: Public Safety Submitted By: Director of Public Safety Tim Mattos Prepared By: Director of Public Safety Tim Mattos Agenda Title : Discussion and Direction Regarding an Alternative Response model to Mental Health /Crisis calls for service, and Homelessness Issues Not Requiring a Law Enforcement Response RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive this report and provide direction as to whether the City should move forward with further evaluating a new mental health/crisis response model to address the concern of law enforcement officers responding to crisis calls for service. BACKGROUND: On January 7, 2021 a special meeting was held to discuss City Council strategic priorities moving forward with the newly sworn-in Council. During the meeting the City Council identified three new goals and priorities to focus Council and staff attention. The goals and priorities identified were Climate Change, Homelessness, and Police/Community relations, (to include increasing the image of Public Safety, building trust, and increasing accountability). ANALYSIS: During the past year, the Department of Public Safety has been looking for alternative responses to mental health and crisis calls for service. As law enforcement has evolved through the years, additional responsibilities have been placed on the shoulders of our sworn personnel. Officers are continually called upon to respond to individuals suffering from mental health issues and other crisis related incidents that require mental health professionals. City Manager, Darrin Jenkins and Public Safety Director, Tim Mattos are interested in pursuing an alternative response model for Public Safety. One such model is the CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets), which was started in Eugene, Oregon in 1989. The program mobilizes two -person teams consisting of a medic (a nurse, paramedic, or EMT) and a crisis worker who has substantial t raining and experience in the mental health field. The CAHOOTS teams deal with a wide range of mental health-related crises, including conflict resolution, welfare checks, substance abuse, suicide threats, and more, relying on trauma-informed de-escalation and harm reduction techniques. CAHOOTS staff are not law enforcement officers and do not carry weapons; their training and experience are the tools they use to ensure a non-violent resolution of crisis situations. They also handle non-emergent medical issues, avoiding costly ambulance transport and emergency room treatment. Mission Statement “We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow.” CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NO. 2.A. 2 In additional to mental health response, the CAHOOTS team also responds to issues surrounding homelessness such as wound care, providing meals and essential items. It is estimated than nearly half of the calls for service responded to by the CAHOOTS team are related to homelessness. City Manager Jenkins and Director Mattos have had the opportunity to meet with and hear from Ben Adam Climer who owns CRISIS Consulting. Ben is an expert in the CAHOOTS model based on his experience both working as an EMT on a CAHOOTS response van, and later working within the management of the CAHOOTS program. Ben Adam Climer will make a presentation to the City Council on the CAHOOTS model and how the program could provide an alternative response mechanism for crisis related incidents in the City of Rohnert Park. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The City’s vision statement is that Rohnert Park is a thriving, family-friendly community that is a safe, enjoyable place to live, work, and play. The consideration of the developing an alternative response model for crisis response intersects with both “Strategic Plan Goal C: Ensure the effective delivery of public services,” and “Goal D: Continue to develop a vibrant community.” OPTIONS CONSIDERED: 1. Recommended Option: Staff recommends council receives this information and provides direction regarding the development of a CAHOOTS type response model in the City of Rohnert Park. 2. Alternative: There is no alternative option. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: The fiscal impact is not known at this time. Possible funding sources will be identified should staff be instructed to move forward with developing a new response model. Department Head Approval Date: 03/30/2021 Finance Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 03/30/2021 Attachments: None 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. ITEM NO. 2.B.. 1 Meeting Date: April 6, 2021 Department: Administration Submitted By: Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Jenna Garcia, Housing Administrator & Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Agenda Title: Discussion and Direction on Options to Expanding the City’s Homeless Services RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Discuss and provide direction on options regarding expanding the City’s efforts to respond to homelessness. BACKGROUND Homelessness is one of the most challenging issues facing Rohnert Park and communities throughout the country today. It is highly complex, and cities alone cannot solve the challenge. There are many factors that contribute to homelessness including insufficient income, the cost of housing, lack of physical and mental health services, and lack of support systems. In January 2021, the City Council added homeless services as a priority issue. At the February 23, 2021 City Council meeting, we provided an overview on homelessness. In this staff report, we will discuss what the City is already doing to address homelessness, provide options for increased support of homelessness and request direction from the Council on which options to pursue further. This staff report was included in the agenda for the March 9, 2021 City Council meeting, but was continued to a later date. As a reminder, below are some key points on homelessness that we included in the February 23, 2021 staff report: 1. While substance abuse contributes to homelessness, it is not the primary cause of homelessness. 2. Homelessness in Sonoma County has likely not increased over the past six years. 3. There are not enough shelter beds for everyone experiencing homelessness. 4. Of all people experiencing homeless in Sonoma County, 84% report that they would accept housing if offered. 5. Most people experiencing homelessness in Sonoma County are from Sonoma County. Mission Statement “We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow.” CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NO. 2.B. 2 6. Not everyone experiencing homelessness needs a deed-restricted affordable housing unit. 7. It is difficult to predict who will become homeless, and thus to target prevention effectively. 8. Permanent housing (often combined with services) solves homelessness. The best local data available on homelessness is the county-wide annual homeless count, which provides a snapshot of how many people are experiencing homelessness on any given night. The number of individuals identified in the February 2020 annual count was 2,745. Since 2015, the annual count has hovered around 3,000 co unty-wide. The February 2020 homeless count identified 248 individuals experiencing homelessness in Rohnert Park, about 9% of the county- wide total. There are considerable differences among those experiencing homelessness. These include: 1. Temporary: This is the largest category of people experiencing homelessness, but they tend to be less visible. They often have lower needs, their experiences of homelessness are short and they do not often experience homelessness again in the future. Most are able to find housing without receiving any services. Some benefit from programs like Rapid Rehousing, which provide housing placement, short-term financial assistance and supports to get back into a home of their own or SHARE, which pairs home-seekers in shared living situations and provides ongoing supportive services. 2. Episodic: People in this category often have moderate needs and may enter, exit and re- enter homelessness multiple times. Many benefit from programs like Rapid Rehousing or SHARE. Others may benefit from subsidized housing and longer term supportive services that assist with finding housing, becoming stable once housed, and staying stable in housing. 3. Chronic Homelessness: Chronically homeless individuals have been homeless for one year or longer and have a disability (such as chronic medical issues, a serious mental illness, or chronic substance use disorders.) These individuals often have high needs and require Permanent Supportive Housing, which is a subsidized housing program with int ensive supportive services such as on-going mental health counseling. Chronically homelessness individuals make up 19% of the homeless population in Sonoma County. Applied to Rohnert Park’s homeless population, this is around 47 people on any given night. What the City is Doing to Address Homelessness: The City’s response to homeless includes six components: 1. Addressing encampments which impact public health and safety on public property; 2. Addressing encampments on private property; 3. Adding and retaining housing; 4. Funding and collaborating on homeless services; 5. Facilitating the Homelessness Roundtable; and 6. Engaging in regional decision-making on homelessness policy and funding. ITEM NO. 2.B. 3 Figure 1 below shows the current Fiscal Year’s City Budget for Homelessness, including encampment cleanup efforts and homeless services. In fiscal year 19-20, the City spent $250,000 on homeless services and $258,000 on encampment cleanup efforts. In fiscal year 18-19, the City spent $250,000 on homeless services. 1. Addressing encampments which impact public health and safety on public property. Staff have identified about 45 sites on public property in or near the City limits where individuals experiencing homelessness are living or have lived in the past . Encampments can create substantial health and safety problems, inhibiting the use of public property by others, and creat e hazardous, unsanitary or unsafe areas by accumulation of trash, waste and debris. The City’s ability to address encampments is limited to situations which pose a risk to public health and safety. A recent decision by the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals, in Martin v. City of Boise prevents the City from prohibiting camping on public land unless we offer access to shelter beds in the City. The City can enforce other regulations not related to camping such as the City ordinance that prohibits entry into City parks between 10:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. When staff come across an encampment which impacts public health or safety, the first intervention is to link the individuals with Catholic Charities’ HOST (Homeless Outreach Services Team.) HOST will visit the encampment and engage the individuals living there, providing services specific to their needs and situation and attempting to link them to permanent housing. Figure 1: Fiscal Year 2020-2021 City Budget for Homelessness ITEM NO. 2.B. 4 The City’s budget includes $125,000 to address encampments, including clean-up when needed, creek patrols, and managing the vegetation to increase visibility in the creeks and public safety. The City can cite and tow vehicles abandoned on public streets and parking lots through the vehicle abatement program – a process which takes a minimum of 14 days. Vehicles left overnight in parking lots that prohibit overnight parking can be towed immediately, however, this is not always an option as tow companies will not tow vehicles that are occupied. RVs pose the additional challenge as there is only one to wing company in Sonoma County that can tow and store RVs. The cost to tow RVs is an estimated $2000 per vehicle, which the City would be responsible for. 2. Addressing encampments on private property. The City also addresses encampments and trespassing on private property. Code Compliance staff engage with property owners and representatives, and explain useful actions to take when there are homeless encampments on their property. These actions include overnight security, posting signs such as “no overnight parking,” towing vehicles parked outside of appropriate hours, securing the dumpster area, and providing notice to leave the property. Code Compliance staff are in regular contact with HOST and will put HOST in contact with property owners when they request assistance. 3. Adding and retaining housing. Facilitating new housing fits with the City’s responsibilities and abilities. California’s high rents are largely due to the low supply of housing relative to the demand, so increasing the supply promotes affordability. There are over 1,000 homes in the City under construction or that have been approved, and thousands more are in earlier stages of the pipeline. The City retains a strong reputation for making it easy to build homes while maintaining our standards. Our efforts include new and existing affordable homes. We expect another 53 new affordable homes to be completed by 2022, and 1,147 affordable homes already exist in the City. This includes the recently constructed Redwoods at the University District, which has 218 units and is one of the largest affordable housing projects ever built in our county. We are working to ensure that these homes remain affordable; protections are set to expire on 106 homes in December 2022. The City also collects fees for new commercial and residential developments which can assist in developing new affordable homes or preserving existing ones. 4. Funding and collaborating on services. As demonstrated in Figure 1 above, the City is funding three homeless service programs: Rapid Rehousing and Outreach (HOST) through service provider Catholic Charities, and SHARE through SHARE California. These programs are described in more detail in the Homeless Services Options and Recommendations section of the staff report. Figure 2 below shows the outcomes between the three programs since July 1, 2020. ITEM NO. 2.B. 5 5. Facilitating the Homelessness Roundtable. Recognizing that homelessness is a community-wide challenge beyond the capacity of the City alone to solve, the City began convening a group of community members to help address the issue in September 2019. The Roundtable meets monthly and includes participants from faith-based organizations, education, business sector, non-profit service providers, health care and the library – in addition to concerned residents. The Roundtable provides education and up-to-date resource information and space for individuals to participate in small groups focused on key issues related to homelessness. One group that grew out of the Homelessness Roundtable is the Unsheltered Friends Outreach, a small group of dedicated volunteers that engage unsheltered individuals in Rohnert Park and Cotati, help connect them to services and provide them with hot meals and donated items. Starting in March 2020, Unsheltered Friends Outreach began preparing and delivering meals to unsheltered individuals throughout the City. They now provide at least 50 meals per day 4 times per week, often partnering with local restaurants and food pantries who donate the food. In addition to meals, they frequently provide essentials such as clothing, blankets and sleeping bags. Since January 1, 2021, they have connected with 166 individuals, 40 of which they interact with multiple times per week. While their efforts provide for individuals’ more immediate needs, they do so with a focus on housing as the ultimate solution. Unsheltered Friends Outreach volunteers encourage individuals to seek help and frequently refer them to housing-focused resources in the community, including the programs funded by the City. This year, they hope to expand their outreach efforts to include a volunteer mentor program. To support their ongoing effort s, they are finalizing their non-profit status. 6. Engaging in regional decision-making on homelessness policy and funding. The services funded by the City are a small part of the county-wide system of services available to those at risk of or experiencing homelessness. This system of care and its funding sources are highly fragmented, yet crucial to addressing the issue. Examples of services offered county-wide include the following, some of which we also fund: Figure 2: City-Funded Program Outcomes July 1, 2020 – March 1, 2021 Total people served with ALL funds: 158 Individuals placed in housing: 20 Individuals enrolled in outreach services: 60 Individuals provided with homeless prevention financial assistance: 78 ITEM NO. 2.B. 6  Prevention  Outreach  Mental Health Services  Addiction Services  Shelters  Access to Rapid Rehousing and Permanent Supportive Housing  Housing vouchers  Employment Services  Safety net (food, financial support, etc.)  Data tracking and reporting  Assessment of the performance of system and providers  Planning (e.g., gap analysis) These services are primarily funded with federal and state funds, some of which are targeted to those experiencing homelessness and some of which are available to low- income populations in general. Per federal regulation, responsibility for coordinating homeless services across the County resides primarily with a body known as the Continuum of Care, or CoC. The CoC is a membership organization guided by a 15 member Board. The Assistant City Manager has a seat on the Board, representing Rohnert Park as well as the other medium and small cities in t he County. The CoC is undergoing significant transition and needs considerable improvement. While working to improve this system requires considerable time and effort, staff believe that investment is worthwhile given the importance of a well-functioning system of care to Rohnert Park’s long -term success in addressing homelessness. Nearly all cities in Sonoma County have formed an Ad Hoc Committee of Councilmembers to address the need for improvements; Councilmember Adams represents Rohnert Park on that Committee. The County uses federal and state funds to pay for the Interdepartmental Multi- Disciplinary Team, or IMDT. T his is a group of County staff from different disciplines that engages in mobile outreach. Suggesting that the unincorporated areas, with 14% of the county-wide homeless population, are underserved with outreach, the County has focused this team on the unincorporated areas, County-owned properties, and requests from individual members of the Board of Supervisors. We are concerned with this practice as there is no evidence that we are aware of that supports the County statements that their areas of focus are underserved compared to Rohnert Park and other cities, and believe that services funded with federal and state funds should serve all areas of the County equitably. ITEM NO. 2.B. 7 Managing Versus Ending Homelessness As noted in the February 23rd report, there are a variety of homeless services that range from short -term efforts focused on managing homelessness to a housing first approach focused on ending homelessness in the long-term. Figure 3 below illustrates this range of services. Managing Homelessness Managing homelessness is focused on short-term efforts that mitigate the challenges of living outside by meeting immediate needs such as access to meals, showers, sanitation facilities, mail and designated places for people experiencing homelessness to park or camp. Some of these services are offered through volunteer and community efforts. Services focused on managing homelessness include: • Safe Parking (Without Services): Safe Parking allows individuals living in their vehicles to park in designated parking lots overnight and provides access to a bathroom and trash receptacles, sometimes including overnight security. In some communities, these programs are operated by local faith-based or advocacy organizations. When staffed by volunteers, a small parking lot requires as little as $10,000 per year to operate, covering the cost of a portable toilet, hand-washing station and security camera. • Sanctioned Encampments: A designated place for people sleeping outside to set up their camp s. Sometimes sanctioned encampments are just spaces that people are allowed to camp. Other sanctioned encampments include portable toilets, hand washing stations, trash receptacles and some services. Figure 3: “Managing to Ending Homelessness” Range of Services ITEM NO. 2.B. 8 • Rotating Shelter: Overnight shelter that rotates locations on a daily or weekly basis. In many communities, faith-based groups will take turns operating a rotating shelter, particularly during the winter months. • Meals: Meals provided to individuals experiencing homelessness, either through a central location (e.g., a soup kitchen) or by delivering meals directly to people. • Supplies: Supplies and donations provided to individuals experiencing homelessness, such as clothing, blankets, sleeping bags and tents, etc. • Sanitation Facilities: Publicly accessible restrooms and showers, which can include portable toilets, hand washing stations and mobile shower units. • Day Center: Facilities that allow people to visit during drop-in hours to access on-site services such as showers, restrooms, meals, laundry and mail. Ending Homelessness Ending homelessness includes a housing first approach to all services. Many of the programs listed above can function within a housing first model if they include housing-focused supportive services. In most cases, however, these supportive services increase the cost of the program substantially. For example, according to a cost analysis the City of Santa Rosa completed recently on a safe parking program with 100 parking spots, a program without supportive services would cost around $165,000 per year to operate, whereas a program that includes housing-focused supportive services would cost $530,000 per year to operate. HOMELESS SERVICE OPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Figure 3 below shows the Housing First Services Continuum, which was included in the February 23rd staff report. This shows the different types of homeless services available in a successful housing first service continuum. Below, we describe the programs that fit within each service category along with specific staff recommendations for each. Attached to this report is a Homeless Services Recommendation Summary which includes a table with all staff recommendations described below. ITEM NO. 2.B. 9 Staff recommend that the City pursue a range of services that are consistent with a housing first approach, and prioritize permanent housing solutions with an emphasis on permanent supportive housing. While all programs are important parts of the system, permanent housing is the intervention that ends someone’s experience of homelessness. Permanent supportive housing is particularly lacking, and it is essential to addressing the most challenging situations of chronic homelessness. Those experiencing homelessness in Rohnert Park are currently able to access shelter and housing in other cities as part of the county-wide system. U nless the City fully funds permanent supportive housing units for those experiencing homelessness in Rohnert Park, there will likely be an expectation that units provided here will be available to those from other parts of Sonoma County. This highlights the importance of developing effective collaboration through the Continuum of Care and with our neighboring cities. There is over $20 million in federal and state funding available for homeless services in Sonoma County in the next 12-18 months – more than ever before. This includes $12.1 million under the jurisdiction of the Continuum of Care, and $8.1 million under the jurisdiction of the County. We do not yet know how these funds will be spent. Because some of them will support Rohnert Park, staff recommend waiting on at least some of these funding decisions before committing City funds to particular efforts, and to the extent feasible collaborating with the Continuum of Care and County to make the most effective use of the overall funding. This $20 million does not include funds for mental health and other services managed by the County, funds from Measure O, the recently-passed mental health tax, and local discretionary funds from most cities and the County. Staff are interested in better understanding the appropriate scale of different options, as well as their effectiveness. We can complete some of this analysis once we have direction from the Council on t he options you are most interested in, as well as after reviewing data we hope to receive soon from the Continuum of Care on performance measures. Because the needs of individuals and the system are dynamic, flexibility to make adjust ments to how funds are used is helpful. For example, in December, the City Council directed staff to move $20,000 in funds from the Rapid Rehousing program to Homeless Prevention targeting families that need assistance due to financial impacts of COVID-19. Staff were able to do this Figure 3: Housing First Services Continuum ITEM NO. 2.B. 10 easily because the agreement allowed for funding adjustments between the two programs. There is no analysis that indicates how much of each component of the system (e.g., prevention, outreach, shelter, housing options) is needed to maximize results. We hope to eventually gain such an understanding, preferably on a county-wide basis. Based on direction provided by Council regarding the services below, staff plan to return with proposals for programs and related funding. Staff may also recommend adding capacity through an additional position and/or consultants. Prevention Homeless prevention helps individuals and families maintain housing, although it is difficult to predict who will become homeless, and thus to target prevention effectively. The only consistent predictor of whether someone will become homeless is if they have experienced homelessness in the past. There is some research, however, to suggest that programs that focus on eviction prevention and access to community-based services can help. Below are some examples of homeless prevention programs: • Services Hub: A central location (physical or virtual) to access services such as sign-ups and referrals to human service and financial assistance programs, access to food resources, education and job placement , disability enrollment , and child care assistance. • Eviction Prevention: These programs focus on preventing evictions through providing a short -term financial assistance, combined with supportive services and sometimes legal support. Resources are usually targeted at households at highest risk of losing their housing. Prevention Recommendation:  Staff do not recommend that the City invest in homeless prevention at this time. Staff believe that a health and human services hub focused on low-income residents would be a valuable addition in Rohnert Park. Residents currently must often travel to Petaluma or Santa Rosa to obtain services. Fortunately, the Rohnert Park Health Center is offering some community-oriented services already, such as those mentioned in the services hub description above. Additionally, alumni from Leadership Rohnert Park are working with the Health Center to identify ways to expand services. Kaiser is supporting the launch of virtual platform called “Unite Us” that would increase access to services as well. City staff are monitoring these efforts and while there may be opportunities to support them, the Council has emphasized expanding services for those experiencing homelessness as the priority. The federal and state governments recently allocated $30 million to the County to provide rental assistance to people impacted by COVID, and we expect that more funds are on the way. These funds will meet the most pressing community need for financial assistance to prevent evictions. ITEM NO. 2.B. 11 Outreach Outreach is the “front door” to homeless services, providing housing-focused services which may include connecting with housing options, getting on shelter and housing waitlists, obtaining government identification, increasing income, connecting with medical, mental health and substance use services, and meeting immediate needs. A key front door component is the Coordinated Entry System, a centralized system to access shelter and housin g resources. Coordinated Entry assesses people for their level of need and then adds them a county-wide waitlist for services. When there is an opening in a housing program, Coordinated Entry refers people that meet the qualifications for the program, focusing first on those with the highest needs. We are hoping that the system evolves so that highly vulnerable individuals can be placed directly into housing rather than on waitlists or at shelters. Below are some examples of homeless outreach programs: • Mobile Outreach: Visit encampments and engage the individuals living there, providing services specific to their needs and situation. Mobile outreach programs are able to complete Coordinated Entry assessments in the field. HOST is an example of a mobile outreach program. HOST in Rohnert Park is partially funded through the Continuum of Care and supplemented by the City. HOST dedicates 40 hours a week on outreach efforts in Rohnert Park. • Day Center: Facilities that provide services such as showers, restrooms, meals, laundry and mail. Within a housing first model, day centers include supportive services and Coordinated Entry assessments. The Homeless Services Center, operated by Catholic Charities in Santa Rosa, is an example of a day center. • Coordinated Entry Access Point: Funded by the Continuum of Care and managed by Catholic Charities, there are locations people can visit during designated times to complete a Coordinated Entry assessment. Many organizations throughout the County host Coordinated Entry staff regularly to conduct assessments. Before the onset of COVID-19, staff were working with Rohnert Park Health Center and Coordinated Entry staff to set up a weekly Coordinated Entry site in Rohnert Park. Unfortunately, this was put on hold, but we plan to start up conversations again when it is safe to do so. The Coordinated Entry system may change significantly in the next 6-12 months as the CoC is looking for a new provider. Outreach Recommendations:  Staff recommend considering increased funding for mobile outreach. HOST currently dedicates 40 hours a week to Rohnert Park, which consists of a team of four outreach specialists visiting twice a week. Increased mobile outreach would add days of dedicated outreach support. In conversations with volunteers and front -line City staff, we hear requests for increased mobile outreach. Unlike physical “front door” programs like day centers, mobile outreach brings the supports directly to where people are at. This is essential for many, especially those without a vehic le or with mobility challenges. The budget for 40 hours a week of dedicated HOST support this fiscal year is $87,000, of which the City is funding $41,544. While the CoC is funding the difference this year, we do not know yet how much it will fund for the coming fiscal year. ITEM NO. 2.B. 12  Staff do not recommend funding a day center. While day centers are a valuable tool for connecting with people, they can also be costly to operate – especially if they include housing-focused services. They are not accessible to everyone, particularly people without vehicle s or with mobility challenges. Many of the physical services a day center offers like showers or meals can be provided through volunteer efforts. Supportive services including Coordinated Entry assessments can be offered through mobile outreach or at an access point.  Staff recommend that the City continue exploring options to set up a Coordinated Entry Access Point in Rohnert Park. While the conversations with Rohnert Park Health Center were stalled due to COVID-19, staff plan to start up conversations again when Coordinated Entry can be offered in-person again. Shelter Shelters offer people a safe place to sleep and to access supportive services focused on permanent housing. Often, shelters will also include on-site health clinics, meals and other services to meet immediate needs. In Sonoma County, there are enough shelter beds for about 25% of the homeless population on any given night. During the winter months, this increases to about 30%. While she lter is an important tool to help ensure the health and safety of many experiencing homelessness, it is not a prerequisite for housing. Below are some examples of shelter programs: • Congregate Shelter : Shelters that offer people a dorm-style sleeping environment, often with several bunk beds in a large room. Examples include Catholic Charities’ Sam Jones Shelter , a 213-bed shelter in Santa Rosa and COTS’ Mary Issak Center Shelter, a 112-bed shelter in Petaluma. • Non-Congregate Shelter: Shelters that offer people rooms or units to sleep in alone or with members of their household (i.e., a partner and/or children.) An example of a non- congregate shelter is Los Guilicos Village, a 60-unit shelter operated by St Vincent de Paul in Santa Rosa. • Safe Parking (with S ervices): Safe Parking allows individuals living in their vehicles to park overnight and provides access to a bathroom and trash receptacles, and sometimes includes overnight security. A housing-focused safe parking program includes supportive services. The cost of a safe parking program depends on the size of the lot and the services provided. As mentioned above, the City of Santa Rosa estimated a safe parking program without services t o cost $165,000 per year and $530,000 per year with supportive services. The members of the Homelessness Roundtable initially expressed interest in a Safe Parking site, and the City offered $10,000 to support a volunteer-led effort if one emerged, which has not happened. o Note: The City does not currently have a specific ordinance regulating safe parking, so establishing a site may require a conditional use permit which is subject to approval by the Planning Commission. The City could also change the zoning code to establish standards for safe parking sites, designate specific areas where they may be established, and allow approval with an administrative permit at the staff level. ITEM NO. 2.B. 13 Shelter Recommendations:  Staff do not recommend funding a shelter in Rohnert Park. While shelters offer people a safe place to sleep and access supportive services, they are costly to build and operate. Those experiencing homelessness in Rohnert Park have access to county-wide shelters, including Sam Jones Shelter and the Family Resource Center in Santa Rosa, though they are limited by those shelters’ capacity. Should the Council desire to provide a short -term housing option, it may want to consider using hotel vouchers. To the extent we in Rohnert Park and the county-wide system can expand housing options – particularly permanent supportive housing – we reduce the need for shelters while providing long-term solutions.  At this time, staff do not recommend funding a housing-focused safe parking program, however, Council may want to consider exploring a more basic safe parking program or one that is led by volunteers. The last homeless count showed that about two thirds of the homeless population in Rohnert Park are living in their vehicles. Safe parking gives individuals a safe and secure place to park overnight and access restrooms and trash. However, a housing-focused safe parking program can be very expensive and staff believes that the City’s limited resources should be prioritized for permanent housing programs. For this reason, Council may consider exploring options for sites and the cost of funding a basic or volunteer-led safe parking program. This option would require substantial Council leadership on identifying and approving site s. Rapid Rehousing Rapid Rehousing provides short -term financial assistance and supports to help people experiencing homelessness get back into a home of their own. Individuals hold a lease with their landlord and take over full monthly rental payments when the assistance expires. Short -term financial assistance could include security deposit, a portion of monthly rent for a limited duration, and assistance paying for utilities. Supportive services include assistance with budgeting and increasing income, help accessing community resources for food, health care and child care, and education on landlord-tenant rights and responsibilities. Rapid Rehousing is a valuable tool to assist those with low to moderate needs who are able to take over paying their rent on their own. It is not a good fit for those that need longer term rental assistance or supportive services, or those who are unable to qualify to rent on their own due to poor credit or limited rental history. There are a number of Rapid Rehousing programs operating in Sonoma County, including the City-funded program with Catholic Charities that serves individuals from Rohnert Park. Rapid Rehousing Recommendations:  Staff recommend exploring options to fund a flexible rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing master-lease blended program. See description of this recommendation under “Permanent Supportive Housing Recommendations” below. ITEM NO. 2.B. 14 Permanent Supportive Housing Permanent Supportive Housing serves the highest needs individuals and is the most important tool to end chronic homelessness. Permanent Supportive Housing combines subsidized housing with intensive supportive services, which are customized to the individuals’ needs and focused on helping them retain their housing. These services include hands-on support from a case manager or social worker, usually provided in participants’ homes, as well as mental health and physical health services. Successful permanent supportive housing programs prioritize those with the highest needs first. The system of ranking individuals by level of need is known as a “by-name list .” Coordinated Entry uses a by-name list method to track and rank individuals for services county-wide, however, some cities have developed their own by-name list with individuals specific to their communities. Permanent Supportive Housing is expensive to build and operate on an on-going basis. Sonoma County staff estimate a need for approximately 1,000 additional permanent supportive housing units just for the existing homeless population. There are three main ways to add more permanent supportive housing units: 1. Build new housing units: New units of permanent supportive housing could include tiny home villages, individual units set-aside as permanent supportive housing in a larger project or entire apartment complexes. Building new permanent supportive housing is expensive, but this is still an important tool as it adds new housing to the market while meeting the housing need for chronically homeless individuals. Permanent supportive housing developers usually partner with a service provider to provide the ongoing on- site services. Local examples include: a. Caritas Homes – A partnership between Catholic Charities and Burbank Housing, Caritas Homes in Santa Rosa, when completed, will provide 128 affordable apartment units. The first phase of development is set to begin March 2021 and will provide 64 affordable units, 30 of which will be designated permanent supportive housing. Develop ment cost s for phase 1 are expected to be around $40 million ($625,000 per unit.) b. John Zane and Michael Wolff Veterans Village – Opened in 2019, this 14-unit tiny home village provides housing and supportive services for veterans experiencing homelessness in Sonoma County. The County owns the land and Community Housing Sonoma County oversaw the development of the project. The total project development cost was $2.25 million (about $160,700 per unit.) c. Vida Nueva – A 23-unit affordable housing apartment complex in Rohnert Park that provides homes for individuals who previously experienced homelessness. Built in 2008, Burbank Housing provides the property management and COTS provides some on-site supportive services. Although it is not set-aside housing for chronic homeless families, this is an example of permanent supportive housing in the City. The project is not limited to Rohnert Park and houses families from through Sonoma County. 2. Convert existing properties: Converting existing properties such as underutilized motels into permanent supportive housing has become more popular over the past few years. It ITEM NO. 2.B. 15 is usually less expensive than developing new housing and the units available more quickly. Local examples include: a. The Palms Inn – Just outside of Santa Rosa, the 104-unit Palms Inn was the first motel in Sonoma County to be converted into permanent supportive housing in 2016. The Palms Inn is still owned by the same family, but it is operated as permanent supportive housing and Catholic Charities provides the on-site supportive services. b. Gold Coin Motel (or “The Commons”) – A 54-unit motel in Santa Rosa recently purchased by St Vincent de Paul, a local homeless service agency. The purchase and conversion is expected to cost $9.9 million (about $183,000 per room). St. Vincent de Paul has indicated that Rohnert Park may be able to purchase rights to a limited number of rooms for $50,000 each. On-going costs would be about $7,500/year. St. Vincent de Paul would work with the City to pursue housing vouchers through the County Housing Authority to cover these costs. There is a small number of vouchers relative to the need and the voucher system is not integrated with the homeless system of care. c. Hotel Azura – A 44-room hotel in Santa Rosa recently purchased by the County of Sonoma using State “Project Homekey” funds. The purchase cost was $7.9 million (about $179,000 per room.) There will be additional costs to renovate and provide ongoing on-site services. d. Sebastopol Inn – A 31-room hotel in Sebastopol recently purchased by the County of Sonoma using State “Project Homekey” funds. The purchase cost was $6.2 million (about $200,000 per room.) There will be additional costs to renovate and provide ongoing on-site services. 3. Master-lease with landlords: A master -leased permanent supportive housing program is probably the quickest to operationalize, but it depends on landlords agreeing to master- lease with a service provider. In this model, a landlord rents their unit(s) to the service provider who pays the rent each month. The service provider then sublets the unit(s), usually at a subsidized rate, to chronically homeless individuals and provides the ongoing supportive services to the individuals. Most of the permanent supportive housing programs in the county are based on the master-leased model. Including the subsidy and service costs, a master-leased permanent supportive housing program will cost up to $18,000 per person per year. Permanent Supportive Housing Recommendations:  Staff recommend developing a robust by-name list and program. A by-name list would capture data and information about the individuals experiencing homelessness in Rohnert Park and help staff and service providers identify and prioritize those with the highest needs. Individuals deemed as the most vulnerable would be prioritized for outreach services, meaning that they would receive increased support to assist them in navigating existing community resources and housing options. Additionally, a by-name list provides feedback about what is working and not working in the local system. This gives us information about where to focus our ongoing efforts and where to advocate for improvements in the system. ITEM NO. 2.B. 16  Staff recommend supporting development of new permanent supportive housing. New housing developments depend largely on market conditions and financing options, however, the Council can provide direction that it is interested in new permanent supportive housing development in the City. Council can also direct staff to look at ways to provide funding for new permanent supportive housing options. Below are two options: o Providence St Joseph Health owns a one acre parcel in the City which they are interested in developing into permanent supportive housing. They are in the beginning process of conducting a feasibility analysis on the project now. If the project is deemed buildable, Council could choose to invest funds in the project, such as the City’s $1 million in successor agency funds. o A tiny home village is generally less expensive than developing an apartment complex, especially if it is developed on public land. If directed, staff could explore City-owned sites that may be appropriate for a tiny home village and connect with possible development partners.  Staff recommend exploring options to convert existing properties. The State has indicated that it plans to make additional funds available for conversions of existing properties through their Homekey program. Properties that could be converted include hotels, motels and vacant office buildings. If directed, staff would explore local properties that may be a good fit for the Homekey program.  Staff recommend exploring the potential to obtain a limited number of rooms at the Gold Coin Motel/The Commons project in Santa Rosa, per the discussion above.  Staff recommend exploring options to fund a flexible rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing master-lease blended program. Rapid rehousing programs tend to be most successful for individuals with lower needs who are able to qualify for housing on their own and can take over payment of market -rate rent after a few months of rental assistance. While that program model works for some, others need rental assistance longer-term and/or may not qualify to rent housing due to factors such as poor credit or limited housing history. A blended rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing master-lease program would offer short-term and longer -term rental assistance for individuals and families, depending on their needs. This model would offer the flexibility to adjust services and supports depending on what an individual needs to maintain housing stability. Other Permanent Housing There are a handful of other programs that provide creative permanent housing options for individuals experiencing homelessness. The City is currently providing funding to SHARE California, a nonprofit organization that specializes in creative permanent housing solutions , especially shared housing. Not only does SHARE place individuals in housing, they also provide ongoing supportive services to both home seeker and home provider, and assist in re-placing individuals if the match is unsuccessful. Below are some examples of these creative housing solutions : ITEM NO. 2.B. 17 1. Room rentals: Matches home-seekers with people that have spare bedrooms in their home s. SHARE’s program model includes options for rent exchange, service exchange or a combination of both. 2. Community Houses: Service provider leases a home from a landlord in the community and sublets the individual rooms separately. Although not a subsidized program, renting a room in a house is generally much less expensive than renting a market -rate apartment. 3. Accessory Dwelling Units: Accessory dwelling units, also known as granny units or second units, can be rented to individuals experiencing homelessness. This is often paired with programs like Rapid Rehousing or SHARE for services and financial assistance. Other Permanent Housing Recommendations:  Staff recommend continuing to support the SHARE program. SHARE provides a creative housing solution that is readily available in the community – empty bedrooms. Furthermore, SHARE integrates well with other programs the City funds, including HOST and Rapid Rehousing. Additional Recommendations: In order to support homeless service collaborations within the City and throughout the County, staff is also making the following recommendations:  Staff recommend continuing to support the efforts of the Homelessness Roundtable and local volunteers. The Homelessness Roundtable has been an effective tool for community engagement and education. Unsheltered Friends Outreach grew out of the Roundtable and has been providing valuable services to individuals experiencing homelessness. The City could increase its support of volunteers, including building stronger bridges between local volunteers and service providers as well as providing some financial support for volunteer-led efforts that align with the Council’s goals. For example, the City has budgeted $10,000/year for outreach workers to meet individual’s immediate needs for food or shelter, which can help establish the trust needed to build the relationships that ultimately lead to permanent housing.  Staff recommend continuing to support regional efforts. Successfully addressing homelessness requires a regional effort. The majority of funds provided to the local system are federal and state funds administered by the Continuum of Care or County of Sonoma, including funding for mental health and addiction services.  Staff recommend exploring sub-regional efforts with neighboring cities. In addition to funding managed by the Continuum of Care and the County, most cities and the county are also investing their o wn discretionary funds to bolster homeless services in their cities. There may be opportunities to collaborate on efforts on a sub-regional basis with Petaluma, Cotati, and Santa Rosa as we believe there is movement of those experiencing homeless in this part of the county. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT These actions are consistent with Strategic Plan Goal D – Continue to Develop a Vibrant Community. ITEM NO. 2.B. 18 FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE There is no direct fiscal impact from providing direction on the Council’s preferences regarding homeless services. To provide some context, we budgeted $360,000 in FY 20-21 for services, including Rapid Re-housing, Prevention, and Outreach. We budgeted an additional $125,000 to clean up encampments, to patrol creeks, and to manage vegetation. Of these funds, $235,000 is from casino mitigation funds and $250,000 is from the Housing Successor Agency budget. These costs do not include the considerable staff time on this issue. There are limited sources of undesignated revenue to fund new projects. One source is the Community Investment contribution from the City’s MOU with the Tribe for casino mitigation. The City receives non-guaranteed contributions for Neighborhood Upgrade and Workforce Housing projects and for the City of Rohnert Park Foundation. The City and the Foundation expect to receive $1.65 million this fiscal year and $2.3 million next fiscal year for Community Investme nt contributions. With these funds available for a wide range of uses, the Council is also considering these moneys for other projects, including the City’s climate change activities, the Foundation’s Small Grants Program, and other projects such as a fireworks event and an expanded small grants program. Department Head Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A Finance Manager Approval Date: 03/02/2021 City Manager Approval Date: 03/02/2021 Attachments: 1. Homeless Services Recommendation Summary Attachment 1: Homeless Services Recommendations Summary Page 1 of 2 # SERVICE TYPE PROGRAM STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1 Prevention Services Hub / Eviction Prevention Staff do not recommend that the City invest in homeless prevention at this time. 2 Outreach Mobile Outreach Staff recommend considering increased funding for mobile outreach. 3 Outreach Day Center Staff do not recommend funding a day center. 4 Outreach Coordinated Entry Access Point Staff recommend that the City continue exploring options to set up a Coordinated Entry Access Point in Rohnert Park. 5 Shelter Congregate / Non-congregate Shelter Staff do not recommend funding a shelter in Rohnert Park. 6 Shelter Safe Parking At this time, staff do not recommend funding a housing-focused safe parking program, however, Council may want to consider exploring a more basic safe parking program or one that is led by volunteers. 7 Rapid Rehousing Rapid Rehousing See #12. 8 Permanent Supportive Housing By-Name List Staff recommend developing a robust by-name list and program. 9 Permanent Supportive Housing Build New Housing Staff recommend supporting development of new permanent supportive housing. 10 Permanent Supportive Housing Convert Existing Properties Staff recommend exploring options to convert existing properties. 11 Permanent Supportive Housing Convert Existing Properties Staff recommend exploring the potential to obtain a limited number of rooms at the Gold Coin Motel/The Commons project in Santa Rosa, per the discussion above 12 Permanent Supportive Housing Master-lease with Landlords Staff recommend exploring options to fund a flexible rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing master-lease blended program. 13 Other Permanent Housing Room Rentals Staff recommend continuing to support the SHARE program. Attachment 1: Homeless Services Recommendations Summary Page 2 of 2 # TYPE TOPIC STAFF RECOMMENDATION 14 Additional Recommendations Homelessness Roundtable Staff recommend continuing to support the efforts of the Homelessness Roundtable and local volunteers. 15 Additional Recommendations Regional Efforts Staff recommend continuing to support regional efforts. 16 Additional Recommendations Sub-Regional Efforts Staff recommend exploring sub-regional efforts with neighboring cities. ITEM NO. 2.B Supplemental 1 Meeting Date: April 6, 2021 Department: Administration and Development Services Submitted By: Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager Prepared By: Don Schwartz, Assistant City Manager & Mary Grace Pawson, Director of Development Services Agenda Title: Supplemental Information Regarding Staffing Requirements to Expand the City’s Homelessness Services RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consider the additional information provided in this report regarding staffing requirements necessary to expand the City’s homeless services. BACKGROUND: This report presents information to supplement the staff report prepared for the March 9, 2021 City Council meeting on options to address homelessness, which will now be considered at the April 6, 2021 Special City Council meeting. Since preparing the initial staff report, staff has been working on the budget for Fiscal Year 2021-22 and has more complete information on the requirements of the City’s existing, state mandated housing program and the staffing and funding required for that program. The focus of this report is the need for additional staff support to administer expanded homeless services programs, if the City Council chooses to expand these programs. The need for additional staff support is mentioned as a possibility in the initial staff report. ANALYSIS: For the past two years, homeless services have been managed by the City’s Housing Administrator, whose primary responsibility is to oversee and administer the City’s affordable housing programs. As the City has increased its efforts to address homelessness, the Housing Administrator has taken on additional tasks regarding homelessness including developing protocols and policies around encampment cleanups, facilitating the City’s Homeless Taskforce, developing and implementing homeless service programs, participating in regional efforts, and facilitating the Homelessness Roundtable. The Housing Administrator currently spends about half her time supporting homeless services. The housing program has been largely funded from former redevelopment agency funds, as allowed by state law. These funds currently pay for the Housing Administrator and Rapid Rehousing program, as well as funding substantial consultant support largely focused on one- time projects needed to establish a solid administrative foundation. This consultant support has allowed the Housing Administrator to focus a considerable portion of her time on homelessness, while still meeting the City’s state-mandated housing obligations. Mission Statement “We Care for Our Residents by Working Together to Build a Better Community for Today and Tomorrow.” CITY OF ROHNERT PARK CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NO. 2.B Supplemental 2 However, beginning in Fiscal Year 21-22, the City must reduce housing consultant support by about 70% to ensure that these funds are available for multiple years to support the cost of the Housing Administrator and affordable housing responsibilities. Reducing consultant support also allows us the option to continue on-going funding of the Rapid Rehousing Program through this funding source. The loss of consultant support coupled with the need to begin work on the state- mandated Housing Element update means that the Housing Administrator does not have the same level of availability to work on homelessness issues. While increasing homeless services is a new Council priority, complying with state law for the entirety of the City’s affordable housing program is also a necessary and established Council priority. Thus, as part of the upcoming budget discussions, staff will be recommending the addition of a full-time Homeless Services Coordinator to administer the Cit y’s homelessness programs. This position would report to the Housing Administrator, who will spend approximately 70% of her time on the City’s housing program and 30% to lead the City’s efforts to address homelessness. The Homeless Services Coordinator would take on much of the homeless program administration currently managed by the Housing Administrator as well as overseeing additional homeless service options as directed by Council. Staff see this position as necessary to administer existing – and expand ing – homeless services while also maintaining a high- performing affordable housing program. If approved in concept by Council, staff will work with Human Resources to determine the appropriate position for this role and return to the Council at a future date for review and approval. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The addit ion of this position is consistent with the Council’s priority of expanding services to those experiencing homelessness. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE: There is no immediate fiscal impact from this item. To provide some context, however, we estimate the full annual cost of the position at $125,000/year. As in the initial staff report on this topic, t he most likely revenue source for this position is the Community Investment contribution from the City’s MOU with the Tribe for casino mitigation. The City r eceives non-guaranteed contributions for Neighborhood Upgrade and Workforce Housing projects and for the City of Rohnert Park Foundation. The City and the Foundation expect to receive $1.65 million this fiscal year and $2.3 million next fiscal year for Community Investment contributions. The level of funding available for homeless services depends in part on the overall funding available to the City, and in part on how the Council allocates those funds. For example, funding for climate change initiatives, mental health support for public safety (which will include supporting those experiencing homelessness,) and back filling non-profits for loss of revenue from fireworks sales may all draw on the same funding source as those proposed for funding services fo r those experiencing homelessness. Staff will present options for the Council’s consideration during the budget hearings. As noted in the prior staff report, there is over $20 million in federal and state funding available for homeless services in Sonoma County in the next 12-18 months – more than ever before. While we know how some of these funds will be spent, other decisions are pending. Because some of the funding will support Rohnert Park, staff recommend waiting on at least some of ITEM NO. 2.B Supplemental 3 those decisions before committing City funds to particular efforts, and to the extent feasible collaborating with the Continuum of Care and County to make the most effective use of the overall funding. This $20 million does not include funds for mental health and other services managed by the County, funds from Measure O, the recently-passed mental health tax, and local discretionary funds from most cities and the County. Department Head Approval Date: N/A Human Resources Director Approval Date: N/A City Attorney Approval Date: N/A City Manager Approval Date: 3/31/2021 Discussion and Direction on Homeless Services City of Rohnert Park City Council April 6, 2021 1 Background Homelessness is a complex issue Contributing factors: ◦High housing costs ◦Low-wage jobs ◦Physical and mental disabilities ◦Lack of personal support systems ◦Difficulty accessing government safety net Cities alone cannot solve it 2 Background In Jan, Council selected homeless services as a top priority On Feb 23, Staff gave an educational presentation on homeless services Today’s presentation will focus on: ◦What the City is already doing ◦Options for expanding services 3 Quick Refresher 4 Key Points on Homelessness 1.While substance abuse contributes to homelessness, it is not the primary cause of homelessness. 2.Homelessness has likely not increased over the past six years. 3.There are not enough shelter beds for everyone experiencing homelessness. 5 Key Points on Homelessness 4.Locally, 84% report that they would accept housing if offered. 5.Most people experiencing homelessness in Sonoma County are from Sonoma County. 6.Not everyone needs a deed-restricted affordable housing unit. 6 Key Points on Homelessness 7.It is difficult to predict who will become homeless, and thus to target prevention effectively. 8.Permanent housing (often combined with services) solves homelessness. 7 Rohnert Park Compared to County Overall Homeless Population Rohnert Park: 9% Remainder of Sonoma County: 91% 8 Different Experiences Temporary: ◦Individuals whose experience of homelessness is short, low recidivism, largely self-resolve Episodic: ◦Individuals who enter and exit homelessness multiple times Chronic Homelessness: ◦Individuals with a disabling condition who have been homeless for one year or longer ◦19% in 2020 Homeless Count (~47 in RP) 9 Costs Temporary Episodic Chronic 10 Complaints Temporary Episodic Chronic 11 Vulnerability Temporary Episodic Chronic 12 Historical Focus Temporary Episodic Chronic 13 What the City is Doing 14 Item FY 18-19 FY 19-20 FY 20-21 Encampment Cleanup Efforts* $0 $258,000 $125,000 Homeless Services* $250,000 $250,000 $360,000 TOTAL $250,000 $508,000 $485,000 City Budget * Doesn’t include substantial amount of City staff time. 15 Homeless Taskforce Includes Public Safety, Public Works, Code Compliance, Homeless Services (HOST) Focus: ◦Address encampments causing health and safety issues ◦Refer individuals to HOST for support ◦Develop protocols for cleanups ◦Ensure compliance with applicable laws 16 What the City is Doing 1.Addressing encampments on public property 2.Addressing encampments on private property 3.Adding and retaining housing 4.Funding homeless services 5.Facilitating the Homelessness Roundtable 6.Engaging in regional efforts 17 1. Encampments on Public Property Legal limitations (Boise v. Martin) Efforts include: ◦Connecting to services (HOST) ◦Conducting cleanups for health/safety issues ◦Creek patrols for protection of waterways ◦Managing vegetation ◦Dealing with abandoned / nonoperational vehicles 18 2. Encampments –Private Property Educate property owners and connect with resources Advise property owners to: 1.Secure Property 2.Post no trespassing / no parking signage 3.Tow unauthorized vehicles (at owner’s expense) 19 3. Adding and Retaining Housing 1,000+ homes under construction or in pipeline 53 affordable homes in pipeline 1,147 affordable homes already exist ◦Includes 218-unit Redwoods at UD Addressing units with affordability expiring 20 4. Homeless Services Catholic Charities HOST ◦City funding: $41,000 (leverages COC $) Rapid Rehousing and Homeless Prevention ◦City funding: $250,000 SHARE/Prevention ◦City funding: $10,000 (leverages private funds) 21 City-Funded Program Outcomes Total served:158 Placed in housing:20 Enrolled in outreach services: 60 Provided with homeless prevention financial assistance: 78 22 5. Homelessness Roundtable Homelessness is a community-wide challenge & requires a community-wide response Monthly meetings –began September 2019 Venue for education, community engagement, collaboration with service providers 23 5. Homelessness Roundtable Participation ◦Faith-based organizations ◦School district ◦Business sector ◦Service providers ◦Health care Volunteer efforts ◦Food and donation deliveries ◦Housing-focused support 24 Unsheltered Friends Outreach Provide 50+ meals / 4 times per week Support Housing First Approach: ◦Connections to/Extension of Outreach ◦Emphasize Housing in their conversations ◦Arranging for volunteer ‘mentors’ with housing emphasis Pursuing non-profit status 25 6. Regional Efforts We are part of a larger system: ◦Outreach ◦Mental health services ◦Shelters ◦Access to Permanent Housing ◦Data tracking and reporting ◦Assess performance of system and providers ◦Planning (e.g., gap analysis) Mostly state and federal funds 26 Continuum of Care Lead responsibility for County-wide system 15 member Board Responsibilities include: ◦Planning ◦Assessing performance of system and providers ◦Policy-setting (i.e., priorities for shelter) ◦Allocating some Fed/state/local $ 27 Continuum of Care Sets regional foundation Foundation needs strengthening ◦Fragmented funding and services ◦Weak planning and assessment Rohnert Park very active on behalf of cities Ad Hoc of City Councilmembers provides rapid input and electeds’ voices 28 Short-term Long-term Managing Homelessness Ending Homelessness Shared Housing Housing-focused Outreach Sanctioned Encampments Housing-focused Shelter Permanent Supportive Housing Day Center Safe Parking with Services Meals Rapid Rehousing Safe Parking without Services Sanitization Facilities 29 Rotating Shelter Homeless Service Options & Recommendations 30 Guiding Principle Focus on “ending” homelessness with housing first approach Prioritize permanent supportive housing All programs important, but permanent housing ends homelessness 31 OUTREACH PREVENTION RAPID REHOUSING SHELTER PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING OTHER PERMANENT HOUSING Housing First Services Continuum 32 Examples: Services Hub: A central location to access services Eviction Prevention: Short-term financial assistance, supportive services, legal support PREVENTION Those at risk of homelessness . •Help keeping or finding housing •Supportive services 33 Do not invest in homeless prevention at this time. ◦Hub would be valuable addition, but there are already entities working on (i.e., RPHC, Kaiser) ◦Feds allocated $30m to County for rental assistance for people impacted by COVID-19 PREVENTION Recommendation 34 Examples: Mobile Outreach: Outreach that meets people where they are Day Center: Drop-in physical location to access services Coordinated Entry Access Point: Drop-in location to enroll in Coordinated Entry OUTREACH Unsheltered individuals. •Front door to services •Help finding housing •Supportive services 35 Consider increased funding for mobile outreach. Do not fund a day center. Continue exploring options to set up a Coordinated Entry Access Point in Rohnert Park. RecommendationsOUTREACH 36 Examples: Congregate: Shelter with dorm-style sleeping environment Non-Congregate: Shelter with separate sleeping spaces (e.g. tiny homes) Safe Parking: Designated lot for overnight parking SHELTER People experiencing homelessness . •Temporary shelter •Help finding housing •Supportive services 37 Safe Parking 2/3 of those experiencing homelessness in RP live in vehicles Program Type Size Services & Amenities Cost? Volunteer-run Safe Parking Program ~10 parking spots On-site cameras, trash bins, restrooms, etc. ~$10,000/yr Safe Parking without Services ~100 parking spots Amenities + security and operator ~$165,000/yr Safe Parking with Services ~100 parking spots Amenities + housing-focused services ~$530,000/yr SHELTER 38 Safe Parking City does not currently have an ordinance regulating safe parking Safe Parking would require parking lot to be identified Likely to require significant Council leadership SHELTER 39 Do not fund a shelter in Rohnert Park. At this time, do not fund a housing- focused safe parking program. Council may want to consider exploring a more basic safe parking program or one that is led by volunteers. RecommendationsSHELTER 40 Several programs operating in Sonoma County, including City- funded program Valuable tool for people with low-to- moderate needs Not for those that need longer-term supports RAPID REHOUSING People experiencing homelessness with low- to-moderate needs . •Help finding housing •Short-term financial assistance •Supportive services 41 Explore options to fund a flexible rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing master-lease blended program. RecommendationsRAPID REHOUSING 42 The most important tool to end chronic homelessness Prioritizes highest needs first, using “by- name list” PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING People experiencing homelessness 1+ years and have higher needs . •Housing placement with long-term rental subsidy •Intensive supportive services 43 3 ways to add more capacity PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 1.Build new housing units 2.Convert existing properties 3.Master-lease with landlords 44 1. Build New Units Expensive, but important tool as it adds new housing to the market Creates ongoing housing to address chronic homelessness Developer usually partners with local service provider 45 PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING Caritas Homes 46 John Zane and Michael Wolff Veterans Village (Tiny Homes) 47 Vida Nueva 48 2. Convert Existing Properties Converting existing structures (like motels) = less expensive option Project Homekey -State program that funds purchase and renovation of existing structures to convert into housing ◦Started as one-time program using COVID funds, State likely to continue funding 49 PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING Hotel Azura 50 Sebastopol Inn 51 The Palms Inn 52 Gold Coin Motel (aka, “The Commons”) 53 3. Master-lease Program Service provider: ◦Master-leases unit(s) with landlord ◦Sublets to individual at subsidized rate ◦Provides ongoing supportive services Quickest to get set-up, but depends on landlords to participate Cost ~$18,000/person/year 54 PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING Develop a robust by-name list and program. ◦Would capture data and information about individuals in RP, identify and prioritize those with highest needs. RecommendationsPERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 55 Support development of new permanent supportive housing. ◦Providence St Joseph Health interested in developing housing project –Council could choose to invest funds. ◦Tiny home village –Council could direct staff to explore City-owned sites that may be appropriate. Recommendations (Cont.) PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 56 Explore options to convert existing properties. ◦Staff could explore local properties that may be a fit for the Homekey program. Recommendations (Cont.) PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 57 Explore the potential to obtain rooms at the Gold Coin Motel/The Commons project in Santa Rosa. Recommendations (Cont.) PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 58 Explore options to fund a flexible rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing master-lease blended program. ◦Provides more flexibility to adjust services depending on what individual needs to maintain housing. Recommendations (Cont.) PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING 59 Examples: Room rentals: Match home-seekers with people that have spare bedrooms Community Houses: Lease home and sublet individual rooms to different people ADUs: Can be paired with programs for services and financial assistance OTHER PERMANENT HOUSING •Room rentals •Community Houses •Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) 60 Continue to support the SHARE program. ◦SHARE provides creative housing solution that is readily available –empty bedrooms. ◦SHARE integrates well with HOST and Rapid Rehousing. RecommendationsOTHER PERMANENT HOUSING 61 Continue supporting the efforts of the Homelessness Roundtable and local volunteers. Continue supporting regional efforts. Explore sub-regional efforts with neighboring cities. Additional Recommendations 62 Add staff position to support homeless services. o Funding for housing is diminishing, consultant support going away o Housing Administrator needs to focus on housing o Homelessness requires full-time position 63 Additional Recommendation 64 Recommendations Summary 65 Overall Recommendations Confirm commitment to housing first approach Provide high-level direction on preferred options Authorize Homeless Services position Initiate staff work on preferred options Wait on most funding decisions until $20m in federal / state funds are allocated and complete more staff work 66 OUTREACH PREVENTION RAPID REHOUSING SHELTER PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING OTHER PERMANENT HOUSING Housing First Services Continuum 67 #SERVICE TYPE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION 1 Prevention Services Hub / Eviction Prevention Do not recommend. 2 Outreach Mobile Outreach Consider increasing funding. 3 Outreach Day Center Do not recommend. 4 Outreach Coordinated Entry Access Point Continue exploring access point. 5 Shelter Congregate / Non- congregate Shelter Do not recommend. 6 Shelter Safe Parking Do not fund housing-focused safe parking program. Council may consider volunteer or basic model. 68 #SERVICE TYPE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION 7 Rapid Rehousing (RRH) Rapid Rehousing See #12. 8 PSH By-Name List Develop robust by-name list. 9 PSH Build New Housing Support new development (e.g., St. Joseph / tiny homes.) 10 PSH Convert Existing Properties Explore options to convert properties (e.g., Homekey.) 11 PSH Convert Existing Properties Explore options to obtain rooms at Gold Coin Motel. 12 PSH Master-lease with Landlords Explore funding RRH / PSH blended program. 13 Other Permanent Housing Room Rentals Continue supporting SHARE program. 69 #SERVICE TYPE PROGRAM RECOMMENDATION 14 Additional Homelessness Roundtable Continue supporting Roundtable and volunteers. 15 Additional Regional Efforts Continue engaging in regional efforts. 16 Additional Sub-Regional Efforts Explore sub-regional efforts with neighboring cities. Sup.Additional Staffing Add dedicated homeless services staff person to City. 70 Final Note Availability of funds depends on Council’s priorities: ◦Fireworks backfill to nonprofits ◦Fireworks show ◦Climate change ◦Mental health support for public safety 71 Presentation on Homelessness Iain De Jong* will be joining this Thursday’s Mayors and Councilmembers meeting at 6pm to talk about ending homelessness. *Iain is the founder and CEO of OrgCode , a consulting firm focused on ending homelessness. Iain is considered a thought leader in Housing First. 72