Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCE - CS-1CS-1 City Council Meeting Correspondence 6/4/2019 A)Orange County Catholic Worker, et al. v. Orange County, et al.., U.S. District Court (Central District of California), Case No. SA CV 18-0155-DOC (KESx) [late of Name Correspondence 1 6/3/2019 Tim Johnson *RA - Recommended action Representative of In Favor In Opposition Comment of RA*. of RA." Yes Tuesday, June 04, 2019 Page 1 of 1 Orono, Norma From: Tim Johnson < Sent: Monday, June 03, 2019 4:56 PM To: Pulido, Miguel; Sarmiento, Vicente; Solorio, Jose; eComment; Villegas, Juan; Iglesias, Cecilia; Penaloza, David; rreyna@santa-ana.org; Funk, John Subject: Closed Session Item 1 This correspondence is with regards to Closed Session item 1 as it relates to our on going cases with homeless issues. As part of those cases, I felt that Judge Carter was impressed with the potential progress of the Yale facility at his last hearings in April. As you know, Judge Carter also has expressed that he feels that Santa Ana has carried more than its fair share in the past but still needs to take care of its homeless. However, since his last hearing things seem to have changed with regards to Yale which may change the tenor of his hearings towards Santa Ana (and possibly the county obviously too). As you know, the city approved of an MOU on Sept 6, 2018 agreeing to work in conjunction with the county on a emergency shelter to replace The Courtyard and The Armory. The location in the MOU proved to not be feasible and the county ended up purchasing the Yale site after conferring with the City in 4Q 2018 a few times. Subsequently, Supervisor Do informed the City that the county was stopping progress on the Yale facility until such a time that the City reaffirms its commitment to the Yale site. I believe that the county has not done an adequate job of presenting to the City and its residents (and others in the county) how the proposed Yale facility will operate. I also understand that from discussions with the county that they will not be putting out an operational plan until the City reaffirms. However, I believe that the county should be putting out an outline of how the Yale site would be operated. Through some various discussions with the county, they have communicated to me that the site will be operated in a manner similar to Bridges at Kraemer or The Link. Both of which when you drive by them, most people would have no idea it is a homeless shelter facility. However, we need something in writing on this in my opinion whether it be a revised MOU or even some written press statements. Essentially, the County is waiting for the City to reaffirm its commitment while the City (your group) may be waiting to reaffirm until after it knows what the proposed site would operate as. I would urge your group to put out conditions under which the Yale facility may be acceptable to the City which I imagine may include items such as: • Referral Only- Referral only type of facility... no walk in or out for residents. • Anti -Loitering Zone- Establishment of a 1 mile anti -loitering zone which would be enforced by OCSD. I believe that the county may be willing to contribute funds for SAPID to enforce this zone however until such a time that the SAPID is staffed up, you may want to encourage alternative enforcement by OCSD. • Transportation Plan- Establishment of transportation plans to cities outside of Santa Ana. This would include cities both inside the Central SPA and also other cities. Although the proposed facility may be ultimately for Santa Ana and the Central SPA, there initially will be residents from all over the county due to movement from The Courtyard so transportation to other cities even outside of the Central SPA seems to be appropriate. • Sharing the Load- The county should be well on its way to establishing emergency housing facilities in South County and be able to communicate this. We should see some movement by the county in this direction. If someone were to call 211 or OC Healthcare asking for shelter, they will be referred to Santa Ana. This is does not seem appropriate and as such, other cities in South SPA also need to have emergency facilities. The county currently owns properly zoned property in South County but it appears to be choosing not to utilize it. • Jail Release- I understand that OCSD is no longer releasing inmates in the middle of the night which I believe to be beneficial but they are still being released from the county jail in Santa Ana directly onto our streets regardless as to where they were originally arrested or their city of origin. I believe this to be true even if they were inmates at the county jail facility in Irvine (Musick) I would suggest that you use this opportunity to also indicate that this needs to change and the county should be providing transportation to released inmates to other cities besides Santa Ana. • Santa Ana beds- The county needs to reaffirm that the City will have control over 125 beds in the proposed facility. • Central SPA beds- The county needs to reaffirm that the remainder of the beds will be for the Central SPA based upon proportionality of homeless including how these individuals are sourced to their city of origin. • The Courtyard/Armory Closure -The county reaffirms its commitment to close The Courtyard and The Armory upon opening of an alternative site. Essentially, closure of 625 beds in those two facilities obviously with the Armory operating only seasonally. • The Courtyard Interim Plan- The county should consider immediate action items that will improve conditions at The Courtyard to show that it can operate a facility in Santa Ana that may be acceptable. I think we can all agree that the situation at The Courtyard is also not acceptable right now. The county should be able to put into practice some of the above items immediately at The Courtyard. They have an opportunity to show that they can have a facility operate more like Bridges at Kraemer or The Link by their actions at The Courtyard. By human nature, when we hear that a new shelter will be opened, a lot of folks will automatically compare it to the only facility that they know ... The Courtyard. By default, they think the new facility will operate like the old facility which from what I am hearing, that is not the desire of the County (a good thing). As a reminder, Yale would be replacing two existing county operations (The Courtyard and The Armory) which comprise a total of 625 beds so in theory the city would not house any more homeless folks but they would be in far better facilities for both them and the surrounding community. If it is acceptable to you to have The Courtyard and Armory replaced with an alternative site such as Yale inside of Santa Ana, I would ask that you put this forth into a discussion item and let the county know under what conditions you would reaffirm your commitment to Yale (or any other site). Essentially, be proactive instead of waiting for the county. In the alternative, I would encourage you to have the county put forth its outline of how a replacement facility would be operated addressing the above items and your other concerns. I believe that there are benefits to being proactive in this manner because you can indicate conditions instead of responding to them. I am concerned that by stopping the Yale facility, the county is jeopardizing our discussions before Judge Carter as it relates to the city's cases. We need to get this back on track not only for the sake of the on going federal cases but also for the betterment of those who are experiencing homelessness.