THANK YOU REALLY APPRECIATE
EVERYBODY FOR JOINING US TODAY.
HERE IN BUDGET SUB SIX, UH,
TODAY IS VERY MUCH FOCUSED ON
THE ISSUE OF HOMELESSNESS, BUT
FROM A VERY SPECIFIC LEVEL WE
ARE LOOKING AT THE STATE
HOMELESSNESS FUNDING PROGRAMS AS
WELL IN LOOKING AT WHAT STATES
AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE DONE.
AND ALSO GET A GOOD SENSE OF
WHAT SORT OF MEASUREMENTS WE CAN
TRY TO PUT IN PLACE TO GET US A
BETTER SENSE OF HOW WE GET TO
THE END GOAL. I THINK WE ALL
HAVE THE WE HAVE. WE ALL HAVE
THE SAME ANGLE. WE WANT TO SEE
MORE PERMANENT, AFFORDABLE
HOUSING BEING BUILT. WE WANT TO
SEE MORE PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS.
YOU WANT TO SEE MORE PEOPLE
SERVED OBVIOUSLY SPENT BILLIONS
OF DOLLARS. ON THAT AT THE STATE
LEVEL. I KNOW IT'S TAKING TIME
TO GET OUT TO LOCALS AS WELL AS
TO NONPROFITS AND COMMUNITY
ORGANIZATIONS. TODAY WE REALLY
WANT TO TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT
VARIETY OF THOSE ISSUES AND
FIGURE OUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO
HELP GET THE MONEY INTO OUR
COMMUNITIES FASTER SO THAT THEY
COULD BUILD HOMES AND SERVICE
PEOPLE AND NEED VERY HONORED
TODAY TO HAVE DR CRUCIAL HERE TO
BE OUR FIRST SPEAKER, PROVIDING
OVERVIEW. I KNOW SHE WAS
INTEGRAL AND HELPING, UH, RIGHT
UP THE CALIFORNIA INTERAGENCY
COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS REPORT.
ALWAYS LOVE HER THOUGHTS AND I
GUESS AS SHE'S APPROACHING US
WOULD LOVE TO HEAR IF THERE WAS
ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR IN THE
REPORT THAT WAS SURPRISING TO
YOU OR ANYTHING THAT YOU WOULD
SAY, YOU KNOW, IN THE 253 PAGES.
WE SHOULD REALLY ZERO IN ON
BECAUSE THERE'S QUITE A BIT
INFORMATION. SO WITH THAT TURN
OVER TO DR KUSHELL. OKAY, WELL,
THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME,
CHAIRMAN TING AND OTHER MEMBERS
OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE. MY NAME IS
DR MARGO CRUCIAL AND I'M A
PROFESSOR OF MEDICINE AT UCSF
AND WHERE I DIRECT THE UCSF
CENTER FOR VULNERABLE
POPULATIONS IN THE UCSF, MANY OF
HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING
INITIATIVE. I DO A LOT OF NIH
FUNDED RESEARCH AND SUBSTANTIAL
EXPERIENCE RESEARCHING
HOMELESSNESS AND AS CHAIRMAN
TAKING MENTIONED I AM WAS ONE OF
THE CO AUTHORS OF THE LANDSCAPE
REPORT. AS YOU KNOW,
CALIFORNIANS IDENTIFY THE
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS TO BE ONE OF
THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUES FACING
OUR STATE. IN THE PAST FEW YEARS
WE HAVE SEEN YEAR OVER YEAR
INCREASES IN HOMELESSNESS
DESPITE EFFORTS AT EVERY LEVEL
OF GOVERNMENT TO END IT IN
CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE
2022 POINT IN TIME, COUNT,
APPROXIMATELY 171,500 PEOPLE
EXPERIENCE HOMELESSNESS AND A
SINGLE NIGHT. MEANS 44 OUT OF
EVERY 10,000 CALIFORNIANS. AND
WHILE FEWER THAN 12% OF
AMERICANS LIVE IN CALIFORNIA,
30% OF THOSE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS DO AND WE ACCOUNT
FOR HALF OF ALL PEOPLE LIVING
UNSHELTERED IN THIS COUNTRY. UM
67% OF OUR POPULATION OF PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AND DO
SO A SHOCK WITHOUT SHELTER.
DESPITE CONCERNS TO THE CONTRARY
, WE HAVE ROBUST EVIDENCE THAT
THE VAST MAJORITY UPWARDS OF 90G
HOMELESSNESS IN CALIFORNIA LOST
THEIR HOUSING AND BECAME
HOMELESS IN CALIFORNIA. UM IN
CALIFORNIA. IT'S TRUE ACROSS THE
COUNTRY, HOMELESSNESS
DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTS
CERTAIN POPULATIONS. BLACK
AMERICANS, INDIGENOUS AMERICANS
ARE VASTLY OVERREPRESENTED. IN
THE PAST THREE YEARS. WE HAVE
ALSO SEEN THIS ENORMOUS AND
DISPROPORTIONATE INCREASE IN
HOMELESSNESS AMONG LATIN X
CALIFORNIANS. MEMBERS OF THE
LGBTQ I COMMUNITIES ARE
OVERREPRESENTED. AND
HOMELESSNESS IS INCREASINGLY
AFFECTING CALIFORNIANS OVER THE
AGE OF 50, THE FASTEST GROWING
PEAK GROUP AT THOSE 65 OTHER
I'LL SAY THAT IN THE EARLY DAYS
OF THE PANDEMIC, MANY FEAR THAT
WE WOULD HAVE DRAMATIC INCREASES
IN HOMELESSNESS THROUGHOUT THE
STATE AND THE COUNTRY QUICK
ACTION AT BOTH THE LOCAL, STATE
AND FEDERAL LEVEL, INCLUDING OUR
EVICTION MORATORIUM, EMERGENCY
RENTAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS,
PROJECT ROOM KEY AND HUNKY AND
OTHERS LIKELY PREVENTED THE
WORST POSSIBLE OUTCOMES.
HOMELESSNESS HAS INCREASED
DURING THE PANDEMIC, BUT
INCREASED AT THE RATE WE WOULD
HAVE EXPECTED WITHOUT THE
PANDEMIC CONSISTENT WITH PRIOR
YEARS. HOWEVER DUE TO THE LARGE
NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS CURRENTLY
SEVERELY BEHIND IN THEIR RENT. I
ACTUALLY FEAR THAT THE PROBLEM
IS GOING TO GET WORSE BEFORE IT
GETS BETTER. TO BE CLEAR THAT
INCREASES IN OUR HOMELESSNESS
ARE NOT DUE TO FAILURES OF OUR
USE OF EVIDENCE BASED POLICIES
TO END HOMELESSNESS, SUCH AS
HOUSING FIRST, IT'S RATHER DUE
TO THE STRUCTURAL CONDITIONS
THAT GERMAN KING MENTIONED, MOST
IMPORTANTLY, THE LACK OF DEEPLY
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND ANY
EFFORTS TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT
OF OUR STATE FUNDING NEEDS TO
CONSIDER ITS DEEP UNDERPINNINGS
IN THIS STRUCTURAL PROBLEM IN
CALIFORNIA RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE 23
UNITS OF HOUSING FOR EVERY 100
EXTREMELY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLD
IN OUR STATE. THOSE ARE
HOUSEHOLDS THAT MAKE LESS THAN
30% OF THE AREA. MEDIAN INCOME.
THEY REPRESENT MOST PEOPLE WHO
EXPERIENCE HOMELESSNESS ARE
RECENT RESEARCH ACROSS THE STATE
SHOWED THAT THE MEDIAN MONTHLY
HOUSEHOLD INCOME IMMEDIATELY
PRECEDING HOMELESSNESS FOR ADULT
CALIFORNIANS WAS $926 A MONTH.
THE UM ABOUT 40% OF THOSE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN
CALIFORNIA ENTERED IT AFTER
LEAVING A SITUATION WHERE THEY
RELEASE HOLDERS. THE OTHER 60%
WHERE THEY WERE NOT
LEASEHOLDERS. THEY WERE DOUBLED
OR TRIPLED UP. WE FOUND THAT THE
MEDIAN MONTHLY HOUSING COSTS FOR
THOSE LEASEHOLDERS WITH $700 A
MONTH AND FOR THE NON
LEASEHOLDERS $180 A MONTH, SO I
GUESS I CHALLENGE YOU TO THINK
IF YOU'RE MAKING $926 A MONTH,
YOU BOTH CAN'T AFFORD $700 A
MONTH IN RENTAL COSTS. AND HOW
ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO FIND
ANOTHER PLACE THAT YOU COULD GET
FOR ONLY $700? SO THE FEDERAL,
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS HAVE
THIS UNIQUE IN CRITICAL AND
SEPARATE ROLES IN ADDRESSING THE
CRISIS, THE RECENTLY RELEASED
LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT REPORT
SHOWED THAT BETWEEN 2018 AND
2021, SO THIS IS THE 200 PAGE
REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU. THE
STATE DIRECTED $9.6 BILLION
THROUGH 35 SEPARATE
ADMINISTERED BY NINE SEPARATE
AGENCIES OR DEPARTMENTS.
HOMELESS SERVICES IN THOSE THREE
YEARS REACHED 571,000
INDIVIDUALS, UNIQUE INDIVIDUALS
AND THESE PROGRAMS INCREASED IN
SCOPE OVER THAT PERIOD, SUCH
THAT THEY WENT FROM SERVING
ABOUT 273,000 PEOPLE IN 2018 TO
332,000. FUNDINGS PROVIDED
PROGRAMS THAT WERE FUNDED, AT
LEAST IN PART BY THE STATE
REACHED 48% OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS
, SO THE MONEY THAT THE STATE IS
SPENDING ARE REACHING THOSE
INDIVIDUALS REACHING
HOMELESSNESS. STATE FUNDING
TENDED TO BE ONE TIME A
RELATIVELY SHORT TERM FUNDING,
AND THAT PROBLEM COMES UP OFTEN
AS AN IMPORTANT LIMITATION IN
ITS EFFECTIVENESS. THE STATE HAS
NUMEROUS IMPORTANT OTHER ROLES
HOMELESS POLICY INSTEAD OF THE
LEVEL OVERSIGHT, STATE
INTERAGENCY COUNCIL SET
STATEWIDE DATA AND THE STATE CAN
USE ITS COORDINATING POWER TO
HELP SMOOTH OUT THE DIFFERENCE
POLICIES. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
LIKEWISE HAVE THEIR OWN ROLE TO
PLAY. MANY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
CONTRIBUTE SIGNIFICANT LOCAL
DOLLARS TO THIS PROBLEM, AND WE
ACTUALLY SAW IN JURISDICTIONS
THAT RAISED AND CONTRIBUTED A
LOT OF LOCAL DOLLARS LESS OF AN
INCREASE OVER THE PERIOD OF THE
PANDEMIC THAN THOSE THAT DIDN'T
THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY GO DOWN,
BUT THEY WENT UP LESS IN THE
SITUATION WOULD LOOK WORSE
WITHOUT THEIR LOCAL, UM,
FUNDING. OVERSIGHT AND
ACCOUNTABILITY ARE CLEARLY
IMPORTANT IN ADDRESSING A CRISIS
OF THIS MAGNITUDE, BUT I URGE
YOU TO BALANCE THE NEED FOR
ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT
WITH AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE
DEPTH OF THIS CRISIS AND THE
LIMITATIONS OF HOMELESSNESS
SERVICES. THE HOMELESSNESS
SERVICES ITSELF CAN'T SOLVE THIS
PROBLEM, AND I LIKE TO USE
ANALOGY. FORGIVE ME BECAUSE I'M
A PHYSICIAN ABOUT THE EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT. THE EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT IS ABSOLUTELY
CRITICAL. WE SAW ITS ROLE DURING
THE PANDEMIC, BUT WE DID NOT
EXPECT ARE INCREDIBLE EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT NURSES AND PHYSICIANS
TO SOLVE THE PANDEMIC. WHAT THEY
WERE DOING WAS DEALING WITH THE
DOWNSTREAM IMPACT. AND I THINK
THAT ANALOGY HOLDS TRUE FOR
HOMELESS SERVICES. UM AT TIMES
WE SAW IN THE REPORT, THE
DEMANDS OF ACCOUNTABILITY CAN
HAVE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES
RESTRICTIONS ON FUNDING THAT
LIMITS ITS UTILITY IN THE
STIFLING OF POTENTIAL INNOVATION
FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT WHO KNOW
THEIR OWN ECOSYSTEMS AND CULTURE
, AND THAT THEY DIFFER FROM ONE
ANOTHER. AND FRANKLY, IT CAN
SOMETIMES STIFLE INNOVATIONS
THAT COULD LEAD TO NEW
GROUNDBREAKING A WAYS TO TREAT
THIS THE KEY CHALLENGE FACING US
, I THINK IS CREATING THE RIGHT
MIX OF BALANCING THE CRITICAL
NEED TO SPEND THESE DOLLARS WELL
TO DEMAND OUTCOMES FOR THE MONEY
TO TRACK THOSE OUTCOMES
REALISTICALLY, AND TO DO ALL OF
THAT WITHOUT STIFLING EFFECTIVE
SOLUTIONS, MANY OF WHICH WILL
REQUIRE SOME LOCAL FLEXIBILITY.
SOLVING THIS CRISIS IS GOING TO
REQUIRE FUNDING COORDINATION,
ACCOUNTABILITY. AND I WOULD ADD
A BIT OF GRACE. THANK YOU FOR
INVITING ME AND I'M HAPPY TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU,
DOCTOR. KUSHELL OPEN QUESTIONS
LOOKING FOR QUESTIONS. ON THE
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE
ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE PHO FROMD
. NO THAT'S NOT. WE DON'T HAVE
QUESTIONS FROM THE PHONE WITH
JUST QUESTIONS FOR THE
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU, OPERATOR.
MR. PLEASE. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIRMAN. I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS. UM YOU MENTIONED
THAT, UH. WE HAVE HALF OF ALL
THE UNSHELTERED PEOPLE ARE IN
CALIFORNIA. YES, HALF OF THE
OTHER AND CHILDREN. PEOPLE IN
THE COUNTRY IN CALIFORNIA 30% OF
THOSE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
OR IN CALIFORNIA, BUT HALF OF
THOSE EXPERIENCING UNSHELTERED
HOMELESSNESS AND WHAT PERCENTAGE
OF THE NATION'S POPULATION IS
CALIFORNIA 12% 12% AND WE? YES
OF ALL THE UNSHELTERED WE DO. DO
YOU THINK THERE ARE ANY POLICIES
IN CALIFORNIA THAT ARE
ATTRACTING UH HUH. AND SHELTERED
OR HOMELESS PEOPLE FROM OTHER
STATES SO YOU KNOW, WE'VE JUST
COME OUT OF WORK ACROSS THE
STATE WHERE WE DID WHAT'S CALLED
A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF EVERY
ADULT EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
IN THE STATE. WE DID IT
ANONYMOUSLY. PEOPLE DIDN'T
REALLY HAVE ANY INCENTIVE TO LIE
TO US. WE WERE FROM THE
UNIVERSITY AND OVER 90% LOST
THEIR HOUSING IN CALIFORNIA, AND
ABOUT THAT AMOUNT WERE ACTUALLY
BORN IN CALIFORNIA, WHICH
SURPRISED ME A HIGHER PERCENTAGE
OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN
CALIFORNIA ARE BORN IN
CALIFORNIA. I WASN'T BORN IN
KELLY. IF ORANJE THEN UM THEN
MOST CALIFORNIANS, I DON'T THINK
THAT THIS IS A PROBLEM OF PEOPLE
COMING TO CALIFORNIA. I THINK
THIS IS CALIFORNIANS BECOMING
INTERNALLY DISPLACED BECAUSE OF
OUR OWN FAILED POLICIES ON
HOUSING AND, FRANKLY, BECAUSE
EVERYONE WANTS TO LIVE IN
CALIFORNIA, WE BROUGHT A LOT OF
PEOPLE TO CALIFORNIA PEOPLE LIKE
ME, BUT WE DIDN'T BUILD HOUSING
TO ACCOMMODATE THEM. AND YOU
THINK EVERYONE HAS A RIGHT TO
LIVE IN CALIFORNIA. EVEN IF THEY
CAN'T AFFORD IT. WELL I GUESS I
WOULD SAY WHAT WOULD THE OTHER
STATES SAY THAT? YOU KNOW? ARE
WE GOING TO SEND OUR OWN FOLKS
WHO HAVE WORKED THEIR WHOLE
LIVES IN CALIFORNIA OUT OF THE
STATE? UM EMPOWERS SOME DO LEAVE
. CERTAINLY WE'VE SEEN DECREASES
IN OUR POPULATION OVER THE LAST
FEW YEARS, I THINK BECAUSE WE
DON'T HAVE SUFFICIENT HOUSING.
UM OFTEN PEOPLE ARE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS DON'T FRANKLY HAVE
THE ABILITY OR SOCIAL TIES OR
ANYWHERE ELSE TO GO. LET ME JUST
ASK A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS.
YOU FOCUS YOUR NARRATIVE ON
THAT. IT'S A AFFORDABILITY ISSUE
, WHICH IS RESULTING IN THE
HOMELESSNESS. BUT YOU MENTIONED
NOTHING ABOUT DRUG ADDICTION,
MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, WHICH I
UNDERSTAND OVERWHELMING MAJORITY
OF THOSE HOMELESS ARE SUFFERING.
FROM MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND
DRUG ADDICTION ISSUES. SO WHAT
PERCENTAGE OF THE HOMELESS
POPULATION HAVE ONE OR TWO OR
BOTH OF THOSE ISSUES? IT DEPENDS
HOW YOU DEFINE THE SEVERITY BUT
SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 30 AND 50% OF
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
HAVE THOSE PROBLEMS. I WOULD SAY
THAT THE ANALOGY THAT I LIKE TO
USE I MEAN, I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO NOTE, FOR INSTANCE,
THERE ARE GOOD WAYS TO LOOK AT
HOW MUCH SUBSTANCE USE AND
MENTAL HEALTH THERE ARE IN A
COMMUNITY. WE USE DIFFERENT SORT
OF RESEARCH METHODS AND WHAT'S
REALLY INTERESTING. IS
CALIFORNIA RATES RELATIVELY LOW
ON THOSE AS BAD AS OUR CRISIS
IS, WE'RE ACTUALLY ON THE VERY
LOW SIDE WHERE PRETTY HEALTHY
STATE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
STATES THAT HAVE THE HIGHEST
LEVEL OF SUBSTANCE USE MENTAL
HEALTH PROBLEMS. IT'S MOSTLY
LIKE THE FORMER RUST BELT
APPALACHIA. WHEN YOU LOOK AT ANY
MEASURE WHERE THERE IT'S OPIOID
OVERDOSES, WHETHER IT'S PERCENT
OF PEOPLE LIVING WITH DISABLING
MENTAL HEALTH PEOPLE ON MENTAL
HEALTH DISABILITY, ETCETERA.
THEY'RE MUCH HIGHER IN
COMMUNITIES LIKE THOSE IF YOU
LOOK AT RATES OF HOMELESSNESS,
THOUGH, RATES OF HOMELESSNESS
DON'T ACTUALLY TRACK WITH EVERY
MEASURE WE HAVE OF MENTAL HEALTH
AND SUBSTANCE USE IN A COMMUNITY
SHELL. I I'M A LITTLE STUNNED
BECAUSE YOU MAKE IT SOUND LIKE
THE PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA IS NOT
THAT BAD. CALIFORNIA HAS THE
HIGHEST POPULATION AND SHELTERED
PEOPLE THE NEXT HIGHEST STATE IS
WASHINGTON NUMBER TWO? YES ONLY
HAVE 12,000 PEOPLE. WE HAVE
115,000 SHELTER PEOPLE. THAT'S
NINE TIMES MORE THAN THE NEXT
CLOSEST STATE. I JUST I DON'T
BUY THAT NEW YORK HAS HIGH
HOUSING COSTS. THERE ARE OTHER
STATES THAT ARE EXCUSE ME. OTHER
STATES THAT HAVE REALLY HIGH
HOUSING COSTS. THEY HAVE REALLY
COMPLEX ISSUES. THEY HAVE
AFFORDABILITY ISSUES. NOBODY HAS
THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA. SOMETHING IS WRONG
HERE. SO I WOULD RESPECTFULLY
SAYING NEW YORK ACTUALLY HAS A
HIGHER PER CAPITA RATE OF PEOPLE
HOMELESS THAN CALIFORNIA DOES.
WE'RE OBVIOUSLY BOTH BIG STATES
OR ABSOLUTE NUMBERS ARE LARGE.
BUT IF YOU LOOK AT IT AS A
PROPORTION OF NEW YORKERS WHO
ARE HOMELESS COMPARED TO THE
PROPORTION OF CALIFORNIANS, NEW
YORK AND HAWAII HAVE A H WHO ARG
HOMELESSNESS. THE DIFFERENCES IN
NEW YORK THERE'S A RIGHT TO
SHELTER AND 95% OF THOSE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN NEW
YORK. DO SO IN SHELTERS IN
CALIFORNIA. WE DON'T HAVE A
RIGHT TO SHELTER AND ONLY AND
67% OF THOSE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS OR UNSHELTERED.
OKAY I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP ALL
THE TIME, BUT NOT JUST A LAST
QUESTION. DO YOU THINK A
MENTALLY ILL PERSON OR A DRUG
ADDICTED PERSON IS CAPABLE OF
MAKING RATIONAL DECISIONS? I DO
. AND I ALSO KNOW IF I THINK
WHAT YOU MIGHT BE ASKING IS CAN
THEY BE HOUSED TALKING ABOUT
INTERVENTION? AND THIS HOUSING
FIRST APPROACH WHERE HOUSING
FIRST, THEN PERSUADING THEM TO
ENTER TREATMENT OR REHAB. I
DON'T KNOW IF I DON'T KNOW IF
THAT'S HOW EFFECTIVE THAT IS. IT
DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE EFFECTIVE
BASED ON THE DATA SO I CAN SHARE
THAT THE DATA YOU HAVE TO
REMEMBER THAT HOUSING FIRST
DOESN'T CREATE HVE A HOUSING CRN
CALIFORNIA. BUT THE CHOICE AT
HAND AS TREATMENT FIRST OR
HOUSING FIRST, AND THOSE HAVE
BEEN TESTED HEAD TO HEAD IN
RELIABLE STUDIES. I'VE DONE SOME
OF THEM, THIS COUNTY OF SANTA
CLARA APPROACHED US ABOUT 10
YEARS AGO AND ASKED US AS
OUTSIDERS. I'M NOT FROM SANTA
CLARA TO HELP THEM IDENTIFY THE
MOST CHAOTIC HOMELESS PEOPLE IN
THEIR COUNTY. AND THEY SAID TO
US I WAS BROUGHT IN AS LIKE AN
OUTSIDE EVALUATOR TO HOLD THEM
ACCOUNTABLE. TO HOUSE THE MOST
CHAOTIC PEOPLE. AND MR SAWYER
WHEN I SAY CHAOTIC, I MEAN
CHAOTIC. THESE WERE FOLKS WHO
HAD ON AVERAGE OVER THE PAST TWO
YEARS. I THINK IT WAS ABOUT 10
JAIL STAYS EQUAL NUMBER OF
PSYCHIATRIC EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT
VISITS. ABOUT FIVE EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT VISITS LOTS OF
HOSPITALIZATIONS. TH OFFICER
KNEW THEY USED A HOUSING FIRST
METHOD TO HOUSE THEM. WE DIDN'T
GO OUT LOOKING FOR THEM. WE SAID
THERE SO CHAOTIC. THE POLICE
WILL COME ACROSS THEM. PEOPLE
WILL FIND THEM. AND WHAT WE DID
IS WE PUT FLAGS IN THEIR SYSTEM
SO THAT WHEN THEY GOT BOOKED
INTO JAIL WHEN THEY GOT BOOKED
INTO A PSYCHIATRIC EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT, SOMEONE FROM THE
TEAM WENT OUT TO THEM AT SEVEN
IN THE MORNING, AND THEY SAID, I
KNOW YOU'VE BEEN UP ALL NIGHT
HAVING A BAD NIGHT. BUT WE YOU
SIGN THESE 50 PIECES OF PAPER TO
GIVE US PERMISSION TO FOLLOW YOU
FOR A 50 50 CHANCE OF GETTING
HOUSING. WE APPROACHED WELL OVER
300 PEOPLE. AND THREE PEOPLE
REFUSED TO SIGN THE 50 PIECES OF
PAPER FOR A 50 50 CHANCE OF
GETTING HOUSING. WE RANDOMIZE
THEM ON THE SPOT. SO AT THAT
MOMENT, WE FLIPPED A COIN AND
SAID YOU EITHER GET HOUSED, OR
YOU DON'T OVER THE SEVEN YEARS
OF THE STUDY 91% OF THOSE PEOPLE
WHO WE MET OUTSIDE THE JAIL OR
OUTSIDE THE AIR WITH VERY
SIGNIFICANT MENTAL PROBLEMS WERE
SUCCESSFULLY HOUSED. WE FOLLOWED
THEM FOR SEVEN YEARS. THEY
WERE HOUSED, THEY STAYED HOUSED
FOR AN OVER 93% OF THE KNIGHTS,
MEANING A FEW PEOPLE SPENT SOME
TIME NOT HOUSED. WHAT DID WE SEE
THEIR PSYCHIATRIC EMERGENCY
DEPARTMENT USE PLUMMETED THEIR
USE OF OUTPATIENT MENTAL HEALTH
AND SUBSTANCE USE TRED HOUSING.K
THEM. WE DIDN'T DEMAND THAT THEY
DID THE TREATMENT, BUT THEY ALL
TOOK IT UP, AND, MORE
IMPORTANTLY, THEY WERE NO LONGER
HOMELESS. I DON'T HAVE MORE
QUESTIONS. I JUST THINK THERE'S
A HUGE DISCONNECT BECAUSE YOU'RE
PAINTING A ROSY PICTURE. AND
WHEN I WALKED THE STREETS OF
SACRAMENTO IN L. A THERE'S A LOT
OF PEOPLE IN NEED, AND THEY'RE
NOT GETTING THE HELP THEY NEED.
WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH SERVICES
PROGRAMS. NO WE HAVE PLENTY OF
SERVICES. THE PROGRAMS DON'T
SEEM TO BE EFFECTIVE. BUT NO
MORE QUESTIONS. MR CHAIR. THANK
YOU, MR PH█fúN. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. I WANT TO KIND OF DELVE A
LITTLE DEEPER INTO THE DATA AND
HOW IT'S COLLECTED. UM I BELIEVE
A FEW YEARS AGO, SOMETHING
MEMBER OF KOREA DID A HEARING ON
THIS AND IT WAS A LOT OF
CONVERSATION ABOUT THE POINT IN
TIME COUNT. YES, YES. YEAH WE
ALL UNDERSTAND AT THAT AT THAT
HEARING, AND I THINK IT'S
PROBABLY EVEN MORE INTENSE TODAY
THAT WE'RE UNDERCOUNTING. YEAH
SO IN TERMS OF THE NUMBERS THAT
ARE BEING MENTIONED, ARE THEY
COMING FROM THE POINT IN TIME
COUNT OR THEY COMING FROM H M I
S CAN YOU CAN QUESTION SO THAT
171,000 FIGURE IS A POINT IN
TIME COUNT NUMBER. THAT WAS A
2022 POINT TIME. COUNTER POINT
IN TIME COUNT WAS NOT HELD
DURING THE PANDEMIC BECAUSE OF
LOGISTIC DIFFICULTIES. THAT
NUMBER I WOULD SAY IS BEST
UNDERSTOOD. STOOD AS A GOOD WAY
TO COMPARE YEAR OVER YEAR BUT IT
MUCH MEANING IN
THE MOMENT BECAUSE IT'S
CERTAINLY AN UNDERCOUNT. THEY
DON'T YOU KNOW THEY'RE REALLY
SENDING VOLUNTEERS OUT THERE
GUESSING HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE IN
THAT TENT, ETCETERA, ETCETERA.
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT'S A
POINT IN TIME. SO MOST PEOPLE
WHO EXPERIENCE HOMELESSNESS DO
SO FOR LESS THAN A YEAR. SO IF
YOU ONLY SPENT WERE HOMELESS FOR
THREE MONTHS, YOU ONLY HAD A 14
CHANCE OF BEING HOMELESS ON THAT
NIGHT. THE OTHER NUMBERS I
MENTIONED ARE FROM H D. I S THE
HOMELESS DATA INFORMATION
SYSTEM, WHICH WHICH MERGES ALL
OF THE HMM. I ASKED HOMELESS
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS,
WHICH EVERY LOCAL AREA COLLECTS
ON PEOPLE WHO USE HOMELESS
SERVICES. THE ADVAF THAT
DATA SOURCE IS IT DOESN'T HAVE
THE POINT IN TIME PROBLEM COUNT
. THE DISADVANTAGE IS NOT ALL
SERVICES SUBMIT TO H M. I S AND
NOT ALL P, SO
THEY'RE SORT OF UNDERCOUNTS IN
DIFFERENT WAYS. AS SOMEONE WHO
HAS PARTICIPATED IN MY POINT I'M
COUNTING IN IN MY COMMUNITY. I
DO BELIEVE IT'S IT IS A SNAPSHOT
IN TIME, BUT IT IS HIGHLY
INACCURATE. EXACTLY AND I DO
BELIEVE THAT OF THE TWO
COMPARISONS THAT H M I S SYSTEM
OR THE IS ACTUALLY A MORE
ACCURATE NUMBER. I THINK THAT'SS
LIMITATIONS. IF PEOPLE DON'T
ENGAGE IN ANY SERVICES, WE DON'T
SEE THEM IN ME'S. BUT JIMMY'S
HAS MANY ADVANTAGES OVER THE
POINT IN TIME COUNTS, SO IF I
COULD. I GUESS ADDRESS WHAT
YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AS KIND OF ONE
OF THE CHALLENGES WITH MAYA
SYSTEM IS SHOULD, UM SHOULD
SERVICES OR ORGANIZATIONS WHO
ARE NOT ENTERING DATA INTO HMOS
. WOULD THAT WE SHOULD THEY BE
ENCOURAGED YOU OR WHAT
INCENTIVES DO YOU THINK WOULD BE
SHOULD BE PUT IN PLACE TO ALLOW
THAT COUNT TO BE BETTER,
ESPECIALLY WITH SINCE IT'S NOT A
POINT IN TIME, RIGHT? DEALING
WITH WHAT THE WAS. WE'RE
ALLOCATING 24 BILLION, RIGHT? WE
HAVE ALLOCATED OVER $24 BILLION,
AND IF THE DATA IS AN ACCURATE
WE CAN'T REALLY MEASURE WHETHER
IT'S WORKING. RIGHT I THINK
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF I S AND HS
MORE PEOPLE COLLECTING AT
DECREASING THE BURDEN TO COLLECT
IT. ONE OF THE REASONS PEOPLE
DON'T COLLECT IT AS IT CAN BE
BURDENSOME TO DO IT. BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY, I THINK WE NEED TO
DO AFFIRMATIVE OUTREACH AND MAKE
SURE THAT WHETHER OR NOT PEOPLE
PRESENT THEMSELVES TO SERVICES
WERE FINDING THEM AND COUNTING
THEM. I THINK IT'S SORT OF
COMBINING A LITTLE BIT OF THOSE
THINGS. I THINK THE OTHER
CHALLENGE THAT ANYONE WHO WORKS
IN MY S, WE'LL SAY, AND I THINK
YOU'LL FIND THAT IN YOUR REPORT
IS, UM, TRACKING EXITS. WHAT
HAPPENS AFTER PEOPLE LEAVE? WE
DON'T HAVE GREAT DATA ON THAT.
AND I THINK THE SECOND MOST
COMMON EXIT AND IT WAS MY TEAM
WHO LOOKED AT THAT DATA WAS
UNKNOWN WHERE WE COULDN'T
ACTUALLY TELL WHERE PEOPLE WENT
GETTING BETTER DATA ON WHERE
PEOPLE ARE COMING FROM HOW LONG
THEY'RE IN THE SYSTEM AND WHERE
THEY'RE GOING TO, WITH MORE
ACCURACY, I THINK WOULD GIVE US
A BETTER PICTURE. I THINK I
THINK YOU AN AGREEMENT THAT THAT
IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF
WHETHER WE ARE HOW WE MEASURE
THE EFFICACY OF WHAT THE STATE
INVESTMENT IS, UM, YOU KNOW IO M
YOU INVEST SIGNIFICANT RESOURCES
WHETHER IT'S IN HOUSING, WHETHER
IT'S IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE
COUNSELING OR MENTAL HEALTH
ACCESS. UM IF WE'RE NOT
MEASURING IT CORRECTLY, WE ARE.
WE'RE DOING OURSELVES A
DISSERVICE. UM AND IN TERMS OF
YOUR YOUR ANALYSIS AND YOUR
RESEARCH HAS ANYONE COMPARED THE
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE H M. I S
H I S NUMBERS OR VERSUS THE
POINT IN TIME ACCOUNT AND
WHETHER THEY EVEN CORRELATE IT
ALL. I MEAN, THEY DO CORRELATE
PRETTY. THEY DO CORRELATE. OKAY
WE ARE PLANNING TO DO THIS IN
ONE COUNTY THAT WE WERE IN FOR A
STATEWIDE STUDY. WE COLLECTED
NAMES FOR EXACTLY THIS REASON
BECAUSE WE WANTED TO SEE IF WE
WERE PICKING UP IN OUR STUDY THE
SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE SHOWING UP
IN EACH H M. I S IT'S HARD TO
COMPARE THEM THOUGH. EVEN IF YOU
HAVE NAMES BECAUSE OF THAT, UM
THAT YOU KNOW, OVER TIME. ONE OF
THE THINGS THAT MY DATA TEAM WAS
TALKING ABOUT DOING IS RANDOMLY
CHOOSING A DAY AND LOOKING AT
LIKE WHO WAS IN HMM. I S YOU
KNOW, USING ANY SERVICES IN THAT
DAY AND TO SEE HOW IT COMPARES
TO POINT IN TIME COUNT NUMBERS.
I THINK THAT, UM THE POINT IN
TIME COUNT NUMBERS IS
INTENTIONALLY BY HUD KEPT
RELATIVELY CONSISTENT
METHODOLOGY YEAR OVER YEAR SO
THAT YOU CAN GET SOME SENSE OF
WHETHER NUMBERS ARE GOING UP OR
DOWN. SO IF I COULD ASK THAT
FROM A TREND LINE I HAVE A LOOK
AT ME IN 2020 AND TELL ME IF I
MIGHT NUMBERS ARE INCORRECT. THE
H H M I A SYSTEM IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA HAS 162,996
CALIFORNIANS TO ACCESS SERVICES.
IN 20, 8 2,176,038 AND IN 2022.
IT'S OF COURSE, UH, UH, 174,000
. SO IT WENT DOWN. BUT SO I'M
TRYING TO KIND OF UNDERSTAND IF
IT IS THAT YEAH. DO YOU BELIEVE
THAT TO BE REAL? YOU KNOW THE
PROBLEM I HAVE WITH MY S IS IN
ONE WAY, LIKE POINT IN TIME
COUNT. WE KNOW WE DON'T WANT
THOSE NUMBERS TO GO UP. RIGHT H
M. I S GOING UP CAN GO UP FOR
ONE OF TWO REASONS. THE
POPULATION IS INCREASING, OR
WE'RE DOING A BETTER JOB
REACHING THAT POPULATION. THAT'S
WHY IT'S SUCH A HARD, UM,
COMPARISON TO HAVE TRUE. YEAH, I
MAY ADD, THOUGH, THAT IF WE HAVE
MORE VOLUNTEERS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN
A POINT TIME ACCOUNT, WE MAY
ACTUALLY COUNTING MORE PEOPLE TO
JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE PEOPLE
GOING OUT AND COUNTING. THEY
HUD. YOU KNOW THE HUD. I DOES A
LOT OF TA AND IT MAKES A LOT OF
DEMANDS OF THE DOCS THAT DO THE
POINT IN TIME COUNT, AND I'VE
ACTUALLY BEEN INVOLVED WITH SORT
OF HUD'S DECISION ON HOW THEY DO
THE POINT IN TIME COUNT THEY
INTENTIONALLY TRY TO UM, KEEP IT
THE SAME YEAR OVER YEAR SO THAT
YOU AT LEAST GET THE SAME AMOUNT
OF MISSING THIS. IT'S A LITTLE
BIT LIKE THIS, BUT ABSOLUTELY
THEIR PROBLEMS WITH IT. OR MAYBE
BETTER JUST TO DO MULTIPLE POINT
TIME COUNTS EXACTLY THE THINK WE
NEED A VARIETY OF SYSTEMS. THE
OTHER THING I WOULD ENCOURAGE
YOU TO THINK ABOUT IS THAT MOST
PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
WHILE THEY MIGHT NOT ALWAYS SERE
SYSTEM, WE SEE THEM IN OTHER
SYSTEMS. I THINK THERE'S A HUGE
LAST OPPORTUNITY THAT WE DON'T
COLLECT GREAT DATA AND HOUSING
STATUS. FOR INSTANCE, IN THE
HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, WE KNOW THAT
MOST PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS INTERACT WITH THE
HEALTH CARE SYSTEM. MOST USED
PUBLICLY FUNDED HEALTH CARE. IT
WOULD BE REALLY, UM, EXTREMELY
USEFUL IF WE COULD COLLECT
BETTER DATA IN THE HEALTH CARE
SYSTEM, AND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT
USING DIFFERENT METHODOLOGIES,
SOME THAT ARE COMING FROM
ECOLOGY ACTUALLY. THAT ACTUALLY
TRY TO, LIKE COMPARE DIFFERENT
DATA SOURCES TO TRY TO FIGURE
OUT THE TRUE NUMBER, AND WE'RE
GOING TO BE WORKING ON THAT IN
THE NEXT YEAR. SO THEN MY FINAL
QUESTION. I MEAN, UNDERSTANDINGE
HAD. AND IN L A ESTIMATES, UM,
THAT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IS
ALLOCATED MORE THAN $24 BILLION
TOWARD HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS
INITIATIVES. AND WITH WHETHER
YOU LET'S COMBINE THE POINT IN
TIME COUNT DATA WITH, UM YEAH.
MHM, I S SYSTEM. HAD. HOW
EFFECTIVE HAS THE INTERVENTIONS
BAN AND WHERE ARE GAPS? I MEAN,
OUR GAPS ARE THAT WE ARE A
MILLION UNITS SHORT. OF THE
HOUSING THAT WE NEED FOR
EXTREMELY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
. AND TO BE TOTALLY HONEST,
SOMETIMES I THINK IT'S A MIRACLE
THAT WE ONLY HAVE 171,000 PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS EVERY
NIGHT, EVEN THOUGH THAT'S AN
OUTRAGE, BECAUSE WHAT THAT
REFLECTS IS NOT 171,000 PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, BUT
MILLIONS OF PEOPLE LIVING,
DOUBLED AND TRIPLED UP. SPENDING
YOU KNOW 80% OF THEIR HOUSEHOLD
INCOME ON RENT AND LIVING ON THE
VERGE OF HOMELESSNESS. I THINK
THAT ARE HOMELESS SERVICES HAVE
BEEN A RELATIVELY EFFECTIVE
EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT, BUT WHAT
WE NEED TO DO IS WE NEED TO GET
TO THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM AND
FIX IT IF WE ACTUALLY WANT TO
MAKE PROGRESS, AND YOU WOULD
AGREE, THOUGH, THAT THE ROOT
CAUSES HOUSING AFFORDABILITY
. IN ADDITION TO WHAT MY
COLLEAGUE HAS SAID THAT THE
SUBSTANCE ABUSE ACCESS MENTAL
HEALTH ACCESS, ABSOLUTELY. BUT I
WOULDN'T CARE SYSTEM RIGHT? BUT
I WOULD ADD THAT IF YOU START
TRYING TO FIX IT BY FIXING THIS
, THE MENTAL HEALTH AND
SUBSTANCE USE WITHOUT FIXING THE
OTHER. WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET
GOOD OUTCOMES. I CAN TELL YOU
THAT I TREAT ADDICTION EVERY
DAY. I STILL DO A LOT OF
CLINICAL MEDICINE. WE CAN DO A
LOT. WHEN SOMEONE COMES TO ME
WHO'S SLEEPING IN A SHELTER ON
THE STREET? MY ABILITY TO
INTERVENE IS VERY LIMITED. I CAN
ALSO TELL YOU IF YOU ARE CARING
ABOUT COSTS, THE MOST, YOU KNOW
, EXPENSIVE THING WE CAN DO IS
INSTITUTIONALIZED PEOPLE. AND SO
I THINK WE NEED TO SOLVE BOTH
TOGETHER. I AM NOT SAYING THAT
OUR MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM IN OUR
SUBSTANCE USE SYSTEM ARE
ADEQUATE, BUT I'M SAYING IS THAT
WE COULD HAVE FANTASTIC MENTAL
HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE SERVICES
WITH NO PROBLEMS AT ALL. AND IF
WE DIDN'T HAVE THE HOUSING, WE
STILL WON'T BE SERVING PEOPLE
THAT THAT THE CHALLENGE FOR US
AND YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M
WRONG, OR MAYBE MY ANALYSIS
NEEDS TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE
DETAILED IS THAT WE HAVE A LOT
OF BROKEN SYSTEMS. YES WHETHER
IT'S IN THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM
OR THE COLONEL JUSTICE SYSTEM,
OR THE HOUSING SPACE AND WE HAVE
A LOT OF THESE BROKEN SYSTEMS
THAT HAVE CREATED INDIVIDUALS
WHO ARE EITHER POTENTIALLY
HOMELESS OR ARE GOING TO BE
HOMELESS OR ARE HOMELESS
CURRENTLY, AND THEY'RE FLOWING
INTO THE HOMELESSNESS. UM CRISIS
AND SO WE'RE THROWING A BUNCH OF
MONEY INTO THE HOMELESSNESS
SITUATION, BUT WE'RE NOT FIXING
SYSTEMS ABOUT THE KEY SYSTEM AND
I KNOW I SOUND LIKE A BROKEN
RECORD, BUT IT'S WHAT WE NEED TO
DO IS WE NEED TO CLOSE THAT GAP.
WE OBVIOUSLY AREN'T GOING TO
IMMEDIATELY. WE CLOSED THAT
MILLION UNIT GAP TOMORROW, BUT
WE NEED TO START MAKING STEADY
PROGRESS ON THAT. NOTHING ELSE
THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO IS GOING
TO BE EFFECTIVE. YOU COULD HAVE
THE MOST EXPENSIVE AND FANTASTIC
AND WELL FUNCTIONING MENTAL
HEALTH SYSTEM AND IF PEOPLE ARE
SLEEPING IN SHELTERS OR OUTSIDE
, IT'S NOT GOING TO SERVE YOU.
VERY WELL. YOU'RE GOING TO FILL
UP YOUR HOSPITALS. YOU'RE GOING
TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY AND
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE GOOD
OUTCOMES. AND THEN WHEN PEOPLE
LEAVE THAT HOSPITALS, THEY'RE
STILL GOING TO BE HOME. THEY'RE
NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. YOU
WOULDN'T SAY THAT MUSIC. OH,
ABSOLUTELY NOT. WE NEED TO DO
YOU KNOW WE CAN DO HARD THINGS
AND WE NEED TO DO BOTH AT ONCE.
THE ONLY MISTAKE WE COULD MAKE
IS IF WE ONLY FIT EXT. THE NINE
HOUSING THINGS AND DIDN'T FIX
THE HOUSING THINGS. THAT WOULD
BE BOTH FOR SURE. THANK YOU.
YEAH. THANK YOU, MR MCCARTY.
YES, THANK YOU. UH I ASKED SOME
OF THESE QUESTIONS LAST WEEK.
AND I ASK YOU THIS QUESTION AT
OUR CAUCUS, I THINK, UH,
UNSATISFACTORY. NO CIRCLED AGAIN
, BUT FIRST KIND OF VISITING THE
OTHER ISSUES, AND I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO NOTE. I DON'T
DISAGREE WITH MANY THINGS. I
JUST HEARD HERE. BUT ONE THING I
DO YOU THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM
OTHERS. I WAS LIKE, OH, THAT'S A
GOOD POINT TO LOOK AT
CALIFORNIA. I DON'T THINK WHERE
PEOPLE ARE GETTING A BUS TO
COME. BE HOMELESS HERE. MOST
HOMELESS PEOPLE. I TALKED TO MY
OWN NEIGHBORHOOD. I SAID, WHERE
ARE YOU FROM? WHAT HAPPENED
THERE? USUALLY FROM LIKE, KIND
OF THE AREA, TOO. SO, YEAH, THAT
BEING SAID, AND ALSO THE NOTION
THAT, UM YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK
AT LIKE WEST VIRGINIA, THEY HAVE
WORSE. POVERTY RATES FOSTER
YOUTH WAY WORSE ADDICTION. YES
HOMELESSNESS. 1/8 HOURS OR
SOMETHING. YEAH, IT'S NOT ALL
THAT LET'S FACE IT, YOU KNOW A
LOT OF THE HOMELESS OUT THERE.
BECOME ADDICTED OR MENTALLY ILL
BECAUSE THEY'RE OUT THERE. I
MEAN, I WAS OUT THERE SLEEP IN
THE COLD. I'LL PROBABLY BE
DRINKING TO STAY WARM. LITERALLY
IT'S GOING TO BE FREEZING. TODAY
IT'S GOING TO MAKE SNOW HERE IN
SACRAMENTO. SO UM, THAT'S JUST
THE REALITY. BUT THE HARD FACTS
AND THIS IS WHERE I CONCUR WITH
AWESOME COLLEAGUES IS OUR
SOLUTIONS AND THE MATH HERE.
THIS IS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE
JUST DON'T ADD UP, BUT WE NEED A
DRASTIC REALITY CHECKS. LET ME
JUST WALK THROUGH SOME NUMBERS,
SO UM, AS MR FONG SAID. WE'VE
SPENT ROUGHLY 24 BILLION YEARS E
PROGRAMS. I THINK SOME OF THAT'S
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, SO IT'S LIKE
I THINK IT'S LIKE ROUGHLY 12 TO
15 BILLION FOR OUR MONEY. WE'VE
GIVEN CITIES TO ADDRESS
HOMELESSNESS AND YOU KNOW OUR
MAYOR IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM
AND OTHER BIG CITY MAYORS ARE
GOING TO SAY GIVE US MORE GIVE
US ONGOING. BUT I DON'T KNOW.
WE'VE HAD THE BEST BUDGET RUN IN
IN, YOU KNOW, 100 YEARS AND I
DON'T SEE IT CONTINUING. WE
MUSCLED UP. 12 TO 15 BILLION,
AND IT HASN'T GOTTEN ANY BETTER.
AND SO I THINK THE BIG ISSUE IS
IF YOU TRY TO BE EVERYTHING TO
EVERYONE, NOTHING TO NOBODY, AND
WE'RE TRYING TO DO A LITTLE BIT
OF PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
A LITTLE BIT OF SHELTER AND WE
CAN'T AFFORD THEM BOTH. MM AND
THE QUESTION I ASK YOU IS IF YOU
JUST HAD LIMITED RESOURCES. WHYN
SHELTER BECAUSE IF YOU FOCUS ON
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AT
$600,000 PER BED, WE'RE GOING TO
BE ABLE TO MAYBE SERVE 5% OF THE
POPULATION. AND IF YOU GO TO
YOUR CONSTITUENTS IS GREAT GREAT
NEWS. 5% OF THE PEOPLE HAVE
HOMES THEY'RE GOING TO BE LIKE.
BUT WHAT ABOUT THE 95% I SEE
WITH MY OWN TWO EYES WERE NOT
MAKING ANY DIFFERENCE. SO JUST
THE BACK OF THE ENVELOPE MAP WE
HAVE. I THINK IT'S 175,000
UNSHELTERED. NOT JUST OVER
HUNDREDS WAY WORSE AND YOURIMES.
PER FOR PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IS NORTH OF
$100 BILLION, AND LIKE I SAID,
WE MUSCLED UP 12 TO 15 AND THE
BEST BUDGET YEARS IN HISTORY.
CALIFORNIA WE'RE NOT THERE.
WE'RE NEVER GOING TO BE THERE
AGAIN. AND SO IF WE KEEP DOING A
LITTLE THIS LITTLE THAT WE'RE
WE'RE WE'RE GIVING A PARTIAL
SOLUTION TO 5% OF THE POPULATION
WHILE PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY GOING
TO FREEZE TONIGHT IN THE STREETS
OF SACRAMENTO, IT'S LITERALLY
GOING TO BE AS MAY SNOW HERE IN
12 HOURS RIGHT OUTSIDE AND
SECOND FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 20
YEARS, AND WE HAVE TENTS WE
DON'T HAVE LIKE NEW YORK. RIGHT
TO HOUSING. SO WHY DON'T WE JUST
PUT ALL OF OUR MONEY? IN TO
SHELTER AND TRIAGE. IT MAKES NO
SENSE MY CITY HERE IN SACRAMENTO
, THE RECENTLY HAD $50 MILLION
FOR SHELTER, AND THEY SAID
KNOW WHAT SHELTER IS A BAND AID
? WE DON'T WANT ANY MORE TENT
CITIES. WE DON'T WANT BAND AIDS.
WE WANT PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING, SO THEY DECIDED TO
SPEND ALL THAT MONEY ON SOME
HOUSING PROJECTS. WELL, 600
GRAND ABED, IT'S GOING TO GET
THEM 83 UNITS. WE HAVE 5000
HOMELESS IN SACRAMENTO AND THOSE
83 UNITS. THERE PROBABLY WILL BE
BUILT FOR THREE YEARS BECAUSE
SOME PEOPLE WILL STILL PLAY IT
SO AGAIN. WHY DON'T WE JEWS ALL
OF OUR MONEY TO FOCUS ON SHELTER
AND YOU SAY YOUR YOUR ANSWER
MAYBE. WELL THEIR LONG TERM
RESULTS ARE NOT GOOD FOR PEOPLE
IN SHELTERS VERSUS THE STREETS.
THEIR OUTCOMES MAY NOT BE
OPTIMAL, BUT WE DON'T SEE PEOPLE
LIVING IN SQUALOR UNDER THE
FREEWAYS AND ALL OF OUR
DISTRICTS. SO YOU DO THE SAME
THING OVER AND OVER. AND YOU
DON'T
LOOKING FOR WHY? WHY WOULD WE
TRY TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF
EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN'T DO IT?
RIGHT. I THANK YOU FOR THAT
QUESTION. I THINK I THINK I
THINK OF A FEW THINGS. ONE IS,
UM, WE NEED TO DO BOTH THE OTHER
IS I URGE YOU NOT TO THINK ABOUT
TWO OR THREE MILLION PEOPLE AT
HIGH RISK OF HOMELESSNESS, WHO
ARE FALLING INTO SHELTER HOMELEO
IF YOU BUILD SHELTER AND YOU
DON'T DO WHAT WE CALL OUTFLOW,
YOU DON'T DO ANYTHING TO REMOVE
PEOPLE FROM SHELTER INTO
ANYTHING MORE PERMANENT THAN
THAT. NO MATTER HOW MANY
SHELTERS YOU BUILD, I PROMISE
YOU, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO NEED
MORE. AND WHEN I TALKED TO MY
COLLEAGUES IN NEW YORK I'M IN
PLACE. YOU CAN'T TELL I'M A
NATIVE NEW YORKER, AND SO I
SPENT A LOT OF TIME THERE. AND
WHEN I TALKED TO MY COLLEAGUES
IN NEW YORK, THEY SAY, PLEASE
DON'T MAKE THE MISTAKE WE MADE
BECAUSE THEY'RE SPENDING SUCH AN
ENORMOUS PART OF BOTH THEIR
LOCAL AND STATE MONEY ON
UPHOLDING THE SHELTER SYSTEM,
AND EVERY DAY MORE AND MORE
PEOPLE FALL INTO HOMELESSNESS.
BUT IF YOU THINK WHAT CALIFORNIA
SPENDS IS A LOT, YOUEW YORK SPEY
HAVE A HIGHER PER CAPITA RATE OF
HOMELESSNESS THAN WE DO SO I
THINK THE ANSWER PEOPLE THAT ARE
THEY DON'T HAVE PEOPLE OUTSIDE,
RIGHT SO THAT I MEAN, THAT
CLEARLY IS BETTER IN SOME WAYS,
BUT SHELTER YOU KNOW AS 100 TO
$300 PER NIGHT PER BED, AND SO I
GUESS I WOULD URGE YOU TO THINKE
WHO'S HOMELESS NEEDS PERMANENT,
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. MOST JUST
NEED A RENTAL SUBSIDY. MOST JUST
NEED, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT TO GET
OUT OF THAT SHELTER. THERE ARE
MANY, MANY PEOPLE WITH MENTAL
HEALTH AND SOME SERIOUS PROBLEMS
WHO LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY, AND
YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW THAT THEY
HAD MENTAL HEALTH OR SUBSTANCE
USE PROBLEMS, AND MANY, MANY
PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS DON'T
HAVE MENTAL HEALTH AND SEVENTIES
PROBLEMS. WE COULD. YOU COULD
FLIP THE QUESTION AND SAY, WHY
SHOULD I SPEND $300? SO LET'S
SAY $200, WITH THE DIFFERENCE IN
NIGHT ON A SHELTER THAT $6000 A
MONTH? WHAT IF I GAVE THIS
PERSON $1500 A MONTH IN A
THEORETICAL WORLD AND HAD THEM
MOVE IN WITH ROOMMATES IN A
REALLY NICE APARTMENT? YOU KNOW,
SHELTER IS JUST IT IS A VERY
EXPENSIVE INTERVENTION. THAT
DOESN'T GET US WHERE WE WANT TO
GO ALL HOME, WHICH IS A NINE
COUNTY SORT OF ORGANIZATION IN
THE BAY AREA, PROPOSES THINKING
ABOUT A 1 TO 4 RATIO FOR EVERY
UNIT OF SHELTER YOU BUILD. YOU
SHOULD FIND TO HOUSING OUTCOMES
MAY BE PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING, IT A PERMANENT
RENTER RENTAL VOUCHER, MAYBE
SOME OTHER HOME SHARE SITUATION.
AND FOUR UNITS OF PREVENTION
BECAUSE YOU SAW LIKE, FOR
IN WHO
RAISED SUBSTANTIAL LOCAL DOLLARS
AND PEOPLE,
BUT FOR EVERY PERSON THEY HOUSED
1.7 PEOPLE FELL INTO
HOMELESSNESS, SO THEY RECOMMEND
A LITTLE BIT OF DOING BOTH
BUILDING SHELTER. BUT BEING SURE
YOU ADD HOUSING OUTCOMES. NOT
EVERYBODY NEEDS THEIR OWN UNIT.
NOT EVERYONE NEEDS PERMANENT
SUPPORT OF HOUSING. THIS
SERVICES AND PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING CAN BE BUILT
TO MEDICAID MEDICAID. A LOT OF
THAT MONEY COMES FROM THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, SO THAT'S
SORT OF A NICE THING FOR US TO
KNOW, THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO STEP UP
WITH HOUSING VOUCHERS AND THINGS
. I FEAR THAT IF WE ONLY BUILD
SHELTER WILL NEVER BUILD ENOUGH
BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE
WHO ARE ON THE VERGE OF FALLING
INTO HOMELESSNESS, AND ONCE THEY
GET IN SHELTER. IF WE DON'T DO
ANYTHING TO GET THEMTHERE, THEYE
JUST GOING TO STACK UP IN THE
SHELTERS. AND THAT IS ACTUALLY
REALLY EXPENSIVE. BUT WHAT DO
YOU SAY TO THE PEOPLE THAT ARE
OUT THERE WITH NOTHING TODAY? SO
I HAVE NO QUESTION THAT WE ARE
UNDER SHELTERED. WE NEED TO
BUILD MORE SHELTERS. I JUST
THINK WE NEED TO BE MEASURED
ABOUT IT. YEAH, ANYMORE
QUESTIONS HERE. ARE THERE
SHELTER THINGS THAT WERE NOT
THERE? THEY'RE CHEAPER SHELTER
VERSIONS THAT WERE NOT THINKING
ABOUT DOING BECAUSE IT IT JUST
SEEMS THAT THE TWO SOLUTIONS ARE
600,000 OR $100 GO TO BIG FIVE
AND BY A SLEEPING BAG AND A
LITTLE TENT AND SO LIKE, ARE
THERE LIKE SHELTER THINGS THAT
WERE NOT. I KNOW SOME CITIES ARE
DOING IT. THAT'S SMALLER, UM,
HOUSING AND SO LIKE THAT, BUT
BUT WHAT THINGS COULD WE BE
ZEROING IN ON FOR OUR DEFINITION
OF AH, SHELTER, I THINK. WELL,
IF YOU'RE THINKING OF THE BIG
COST WAS SHELTER OF THE
PERSONNEL. THAT'S WHAT'S
EXPENSIVE ABOUT SHELTER. IT'S
NOT SO MUCH BUILDING IT ITS
STAFFING IT LIKE WHEN YOU GATHER
A BUNCH OF PEOPLE TOGETHER. YOU
NEED 24 7 STAFF WHICH HOUSING
DOESN'T HAVE LIKE WE DON'T YOU
KNOW, PROVIDE THAT FOR PEOPLE
LIVING IN HOUSING, AND SO I
THINK THAT THERE ARE DIFFERENT
MODELS OF SHELTERS THAT COSTS.Y
IS TO BE SURE THERE'S AN EXIT. I
DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT
IT'S PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING OR NOTHING. WE CLEARLY
CAN BE DOING MORE WITH SHARED
HOUSING. WHENEVER I'M ROOMS, I
MUST WHOEVER LIVED WITH A
ROOMMATE. MOST PEOPLE HAVE LIVED
WITH ROOMMATES. CAN WE BE GIVING
PEOPLE MORE MORE
CHOICES TO LIVE WITH ROOMMATES
OR THINGS? I URGE US TO SORT OF
NOT JUST HAVE THIS DICHOTOMY
BECAUSE WE ABSOLUTELY CAN'T
BUILD $600,000 UNITS FOR EVERY
SINGLE PERSON WHO EXPERIENCES
HOME ASSOCIATES NOT GOING TO
WORK EITHER. MR BENNETT. LOOKS
LIKE HE WANTS TO ASK A. I DON'T
WANT. I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT
WANTING OF THE
OTHER SPEAKERS. SO I HAVE TO
COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS ONE. ARE
YOU GOING TO BE HERE? ALL THESE
SPEAKERS ARE HERE BECAUSE IT MAY
HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. AFTER THATR
SURE WOULD APPRECIATE THAT
NUMBER ONE AND TWO. I JUST WANT
TO GET ON ON YOUR RADAR SCREEN.
UM YOU MENTIONED THAT? YOU KNOW,
WE'RE A MILLION UNITS SHORT.
WE'VE HEARD THAT NUMBER OF TIMES
OUT THERE AND WE ARE IN TERMS OF
LOW INCOME UNITS, BUT IT SEEMS
TO ME THAT, UM WE JUST DON'T
FAULT WE USE THE TERM AFFORDABLE
HOUSING. TOO LOOSELY, AND WE
DON'T REALLY GET AFTER LOW
INCOME. AND WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT
HOMELESS PEOPLE, IT'S GONNA BE
LOW AND VERY LOW IN EXTREMELY
LOW INCOME. YEAH OUT THERE AND
IT SEEMS THAT WE ARE GETTING
DISTRACTED. MY OWN VIEW IS LIKE
WE SHOULDN'T BUILD MORE MARKET
RATE HOUSING UNTIL WE BUILD
THESE MILLION UNITS UNTIL WE
MAKE A SIGNIFICANT DENT IN THIS
MILLION THAT THAT'S THAT'S WHERE
ALL OF OUR ENERGY SHOULD GO.
THERE WILL BE MARKET RATE
HOUSING BUILT. WE SHOULDN'T BE
DOING THAT. AND I'M CONCERNED
ABOUT THE, UM CROWDING OUT. WE
HAVE AN IN A CITY IN MY DISTRICT
, SOME PRIME PROPERTIES THAT
COULD HAVE BEEN VERY GOOD
PROPERTIES FOR LOW INCOME
HOUSING.
ALL GETTING MARKET RATE HOUSING
ON HIM. IT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE
IT HARDER IN THAT COMMUNITY TO
BUILD THAT. THAT'S NUMBER ONE
AND THE OTHER ONE. I JUST WANT
TO QUICKLY ASK YOU ABOUT IS YOU
TALKED ABOUT GATHERING THE
NAMES. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT FROM
AN ACCOUNTABILITY STAND POINT.
I'D LIKE TO GET YOUR QUICK TAKE
ON THIS FROM ACCOUNTABILITY
STANDPOINT. IF I PUT MY CITY
COUNCIL HAD ON, I PUT MY COUNTY
SUPERVISOR HAT ON. ALL OF THE
PEOPLE THAT MIGHT MOVE IN OR
MIGHT FALL INTO HOUSING. THAT'S
AN ISSUE THAT WITHOUT FALL INTO
HOMELESSNESS. I MEAN, THAT'S
THAT'S AN ISSUE THAT WE SHOULD
BE CONNECTED, TURNED WITH BUT
FROM AN ACCOUNTABILITY
STANDPOINT, IF I WAS TASKED WITH
IDENTIFYING THE 500 REGULAR
HOMELESS PEOPLE IN IN THE CITY
AND THE GOAL WAS IT WITHIN TWO
YEARS? 400 OF THOSE 500 HAD TO
BE HOUSED. THAT THAT WOULD BE AN
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURE THAT
WOULD MAKE ALMOST EVERYBODY FEEL
GOOD BECAUSE PEOPLE KNOW THOSE
PEOPLE AND WE'RE GETTING THOSE
PEOPLE IN AND THEN YOU'RE NOT.
YOU KNOW, THE L A GOT CAUGHT IN
THAT YOU KNOW THEY WERE HOUSING
THE PEOPLE, BUT MORE PEOPLE ARE
FOLLOWING SOLVE THE PROBLEM, BUT
IT DOESN'T LEAST CREATE A SENSE
OF ACCOUNTABILITY FOR YOUR
CURRENT POPULATION. I'M VERY
INTERESTED IN THAT IN IN AND
PERHAPS OTHER PEOPLE,
UM, TALK. WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT
A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE I DON'T
WANT TO TIE THINGS UP TOO MUCH
SHOULD I DEFER ANSWERS OR
SCIENCE? I SHOULD ANSWER. I
MEAN, I THINK THAT FIRST
QUESTION UM, LOOK, WE NEED
HOUSING AT EVERY LEVEL. BUT
THERE'S NO QUESTION THAT THE
HOMICIDES POPULATION NOT ONLY IT
NEEDS AFFORDABLE
ACTUALLY THE HIGHEST LEVEL E L I
EXTREMELY LOW INCOME. THEY'RE
GENERALLY FROM PEOPLE WHO MAKE
LESS THAN 20% OF THE AREA.
MEDIAN INCOME AND UP TO 30.
PERCENT. AND SO IF WE WANT TO
GET AT THIS PROBLEM, THAT'S THE
HOUSING. I THINK WE ALSO HAVE TO
BE REAL. WHEN I TALKED TO MY I'M
JUST A PHYSICIAN. BUT WHEN I
TALK TO MY HOUSING, DEVELOPER,
FRIENDS AND MY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING DEVELOPER FRIENDS, THEY
SAY THOSE NEED DEEP SUBSIDIES
LIKE PEOPLE MAKING $960 A MONTH
JUST CAN'T PAY ENOUGH NOT ONLY
TO CREATE THE HOUSING BUT
FRANKLY TO SUSTAIN IT. THIS IS
WHERE I FEEL LIKE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAS KIND OF ABANDONED
US, RIGHT, UM SO, BUT THERE'S NO
QUESTION THAT IF WE HAD WERE SO
SHORT OF EVERY LEVEL OF HOUSING
THAT PEOPLE ARE SORT OF MOVED
DOWN, YOU KNOW PEOPLE ARE PEOPLE
WHO COULD AFFORD IN OTHER
PLACES, BETTER HOUSING OR SORT
OF CROWDING OUT THE PEOPLE WHO
ARE LOWER INCOME. SO I THINK THE
ANSWER IS BOTH. AND BUT I THINK,
UM, SUMMER BENNETT, YOU'RE
ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT THIS
POPULATION IS DESPERATELY POOR,
AND THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO FOCUS
ON FOR THIS POPULATION. RESPOND
TO THAT JUST REAL QUICKLY SINCE
I MAYBE IF NOT, MAYBE YOU DON'T
HAVE TO STAY AROUND. BUT THE
OTHER FIRST WORLD COUNTRIES THAT
HAVE SOLVED THIS PROBLEM, THEYP,
SUBSIDIES. THEY DO IT WITH.
ABSOLUTELY UNTIL WE COMMIT TO
DEEP SUBSIDIES. ABSOLUTELY. I
THINK WE'RE GONNA BE SITTING
HERE. JUST TALKING AROUND THIS
CIRCLE, YOU KNOW, FOREVER AND
DEEP SUBSIDIES MEAN YOU DON'T
HAVE TO SAY OKAY THE WAY WE'RE
GOING TO GET THE FUNDING FOR
THIS LOW INCOME HOUSING AS WE'RE
GOING TO LET SOMEBODY BUILD 10
UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND
THEY GIVE US ONE LOW INCOME
HOUSING IN THAT IS A FAILED
POLICY TO TRY TO ADDRESS THIS
ISSUE. INSTEAD YOU SAY, BUILD 11
UNITS OF LOW INCOME HOUSING, AND
WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE THAT
COMMITMENT UNTIL WE MAKE THE
COMMITMENT IS GOING TO BE A REAL
CHALLENGE. YOUR PERCEPTION ALSO
, YEAH. I MEAN, I FEAR THAT I
MEAN, I'VE BEEN DOING THIS SINCE
1998 AND I FEEL LIKE I'M GOING O
BE HAVING THE SAME CONVERSATIONS
UNLESS WE GET AT THE ROOT. OF
THE PROBLEM, AND IT'S A TOUGH
CONVERSATION TO HAVE BECAUSE
WE'RE SO FAR FROM IT. WE'RE
GOING TO NEED THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TO STEP UP. BUT
CALIFORNIA IS IN THE STATE NOW
THAT EVEN IF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT DECIDED TO FUND
HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS RIGHT
NOW, ONLY ONE IN FOUR HOUSEHOLDS
THAT, UM QUALIFIED GET THEM IN
MOST OF THE COUNTRY. THEY COULD
FLIP THE SWITCH ON THAT SPEND
ABOUT WHAT WE SPEND ON SHELTERS
IN THE COUNTRY. PROVIDED FOR
EVERYONE WHO QUALIFIES IN MOST
OF THE COUNTRY. HOMELESSNESS
WOULD DISAPPEAR. WE WOULD STILL
HAVE A PROBLEM IN CALIFORNIA
BECAUSE WE LITERALLY DON'T HAVE
THE HOUSING FOR THOSE VOUCHERS
TO WORK IN, SO IT'S A BIT OF
BOTH. THANK YOU, MR PRONTO.
THANK YOU, DOCTOR. I JUST WANTED
TO KIND OF HONE IN SPECIFICALLY
ON SOME OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC
QUESTIONS AND THE NATURE OF THE
POPULATION THAT WE'RE DEALING
WITH, UM, FOR SOME OF THE
QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED
EARLIER, SO IN THE REPORT, WE
OUTLINED THE FACT THAT ALMOST
ONE IN FOUR OF PEOPLE WHO ARE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS ARE
ACTUALLY CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE
OF 18. YES AND YES, LIKELY NOT
GOING TO BE PEOPLE WHO ARE DRUG
ADDICTED SUBSTANCE ABUSERS. FOR
THE MOST PART, THE SINGLE AGE
THAT PEOPLE ARE MOST LIKELY TO
BE HOMELESS. WE CALL IT THE
MODEL AGE IS ZERO IS BEFORE YOUR
ONE YEARS OLD. THAT IS A TIME IN
ANYONE'S LIFE THAT THEY'RE MOST
LIKELY TO BE HOMELESS. SO WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT 25% OF OUR
POPULATION 310,000 PEOPLE. UH
THAT ARE CAPTURED IN THIS REPORT
AND IN OUR, JUST
FROM A COST EFFICIENCY
STANDPOINT, THOSE CHILDREN AND
FAMILIES WHO ARE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS IS IT MORE COST
EFFICIENT TO BU OR IS
IT MORE COST EFFICIENT TO FIND
WAYS TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE IN THEIR HOMES IN
THEIR HOMES? WE HAVE TO THE
FIRST THING. THE FIRST RULE IS
STOP THE BLEEDING. WE HAVE TO
KEEP PEOPLE WHO ARE HOUSED WHERE
THEY ARE. UM AND SO THAT THEY
DON'T FALL INTO HOMELESSNESS OR,
FRANKLY, BECOME EVICTED. EVEN IF
YOU KNOW WHAT WE SEE AS MOST
PEOPLE BEFORE HOMELESSNESS GO
THROUGH THIS PERIOD OF BEING
DOUBLED UP OR TRIPLED UP WHERE
THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE
ALREADY BEEN EVICTED. OBVIOUSLY
IF YOU CAN STOP THE EVICTION,
YOU STOP THAT PROCESS, BUT WE
ALSO NEED TO FOCUS ON THOSE WHO
ARE DOUBLED AND TRIPLED UP TO
KEEP THEM THERE AND KEEP THEM
FROM BECOMING HOMELESS. THINGS I
JUST WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME
TALKING ABOUT HOUSING
PRODUCTION, WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY
SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO FOCUS
IN ON. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE
SPEND AS MUCH TIME TALKING ABOUT
ENSURING PROTECTIONS FOR TENANTS
SO THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY STAY
IN THEIR HOMES AND PROVIDE THATD
TO EMERGENCY RENTAL PROGRAM AND
ASSISTANCE FOR THOSE POPULATIONS
AGREE COMPLETELY. THANK YOU, MY
QUICK QUESTION FOR DR KUSHELL,
YOU YOU MENTIONED EARLIER. YOU
WERE CONCERNED ABOUT SOME. YOU
THOUGHT WE SHOULD FOCUS MORE ON
CERTAIN OUTCOMES ALONG THE WAY.
SO DO YOU GIVE ADVICE ON WHAT
OUTCOMES WE SHOULD BE. FOCUS ON
BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING
WE THAT ISSUES AND THEN WE'RE
LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW. I MEAN, I
THINK SOMETIMES WHEN THE
ACCOUNTABILITY IS TOO NARROWLY
DEFINED, YOU FIND THAT THE MONEY
BECOMES DIFFICULT TO USE. IF
IT'S YOU KNOW, I HEAR ALL THE
TIME JUST BEING OUT THERE IN THE
COMMUNITY TALKING TO PROVIDERS
WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT UNICORN
FUNDING OR UNICORN UNITS, UNITS
THAT HAVE BEEN SO CONSTRAINED
AND HOW THE FUNDING IS USED THAT
THEY CAN'T FIND A PERSON. TO FIT
THAT THAT ISN'T SERVING ANYONE'S
INTEREST. I THINK WE CAN
ABSOLUTELY HOLD PEOPLE
ACCOUNTABLE FOR HOUSING. THE
PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS, YOU
KNOW YOU CHOOSE IT. WHETHER IT'S
THE MOST COMPLICATED PEOPLE, THE
LARGEST NUMBER OF PEOPLE OR
WHATEVER, BUT GIVING LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS SOME FLEXIBILITY AND
HOW THEY DO THAT AND NOT MAKING
IT HARD FOR PEOPLE TO USE THE
MONEY THAT'S COMING THEIR WAY.
THEN HOW WOULD YOU MEASURE LIKE?
WHAT WOULD YOU BECAUSE YOU, YOU
DO DATA YOU DO RESEARCH. WHAT
OUTCOMES? WOULD YOU SAY? WE
SHOULD LOOK AT BECAUSE BECAUSE
WE CARE ABOUT OBVIOUSLY RIGHT,
GETTING PEOPLE INTO PERMANENT
HOUSING. GETTING PEOPLE OFF THE
STREETS. WHAT WHAT OUTCOME? YOU
WANT TO LOOK AT OUTFLOW, FOR
INSTANCE, FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN
SHELTERS. YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE
THEY'RE NOT STAYING IN SHELTERS
TOO LONG, BECAUSE IF, IF A
SYSTEM IS WORKING APPROPRIATELY
, PEOPLE WOULD BE IN SHELTER AND
THEN MOVED OUT TO PERMANENT
HOUSING. AND THEN SOMEBODY ELSE
CAN FILL THAT SHELTER BED THAT
WAY YOU DON'T HAVE TO RISK
CREATE ENDLESS SHELTERS FOR
EVERYBODY, SO CERTAINLY
OUTFLOWS. T█g7 PERMANENCE LACK F
RE ENTRANCE INTO HOMELESSNESS.
YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE PEOPLE WHO
BECOME HOUSED. COME BACK TO YOUR
SYSTEM AGAIN. I THINK THAT THERE
CAN BE SOME ACCOUNTABILITY FOR
PEOPLE WHO WE SEE WITH COMPLEX
NEEDS AND ALL THESE SYSTEMS ARE
THEY BEING PRIORITIZED? ARE
THERE NEEDS BEING MET BECAUSE
THEY'RE OFTEN THE PEOPLE WHO ARE
CAUSING THE MOST PROBLEMS. I
THINK THERE CAN BE SOME
PREVENTION WORK, YOU KNOW? ARE
WE GETTING PREVENTION DOLLARS TO
THE PEOPLE AT HIGHEST RISK, AND
THERE'S A WAY A TO SORT OF TEST
THAT AND ARE WE DECREASING
OUTFLOWS? AND THEN I THINK YOU
CAN LOOK AT CERTAIN POPULATIONS
. I MEAN, WE SEE SUCH
DISPROPORTIONALITY IN CERTAIN
POPULATIONS. WE ALWAYS TALK
ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH AND
SUBSTANCE USE, BUT WE DON'T TALK
ABOUT THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM
OF THE WAYS IN WHICH THE BLACK
POPULATION INDIGENOUS POPULATION
AND NOW LATIN X POPULATIONS ARE
SO OVERREPRESENTED IN THIS
POPULATION AND I THINK WE NEED
TO BE HOLDING OUR SYSTEMS
ACCOUNTABLE. TO MAKE SURE THAT
THEY'RE NOT LEAVING THOSE MOST
IMPACTED POPULATIONS BEHIND. SO
JUST I MEAN, I WAS I'M GLAD YOU
BROUGHT THE ISSUE OF OUTCOMES. I
WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE REPORT
AND JUST NOTICING ON SOME
CHARTS. AND I'M JUST FOCUSING ON
ONE CHART. THIS IS THAT OUTCOMES
FOR PEOPLE EXITING PROGRAMS
REPORTING DATA TO H D. I S BY
JUNE 30TH 2021. IT'S UM OF THE
22% EXITED THE HOMELESSNESS. SO
THEY WENT THROUGH THE PRO. THEY
WENT TO THE SERVICES, BUT THEY
STILL EXITED THE HOMELESSNESS.
AND ANOTHER 35% EXIT UNKNOWN
DESTINATIONS WHICH PEOPLE THINK
IS HOMELESSNESS WITH WITHOUT A
LABEL. RIGHT SO THAT'S OVER. 50%
IS GO. IT IS THAT KIND OF I
MEAN, I THINK THAT
REPRESENTATIVE GETS TO THE ROOT
OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE?
YOU KNOW, THERE IS NO PLACE FOR
PEOPLE TO GO. AND I CAN TELL YOU
, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN DOING
A VERY INTENSIVE WHAT WE CALL
LONGITUDINAL STUDY, WHERE WE
ACTUALLY COLLECTED A GROUP OF
PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS AND HAVE
FOLLOWED THEM FOR NOW, A DECADE
TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS. 80% OF
THESE OLDER ADULTS IN OAKLAND
GOT REHOUSED, BUT 50% OF THEM
REENTERED HOMELESSNESS AND THE
ONLY THINGS THAT PROTECTED THEM
FROM RE ENTERING HOMELESSNESS
WAS HAVING SOME SORT OF RENTAL
SUBSIDY. THOSE WITH RENTAL
SUBSIDIES DIDN'T RENTER
HOMELESSNESS. THOSE WITHOUT GOT
HOUSED FOR A YEAR OR TWO AND
THEN CAME BACK INTO THE SYSTEM.
I THINK IT'S HARD TO HOLD THE
HOMELESS A SYSTEM ENTIRELY
ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT, BECAUSE
YOU KNOW, WHERE ARE PEOPLE GOING
TO GO? WHEN WHEN YOU HAVE A
CLIENT IN FRONT OF YOU WHO MAKES
$960 A MONTH AND YOU'RE TRYING
TO FIND A PLACE FOR THEM TO LIVE
FOR THAT? YOU KNOW, UNTIL WE
SOLVE THAT PROBLEM, I THINK THE
SYSTEM IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO
SORT OF STRAIN UNDER THE WEIGHT
OF THAT. JUST I THINK. ONE LAST
THING YOU KNOW, WASN'T CLEAR. I
KNOW WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT
THE MONEY THAT'S BEEN
APPROPRIATED. IT WASN'T CLEAR
HOW LONG IT'S BEEN TAKING TO GET
IT OUT BECAUSE I KNOW EVEN
THOUGH IT'S BEEN APPROPRIATE THE
BUDGET A LOT OF IT HASN'T REACH
THE COMMUNITIES. AND I GUESS THE
REPORT DIDN'T REALLY GIVE US BUT
INDICATION OF THAT. DO YOU HAVE
A SENSE OF I THINK IT'S BEEN
DONE WITH. I DON'T KNOW FOR
SURE, BUT I THINK IT VARIES BY
PROGRAM, AND I THINK IT VARIES
BY PROGRAM DESIGN. I THINK YOU
SEE PROGRAMS LIKE HOME KEY THAT
CAME ON BOARD VERY, VERY QUICKLY
AND OTHER PROGRAMS THAT WERE
JUST HARDER TO MAKE USE OF. GOT
IT. SO YOU DO IT. ENCOURAGE US
TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT
INDIVIDUAL. OKAY, GREAT. NOT
SEEING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
REALLY WELL, THANK YOU. DR
KUSHELL. APPRECIATE YOUR
INSIGHTS. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE TO
OUR NEXT PANEL ON STATE
PERSPECTIVE. WITH, UM LOURDES
MORALES FROM L A. OH AH, THAT'S
CHIC, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF
HOMELESSNESS BUSINESS CONSUMER
SERVICES HOUSING AGENCY DOES
CHIC WITH GRANDMA AS WELL AS
ZACK HOMESTEAD, CHIEF DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF CD. SO WITH THAT, I
THINK L A WAS GOING TO GO FIRST.
GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON,
MR CHAIR AND MEMBERS. I'M DOING
THIS MORALES WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE.
I'VE BEEN ASKED TO PROVIDE AN
OVERVIEW OF FOUR KEY HOMELESS.
HOMELESSNESS PROGRAMS FOR THE
STATE. I'LL BE MAKING MY
COMMENTS FROM THIS HANDOUT,
WHICH YOU SHOULD HAVE BEFORE
YOU. IT'S ALSO AVAILABLE ON OUR
WEBSITE. IF YOU TURN TO THE
FIRST PAGE OF THE HAND HANDOUT,
YOU'LL SEE OVERVIEW TABLE OF THE
FOUR KEY PROGRAMS THAT WILL BE
DISCUSSED DURING THIS PANEL. WE
HAVE HOME KEY ADMINISTERED BY H
C D, AS WELL AS HAP ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION FUNDING PROGRAM AND
THE FAMILY HOMELESSNESS
CHALLENGE GRANT, ALL THREE OF
WHICH ARE ADMINISTERED BY THE
CALIFORNIA ENERGY AGENCY. I'M
REALLY HAVING TROUBLE IF SHE BE
A LOT CLOSER THAT MICROPHONE
WITH THAT MASCULINE, I THINK,
THINK THAT WOULD HELP ME. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. UM, SO WE HAVE
SORT OF THE THREE PROGRAMS
ADMINISTERED BY THE COUNCIL. UM
ON THE TABLE. THE TABLE
IDENTIFIES HOW MUCH THE BUDGET
HAS ALLOCATED TOWARDS THE THREE
PROGRAMS TO YOUR PRIOR QUESTION
. HOW MUCH IS ACTUALLY BEEN
AWARDED? AWARDS ARE USUALLY
PROVIDED TO CITIES, COUNTIES AND
C. O. C S. AND FOR THE FUNDING
THAT REMAINS. WHAT IS THE
TIMELINE FOR GETTING THAT
FUNDING OUT THE DOOR? WE ALSO
IDENTIFY THE REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH
EACH OF THESE THREE PROGRAMS. SO
IN THE PAGES THAT REMAIN IN THE
HANDOUT, I'LL GO THROUGH EACH OF
THE FOUR PROGRAMS IN TURN,
PROVIDING A STATUS UPDATE AND
SOME OF THE PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
FROM THESE PROGRAMS. SO TURNING
TO PAGE TWO, OR WE BEGIN OUR
DISCUSSION OF HOME KEY IS
ALREADY SORT OF MENTIONED HOME
KEY PROVIDES GRANTS TO LOCAL
PUBLIC AGENCIES AND TRIBES TO
ACQUIRE PROPERTIES LIKE MOTELS
AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES IN
ORDER TO QUICKLY EXPAND THE
SUPPLY OF HOUSING FOR PEOPLE
THAT ARE HOMELESS, ARE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. THE
TABLE ON PAGE TWO, PROVIDES AN
OVERVIEW OF HOW FUNDS FOR THE
FIRST TWO ROUNDS HAVE BEEN
DISTRIBUTED SO FAR AS YOU CAN
SEE OVERALL. THE LARGEST
ALLOCATION HAS BEEN ALLOCATED TO
COMMUNITIES WITHIN LOS ANGELES
COUNTY, WHERE OVER 900 MILLION
HAS BEEN PROVIDED AND ABOUT 4000
PROPERTIES ARE INTENDED TO OR
UNITS ACCUSED ME ARE INTENDED TO
BE OPEN AS A RESULT OF THAT
FUNDING, MANY OF WHICH ARE
ALREADY IN OPERATION. IF YOU
TURN TO PAGE THREE, WE PROVIDE A
LITTLE MORE DETAIL ABOUT THE
OVERALL ACCOMPLISHMENTS THAT
THUS FAR AS YOU CAN SEE FOR THE
$2.8 BILLION THAT HAS BEEN
ALLOCATED ACROSS 210 PROJECTS
THE STATE ANTICIPATES COULDN'T
CREATING A TOTAL OF NEARLY
13,000 UNITS, MANY OF WHICH I
ALREADY MENTIONED ARE ALREADY
AVAILABLE, AND THESE WOULD
SUPPORT ABOUT 213,000 PEOPLE
OVER THE LIFE OF THESE UNITS.
THERE'S AFFORDABILITY COVENANTS
AND ENSURE THAT THEY STAY
AFFORDABLE OVER A LONG TIME, SO
OVER THE ENTIRE DURATION. UM
OVERALL, ALL OF THE ROUND ONE
HOME KEY FUNDING HAS BEEN
AWARDED. THE VAST MAJORITY OF
THAT FUNDING HAS BEEN TOWARDS
ACQUISITION OF PROPERTIES. FOR
AROUND TO THE STATE SAW
SIGNIFICANT DEMAND ON HOME KEY
FUNDING TO SUCH EXTENT THAT SOME
OF THE ROUND THREE HOME KEY
FUNDING WAS ACCELERATED TO
ENSURE THAT ALL ELIGIBLE
APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FUNDS SO
THAT THESE PROJECTS DON'T HAVE
TO REAPPLY LATER AND HAVE DELAYS
IN GETTING THE UNITS UP AND
RUNNING. SO THIS MEANS THAT
THERE'S ABOUT $900 MILLION LEFT
IN HOME KEY FUNDING THAT'S
ANTICIPATED TO GO OUT THIS YEAR,
SOME OF THAT MONEY NEXT MONTH.
WITH THAT FUNDING RELIEF THAT
WOULD SORT OF EXHAUST THE
CURRENT AUTHORIZED FUNDING FOR
HOME KEY, AND THERE'S NO
ADDITIONAL FUNDING THAT'S BEEN
PROPOSED AT THIS TIME. IF YOU
TURN TO PAGE FOUR, WE BEGIN THE
DISCUSSION OF HAP, WHICH IS THE
STATE'S LARGEST, MOST FLEXIBLE
PROGRAM RELATED TO HOMELESSNESS
THAT PROVIDES FLEXIBLE AID TO
THE LARGEST CITIES, COUNTIES AND
CONTINUUM OF CARE SO THEY CAN
ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS IN THEIR
COMMUNITIES. THE TABLE THAT
SPANS PAGES FOUR AND FIVE CREATE
PROVIDES A SNAPSHOT. OF THE
VARIOUS ROUNDS OF HAP FUNDING.
OVERALL YOU CAN SEE THAT ACROSS
THE FIRST TWO ROUNDS OF FUNDING
. UM ABOUT $834 MILLION HAS
BEEN, UM ENCUMBERED LOCALLY. AND
ABOUT, UM. 86% OF THIS FUNDING.
I'M SORRY ABOUT 86% OF FUNDING
HAS BEEN ENCUMBERED IN ABOUT 52%
HAS ACTUALLY BEEN SPENT LOCALLY.
SO FROM THE FIRST TWO ROUNDS,
THERE'S ABOUT 127 MILLION. THAT
REMAINS OBLIGATED. IMPORTANTLY
THOUGH THE PROGRAM ALLOWS FOR A
FIVE YEAR EXPENDITURE WINDOWS.
THE LOCALS DO HAVE ADDITIONAL
TIME TO GET THIS FUNDING OUT. ON
THE BOTTOM OF PAGE FIVE. WE
STARTED BEGIN TO OUTLINE A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT WE KNOW
ABOUT THE PEOPLE SERVED TO THE
FIRST TWO ROUNDS OVERALL ABOUT
74,000 INDIVIDUALS AND NEARLY
18,000 FAMILIES HAVE FAMILIES
WITH DEPENDENT CHILDREN HAVE
BEEN SERVED SO FAR. THE ROUND
THREE FUNDING WAS JUST RECENTLY
RELEASED AND THE INTERAGENCY
COUNCIL IS CURRENTLY REVIEWING
APPLICATIONS FOR THE FOURTH
ROUND. LAST YEAR'S BUDGET DID
PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL $1 BILLION
IN FUNDING FOR HAT FOR A FINAL
SORT OF FIFTH ROUND. AND ONCE
AGAIN ONCE THESE FUNDS GO OUT,
THAT WOULD SORT OF EXHAUST THE
CURRENTLY AUTHORIZED FUNDING FOR
THE PROGRAM. IN TERMS OF SORT OF
HOW THE PROBLEM THE PROJECT. UM
SORRY, THE PROGRAM HAS EVOLVED
OVER TIME. WE HAVE SEEN AN
INCREASE IN REGIONAL
PARTNERSHIPS OVER THE FIRST FOUR
ROUNDS OF THE PROGRAM, MOST
IMPORTANTLY, ADDITIONAL SORT OF
JURISDICTIONS EITHER, UM,
JOINING THEIR FUNDS IN ORDER TO
SORT OF WORK MORE
COLLABORATIVELY IN ADDRESSING
HOMELESSNESS IN THEIR
COMMUNITIES. IN TERMS OF
ACCOUNTABILITY. WE'VE ALSO SEEN
SIGNIFICANT EVOLUTION IN THIS
PROGRAM. OVER TIME. THE INITIAL
TWO ROUNDS DID HAVE THEM ANNUAL
REPORTING, BUT IT WAS MOSTLY
ABOUT SORT OF TRACKING
EXPENDITURES AND USES WITH THE
START OF ROUND THREE. THERE WERE
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES WHERE THERE
IS NOW THE INCLUSION OF LOCAL
ACTION PLANS SO THAT LOCALS
IDENTIFY THEIR GOALS. AS A WAY
TO SORT OF TRACK PROGRESS OVER
TIME. THERE IS ALSO AN INCLUSION
OF BONUS FUNDING FOR
JURISDICTIONS THAT ARE MEETING
THEIR GOALS. NOW THAT THERE IS
QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER THE
LOCAL SCHOOLS DO ALIGN WITH UM
YOU KNOW, LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES
FOR THESE PROGRAMS, AND SO
THAT'S STILL THE QUESTION, BUT
IT DOES REFLECT GREATER
OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
HOWEVER ONE OF THE CHALLENGES
THAT JUST THE SHEER SORT OF WORK
AND GATHERING THE INFORMATION
AND REPORTING AND COMPILING IT
DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE IS A LAG
IN WHEN THIS INFORMATION
ULTIMATELY BECOMES AVAILABLE TO
THE LEGISLATURE. AND SO SORT OF,
FOR EXAMPLE, THE REPORTING FOR
AROUND THREE, WHICH IS THAT
FIRST YEAR WE ARE GOING TO HAVE
MORE DATA WON'T BE REPORTED
UNTIL THE END OF THIS YEAR. UM
SORT OF, SO THAT MEANS THAT
THERE WILL BE A MISALIGNMENT
BETWEEN WHEN THAT ADDITIONAL
DATA COMES IN, AND WHEN THE
LEGISLATURE WILL BE ASKED TO ACT
ON BUDGET LEGISLATION RELATED TO
THAT FIFTH ROUND TURNING TO PAGE
SEVEN OF THE HANDOUT. THERE'S A
DISCUSSION OF THE ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION FUNDING PROGRAM, SO
THESE ARE COMPETITIVE GRANTS TO
CITIES, COUNTIES AND DOCS IN
ORDER TO ADDRESS UNSHELTERED
INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN
ENCAMPMENTS. FOR THIS PROGRAM
YOU CAN SEE ON FLIGHT SEVEN AND
EIGHT THE FUNDING THAT HAS BEEN
AWARDED OVER THE FIRST TWO
ROUNDS OF THE PROGRAM. ALL ABOUT
$96 MILLION HAS BEEN AWARDED. UM
FOR THE SECOND ROUND. UM. FOR
THE SECOND ROUND. THERE'S STILL
SORT OF SOME ALLOCATION
REMAINING THAT WILL BE WILL BE
GOING OUT, AND THEN ALL OF THE
THIRD ROUND WILL BE GOING OUT IN
THE NEXT CALENDAR YEAR. AND THEN
THE FINAL PROGRAM THAT WILL
HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU IS ON PAGE
NINE. THE FAMILY HOMELESSNESS
CHALLENGE GRANT. THIS IS ABOUT
40 MILLION IN ONE TIME FUNDING
THAT WAS PROVIDED SPECIFICALLY
TO ADDRESS FAMILIES EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS, SO ADULTS WITH
DEPENDENT CHILDREN. IN
PARTICULAR, THERE WAS 30 MILLION
ALLOCATED TOWARDS GRANTS TO
COMMUNITIES TO ADDRESS THIS
ISSUE ABOUT $17 MILLION HAS GONE
OUT. UM THIS IS SORT OF MORE
RECENTLY RELEASED AND THERE'LL
BE SORT OF TRACKING TOWARDS
OBJECTIVES IDENTIFIED IN THE
APPLICATIONS FOR THESE PROGRAMS
, AND AS THEY SORT OF
DEMONSTRATE THEIR MEETING GOALS
, THESE SAME JURISDICTIONS WOULD
BE THE ONES ELIGIBLE FOR THE
REMAINING FUNDING. SHOULD THEY
MEET THOSE OBJECTIVES? THAT
CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS AND HAPPY
TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.
THANK YOU CHATTING. MY NAME IS
DOC CHICHA WITH CREMA AND THE
DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR THE
BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND
HOUSING AGENCY, AND I'M HERE
JUST TO PROVIDE A QUICK OVERVIEW
ON SOME OF THE PROGRAMS ACTUALLY
, THAT MS MORALES WENT OVER SO
I'LL TRY NOT TO DUPLICATE BUT
JUST ADD TO SOME OF THE THINGS
SHE MENTIONED. SO MS MORALES
MENTIONED HAP WHICH IS THE
FLEXIBLE ONE TIME FUN BUT OVER A
FIVE YEAR PERIOD, ITS FIRST
STARTED AS SHE MENTIONED IN 2019
20. SO WE'VE GONE TO THREE
ROUNDS NOW HAVE ONE HAVE TO HAVE
THREE FUNDS JUST WENT OUT AND WE
ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF REVIEWING
FOR SHE MENTIONED I WILL MENTION
GOING BACK TO WHAT DR KUSHELL
MENTIONED CHATTING. THAT THERE
ARE METRICS IN 3.5 4, WHICH
MIRRORS SOME OF THE OUTCOME. SHE
MENTIONED, FOR EXAMPLE, LOOKING
TO SEE HOW WE CAN REDUCE
UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS,
LOOKING TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE
WERE SERVING THAT REACH, LOOKING
TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE NEWLY
HOMELESS. THAT MEANS WHO HAS NOT
EMERGED IN THE SYSTEM IN THE
LAST TWO YEARS, SO WE CAN SEE
WHO'S COMING UP. AND THAT'S BEEN
A TWO YEAR GAP. NEWLY HOMELESS
LOOKING TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE
ARE RETURNING TO HOMELESS, SO
THESE ARE FAIRLY STANDARD
METRICS AND OUTCOMES THAT ARE
COLLECTED ACROSS THE COUNTRY,
WHICH ARE NOW EMBEDDED IN HALF
ROUND THREE AND WILL BE UNHAPPY
FOR AND I'M SURE I HAVE FIVE AS
WELL, ALONG WITH OTHER THINGS WE
WANT TO ADD. I WILL ALSO
MENTIONED THAT THERE IS A YOUTH
SET ASIDE, WHICH THE YOUTH
ADVOCATES WILL MENTION BECAUSE
IN ONE AND TWO THERE WAS AN 8%
SET ASIDE AND HAVE THREE AND
FOUR, THERE'S A 10% SET ASIDE A
BRIGHT SPOT BECAUSE OF THAT, IF
YOU LOOK AT THE HEART, WHICH WAS
MENTIONED THE 2022 NATIONALS
POINT IN TIME COUNT IN
CALIFORNIA. WE WERE ONE OF THE
STATES THAT HAD THE LARGEST
ABSOLUTE DECREASE OF YOUTH
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS, AND
WE HAD A MINUS 21% DECREASE FROM
2020 TO 2022 YOUTH ADVOCATES. IF
YOU TALK TO THEM WILL SAY THAT
THIS BECAUSE YOU HAVE THIS
TARGETED FUNDING NOW, THAT'S
FLEXIBLE THAT CAN BE USED FOR
PLANNING AND INTERVENTIONS.
ESPECIALLY FOR THAT YOUTH
POPULATION. 18 TO 24 AS
ASSEMBLYWOMAN BOND UP MENTIONED
THIS IS A REALLY GOOD PREVENTION
. EARLY INTERVENTION THING TO
MAKE SURE PEOPLE DON'T AGE INTO
HOMELESSNESS. SO JUST WANT TO
MENTION THAT ROUND THREE. AS WE
SAID THE CHECKS JUST WENT OUT
AND THEN ROUND PHOBIA REVIEWING.
WE ARE LOOKING REALLY CAREFULLY
TO SEE THOSE OUTCOMES SURROUND
THREE THERE WERE OUTCOMES FOR
2024 ROUND FOR THE OUTCOMES WILL
BE 2025. SO ALL OF THESE THINGS
IMPORTANTLY, USE H D I S WHICH
WAS DISCUSSED AS A BASELINE. SO
FOR THE VERY FIRST KNOWN WE HAVE
THIS BASELINE THAT CAN BE USED
AS APPLES AND APPLES COMPARISON
SO THAT PEOPLE ARE MEASURING
THEIR OUTCOMES VERSUS THE
BASELINE PROVIDED THROUGH HD. I
S SPEAKING OF H D. I S I KNOW
THE LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT WAS
MENTIONED, SO WANTED TO MENTION
AGAIN THAT THAT'S A THREE YEAR
STUDY PERIOD. 571,000 PEOPLE
SERVED. AND WHILE THAT I THOUGHT
ONE OF THE TAKEAWAYS FOR ME WAS
THAT YOU'RE SEEING THIS GREATER
REACH YEAR OVER YEAR. AND WHILE
THERE IS A 25% UNKNOWN
DESTINATION OUTCOME WHAT THE
RESEARCHERS AT TURNER I HAD
ASKED HIM TO LOOK INTO THIS WHEN
YOU LOOK AT THE NATIONAL
UNKNOWN. OUTCOMES AT OTHER
PLACES. CALIFORNIA'S OUTCOMES
ACTUALLY ARE LOWER ON THE
UNKNOWN SITES OF OUR PROVIDERS
ARE DOING IT'S NOT PERFECT, BUT
A BETTER JOB COMPARED TO THE
NATIONAL KIND OF DATA AROUND WHO
IS EXITING TO UNKNOWN
DESTINATIONS AND TWO OVER THE
THREE YEAR STUDY PERIOD, THE
NUMBER THE PERCENTAGE OF UNKNOWN
WENT DOWN, SO WE ARE GETTING
BETTER. AND BUT I CAN ADDRESS
MORE QUESTIONS AROUND HDS, WHICH
I'M SURE WILL COME UP. AND THEN
IN CAMP AND RESOLUTION FUND.
THERE ARE ALSO METRICS THERE
BECAUSE AGAIN THE GOAL AS WAS
MENTIONED IT WAS AROUND, PLACING
PEOPLE IN A PATHWAY TO PERMANENT
, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO THOSE
ARE THE METRICS WERE GATHERING
ON ENCAMPMENT RESOLUTION. AS YOU
KNOW, THERE WAS A 50 MILLION
ROUND ONE. THAT WAS AROUND TO
WHICH WE ARE IN RIGHT NOW OPENED
IN DECEMBER AND JUNE, 30TH.
WHENEVER IT'S OVER THE COUNTER,
AND THERE WILL BE AROUND THREE
IN DECEMBER OF THIS YEAR.
ANOTHER 400 MILLION. UM THE LAST
THING I'LL MENTION IS AROUND
ACCOUNTABILITY. YOU PROBABLY SAW
THAT WITH THE ACCOUNTABILITY
WITH ABILITY IN TO HAVE 3.5 4.
WE'RE ALSO THINKING ABOUT WHAT
MORE WE CAN DO. ONE THING TO
KEEP IN MIND, AS DR CRUCIAL
MENTIONED IS THE CONTEXT AT THE
LOCAL LEVELS ARE VERY DIFFERENT
, SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT MARKET
FORCES AND OTHER DYNAMICS, WHICH
WERE REFERENCED. FOR EXAMPLE,
RESEARCH SHOWS THAT IN
CALIFORNIA THE MEDIAN RENTER IS
PAYING MORE THAN 50% OF THEIR
INCOME TOWARDS RENT. THAT ITSELF
IS KIND OF A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE
DENY IN DANGER, ONE EXPENSE THAT
THEY'RE NOT EXPECTING COULD
THROW THEM INTO HOMELESSNESS. SO
THAT'S WHERE WE REALLY HAVE NEED
TO THINK ABOUT BUILDING HOUSING,
BUT ALSO THE PREVENTION
MECHANISMS IN THOSE UPSTREAM
SYSTEMS TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T
SWAMP THE PROGRESS ON THE
GROUND. UM AND SO AS WE MOVE
FORWARD, I THINK WE NEED TO
THINK ABOUT WHAT OUR LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS DOING WITH THEIR
LOCAL KIND OF AUTHORITIES TO
BUILD AND PERMIT MORE HOUSING,
SO I THINK WE LOOK FORWARD TO
THAT CONVERSATION AS WE THINK
ABOUT HOW THAT BECOMES PART OF
ACCOUNTABILITY AS WELL AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL AROUND, PRODUCING
AND PRESERVING AFFORDABLE
HOUSING FOR FOLKS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ZACH
HOMESTEAD, CHIEF DEPUTY DIRECTOR
AT THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,
APPRECIATE BEING ABLE TO WEIGH
IN ON THE DEPARTMENT'S ROLE, UM,
ADDRESSING HOMELESSNESS IN THE
STATE. THE ADMINISTRATION
BELIEVES THE WORK THAT WE DO IN
HOUSING IS A REALLY CRITI OF OUO
HOMELESSNESS. UM HDS WORK STARTS
WITH MAKING SURE THAT EVERY
LOCAL GOVERNMENT ZONE FOR THEIR
HOUSING NEED. SO THAT THERE ARE
OPPORTUNITIES TO CREATE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. WE'RE
COLLECTIVELY OVER ONE MILLION
UNITS NOW NEED TO BE ZONED FOR
THOSE PURPOSES. AND THEY MUST BE
ZONED TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS
OF OUR EXTREMELY LOW INCOME ARE
LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, WHICH
INCLUDES THOSE WHO ARE HOMELESS,
AND ALL OF THESE PLANS NOW MUST
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHER FAIR
HOUSING, WHICH MEANS THAT IN
ORDER TO BE DEEMED COMPLIANT,
THEY MUST BE ADDRESSING. UM HAVE
CLEAR PLANS TO ADDRESS
DISPARITIES WITHIN THAT
COMMUNITY, JUST SEGREGATION. AND
SO WHILE THE COMMUNITY
COMMITTEES ARE LIKELY FAMILIAR
WITH HOME KEY I DO WANT AND I DO
THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT, UM NEARLY EVERYONE OF HDS
, AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS
ADDRESSES THE NEEDS OF EXTREMELY
LOW INCOME OR HOUSING OR
HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS. IN FACT,
THOSE PROJECTS THAT DO SO ARE
THE ONES THAT ARE THE MOST
COMPETITIVE WITHIN OUR PROGRAMS
BECAUSE WE BUILD THAT INTO THE
SCORING. WE REFLECT THOSE VALUES
TO SERVE AT THE DEEPEST NEED
WITHIN ALL OF THOSE PROGRAMS, SO
IT'S NOT JUST HOME KEY OR NO
PLACE LIKE HOME PROGRAM THAT ARE
PRODUCING UNITS FOR THESE
HOUSEHOLDS FOR HOMELESS
HOUSEHOLDS, BUT IT'S NEARLY
EVERY FEDERAL OR STATE PROGRAM
THE DEPARTMENT OF MINISTERS SO
SINCE 2018 ALONE WE HAVE, UM
AWARDED OVER 13 BILLION IN
INVESTMENTS AND THESE RESOURCES
HAVE RESULTS ARE HAVE ALREADY
RESULTED IN NEARLY 10,000 HOMES
BEING BUILT AND IN SERVICE, UH
OVER 22,000 MORE ARE CURRENTLY
IN CONSTRUCTION AND 24,000 ON
TOP OF THAT ARE IN THE PIPELINE
ALREADY BEEN AWARDED AND WILL BE
COMING ONLINE IN THE COMING
YEARS. SO I WANT TO OFFER A FEW
SPECIFIC EXAMPLES BEYOND HOME
KEY. TO KIND OF ILLUSTRATE THAT
POINT. 47% OF THE UNITS THAT WE
AWARDED FROM THE ACCELERATOR
FUNDS THAT CREATIVE USE OF
MOSTLY FEDERAL FUNDS THAT WE USE
TO ACCELERATE. HOUSING PROJECTS
THAT WERE STUCK 47% OF THOSE
UNITS FUNDED EXTREMELY LOW
INCOME UNITS. AH UM AT OUR 30
30% OR BELOW THE AREA MEDIAN
INCOME JUST FOR 21 22 BUDGET.
YOU'RE ALONE. THE RESOURCES WE
DEPLOYED FROM OUR STATE SHARE OF
THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS
GRANT PROGRAM RE HOUSED NEARLY
14,000 HOUSEHOLDS AND PROVIDED
EMERGENCY SHELTER FOR AN
ADDITIONAL 50,000 PEOPLE. THE
LAST ROUND OF OUR HOUSING FOR A
HEALTHY CALIFORNIA PROGRAM. DID
YOU KNOW A LITTLE MORE MODEST,
BUT OVER 500 PERMIT SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING UNITS ACROSS SEVEN
COUNTIES. EVEN A PROGRAM LIKE
OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES PROGRAM
, WHICH IS NOT ONE THAT PEOPLE
THINK ABOUT ADDRESSING
HOMELESSNESS FUNDS QUITE A BIT
AT THE EXTREMELY LOW INCOME AND
HOMELESS HOUSEHOLD LEVEL. THE
LAST FUNDING ROUND, FOR EXAMPLE
, FUNDED NEARLY 4500 UNITS OVER
1300 OF THOSE FOR EXTREMELY LOW
INCOME HOUSEHOLDS OR 400 UNITS
OF PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
IN THAT PROGRAM. AND OF COURSE,
I MENTIONED THE NO PLACE LIKE
HOME PROGRAM, WHICH WELL
COMPLETE NOW HAS CREATED OVER
17,000 UNITS OF HOUSING OVER
6300 OF WHICH WERE FOR PERSONS
EXPERIENCE WITH CHRONIC MENTAL
ILLNESS AND HOMELESSNESS. BUT I
WANT TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE.
THESE PROGRAMS HOME KEY. ALL OF
THAT. WE'RE DOING ALL THOSE
NUMBERS I GAVE. I WANT TO TALK A
LITTLE MORE RETURN ON INVESTMENT
AND IMPACT IF WE HEAR A LOT
ABOUT THE COST HERE, BUT THESE
INVESTMENTS ARE NOT JUST ONE
TIME THEY'RE MULTIGENERATIONAL.
WE HAVE REGULATORY COVENANTS FOR
ALL OF OUR PROGRAMS THAT REQUIRE
AFFORDABILITY. AFFORDABILITY FOR
55 YEARS. SO THESE ARE NOT ONE
TIME BENEFITS OR ONE TIME
OUTCOMES ON AN AVERAGE TURNOVER
. WE'RE GOING TO SERVE AT LEAST
SEVEN HOUSEHOLDS OVER THE COURSE
OF THAT TIME, RIGHT? SO WE NEED
TO BEGIN THINKING ABOUT IN THAT
TERMS. WE SEE OURSELVES AS
HELPING TO BUILD THAT CAPACITY.
BUILD THAT PORTFOLIO ACROSS THE
STATE THAT HAS BEEN UNDER
INVESTED PERMIT FOR A LONG TIME
UNDER PRODUCED FOR A LONG TIME,
SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT
WE REMEMBER THAT WE'RE GOING TO
SERVE HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF
CALIFORNIANS AND THE NUMBERS? I
JUST I JUST MENTIONED UM, I'LL
TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE HOME KEY.
I DON'T WANT TO BE DUPLICATIVE
CREATED NEARLY 13,000 HOMES
ALREADY. UM. 210 PROJECTS ACROSS
42 COUNTIES. SEVEN TRIBES, UM
AND I WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE
OF THINGS WE CONTINUE. ALSO
FUND, NOT JUST THE ACQUISITION
OR THE CREATION OF THESE UNITS,
BUT THE OPERATIONS OF THESE
PROJECTS AS WELL. SO, UM, IN OUR
LAST ROUND OF FUNDING, WE
INCREASED UP TO AT LEAST THREE
YEARS OF OPERATING SUPPORTS
WITHIN THOSE AWARDS COMPARED TO
THE TWO YEARS THAT WAS AVAILABLE
IN THE FIRST ROUND. AND SO OF
THAT 1.9 BILLION WE DID IN THE
SECOND ROUND. IT BROKE DOWN TO
ABOUT 1.67 BILLION FOR THE
CAPITAL AND ACQUISITION COSTS
AND ABOUT 282 MILLION OF SUPPORT
FOR OPERATING COSTS. UM I WOULD
ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT WE DID
HAVE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THIS
PROGRAM RIGHT BOTH INTERIM AND
PERMANENT HOUSING. BUT IN ROUND
2 60% OF THE AWARDEES CREATED
PERMANENT HOUSING, WHICH IS UP
FROM 39% AND ROUND ONCE WE ARE
DOING THAT BALANCE THAT WAS
SPOKEN TO A LITTLE BIT EARLIER.
UM WE ALSO INCREASED THE PER
UNIT OPERATING DOLLARS FOR
PROJECTS SERVING FOR GETTING AT
THE POINT OF SERVING AT THE
GREATEST NEED FOR THOSE THAT
WERE ADDRESSING PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING CHRONIC
HOMELESSNESS OR FOLKS OR
HOMELESS YOUTH. UM WE ALSO HAD
MANY OF OUR PROJECTS WORRY ABOUT
DO YOU AS FEDERAL PROJECT BASED
VOUCHERS, WHICH DECREASED THE
NEED FOR ADDITIONAL OPERATING
SUPPORT, WHICH IS GREAT. UM NOT
ALL PROJECTS, OF COURSE, CAN CAN
HAVE HAVE THAT WITHIN IT. BUT UM
, THE USE OF FEDERAL, STATE AND
OTHER LOCAL SOURCES, UM, TO
PROVIDE MEDIUM SHORT TERM
OPERATIONS AND COUPLED WITH OUR
OPERATION AWARDS, WE'RE SEEING
AN AVERAGE OPERATING SUPPORT
ABOUT 5 TO 7 YEARS FOR THESE
PROJECTS RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS
WHICH IS PRETTY HEALTHY.
SPECIFIC TO THE GOALS OF SERVING
HOMELESS YOUTH. HD AWARDED ABOUT
156 MILLION FOR 25 PROJECTS.
THAT WAS 40 MILLION ABOVE WHAT
OUR STATUTORY SET ASIDE WAS, UM
, AND THOSE THOSE SUPPORTED THE
CREATION OF 535 UNITS FOR
HOMELESS YOUTH, ALONG WITH A
COUPLE OF MANAGER UNITS WERE
ALSO REALLY PROUD OF OUR WORK
WITH TRIBES. UM, WE HAVE, UH
MADE SEVERAL AWARDS. LIKE I SAID
, 2 TO 7 DIFFERENT TRIBES. WE
WILL DO ANOTHER TRIBAL SPECIFIC
SET ASIDE WITHIN THE REMAINING
FUNDING THAT WE HAVE LEARNED
THIS YEAR. SO UM, WE DO HAVE ONE
MORE ROUND OF FUNDING DUE OUT
VERY SOON. 736 MILLION IS WHAT
WE EXPECT, ALONG WITH A SEPARATE
SET ASIDE FOR TRIBES OF ABOUT 75
MILLION, AND THEN TAKEN TOGETHER
, THESE WORKS OST FUNDING THAT'S
BEEN APPROPRIATED SO FAR. UM
PLEASE, THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS
CONTINUE TO BE WILLING PARTNERS.
UM WE DO HAVE A PUBLIC DASHBOARD
ON OUR WEBSITE OF THE ROUND. TWO
OF FUNDING FOR THOSE THAT ARE
INTERESTED. UH WE'RE STILL
SEEING CERTAINLY THE ACQUISITION
. HOTELS AND MOTELS, OF COURSE,
ARE A POPULAR TYPE. BUT THERE'S
INTERESTING MODULAR HOUSING
ACQUISITION OF EXISTING MULTI
FAMILY HOUSING, OTHER ADAPTIVE
REUSES. UM AND SO I JUST WANTED
TO MENTION THAT NOT JUST HOME
KEY, BUT SOME OF THOSE PROGRAMS
TO PROVIDE THAT SNAPSHOT OF WHAT
THIS DEPARTMENT'S DOING WHAT OUR
ROLE IS KIND OF ADDRESSING THE
ISSUE ON THE SUPPLY SIDE. WE DO
BELIEVE THAT HOMELESSNESS IS A
HOUSING PROBLEM, AND WE'RE PROUD
TO BE A PART OF THAT, UH, YOU
KNOW PART OF THAT SOLUTION AND
INCREASING THAT PORTFOLIO AS WE
ARE SO DESPERATELY NEEDED FOR
EXTREMELY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
AND HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS HAPPY TO
ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. THANKS
THANK YOU. WE'RE GONNA GO TO
QUESTIONS, MISS SANCHEZ. I HAVE
A QUESTION FOR MR OLMSTEAD AS I
SPEAK TO PEOPLE IN L, A SAN
DIEGO OR EVEN PARTS OF MY
DISTRICT, RIVERSIDE AND ORANGE
COUNTY. IT'S VERY HARD TO
BELIEVE THAT THESE METRICS ARE
WORKING. UH, WHAT WOULD YOU OR
HOW OUR WAYS HOW ARE WE ABLE TO
MEASURE THE SUCCESS OF THESE
PROGRAMS SPECIFICALLY PROJECT
HOME KEY PRODUCTION PROGRAMS?
IT'S QUITE SIMPLE, RIGHT. IT'S
THE IT'S THE ACTUAL CREATION OF
THOSE UNITS AND PEOPLE LIVING IN
THOSE UNITS. WE HAD THE FIRST
ROUND REPORTS THE LEGISLATURE
SAYING HOW MANY YOU KNOW 6000
UNITS ABOUT YOU KNOW, OVER 8000
FOLKS LIVING IN THOSE UNITS, UM,
ON AVERAGE, RIGHT? YOU'RE GOING
TO SEE AT LEAST 123 PEOPLE IN
EACH OF THESE UNITS. YOU CAN DO
A LITTLE BIT OF ROUGH MATH OF
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN
THOSE UNITS, SO IT'S PRETTY
SIMPLE. IT'S A LITTLE SIMPLER,
MAYBE ON THE HOUSING SIDE THAN
IT IS FOR ME FROM THE SERVICES
SIDE BECAUSE WE FUND THE
CREATION OF UNITS, WILL THERE BE
ACQUISITION OR CONSTRUCTION? UM
AND YOU KNOW, WE BUILD THOSE
UNITS RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S A WAY
TO KIND OF MEASURE THE OUTCOMES.
THEY'RE THEY'RE THEY'RE THEY'RE
FAIRLY CLEAR. CERTAINLY WE WANT
TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE AS LOW
VACANZE REACHES POPS POSSIBLE IN
THOSE UNITS. THAT'S ALSO A PART
OF OUR ACCOUNTABILITY WORK. ALL
THESE ARE PUBLIC FUNDS. WE SEE
OUR ACCOUNTABILITY WORK, NOT
JUST WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT
ZONING FOR HOUSING AND BUILDING
HOUSING. BUT IN OUR DEPLOYMENT
OF THESE FUNDS THAT THOSE THAT
THERE WERE GETTING THE OUTCOMES
THAT ARE EXPECTED WHEN WE MAKE
THOSE AWARDS, RIGHT, THE NUMBER
OF UNITS CREATED THE YOU KNOW,
FOLKS LIVING IN THOSE UNITS.
QUICK FOLLOW UP. I'M GLAD YOU
BROUGHT UP PUBLIC FUNDS AND
ACCOUNTABILITY. WOULD YOU AGREE
TO OPENING YOUR BOOKS AND
COMPLYING WITH THE PERFORMANCE
AUDIT BY THE STATE AUDITOR TO
MAKE SURE THAT THOSE METRICS ARE
ACCURATE AND NOT JUST A
FINANCIAL AUDIT, BUT ONE TO
EXAMINE OUTCOMES PERFORMANCE AS
YOU MENTIONED IN ACHIEVEMENTS AS
WELL? WELL I THINK, CERTAINLY
THINKING WHATEVER IT WHATEVER
THE STATE AUDITOR REACHES OUT TO
US, WE ALWAYS COMPLY WITH THOSE
WITH THOSE REQUESTS. UM WE'RE
ENGAGED IN. THEY HAVE ENGAGED US
QUITE A BIT IN THE LAST COUPLE
OF YEARS ON A LOT OF OUR FEDERAL
FUNDS AND THE LIKE, SO CERTAINLY
WHATEVER IS REACHED OUT TO WE
ARE ALWAYS IN, YOU KNOW, SEEK TO
NOT ONLY COMPLY WITH OUR
PARTNERS BUT IMPLEMENT THE FUNDS
THAT ARE GIVEN TO US BY THE
STATE LEGISLATURE. THROUGH THAT
BUDGET PROCESS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, MR FONG. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR. IF I COULD ASK UM. THE
DEPUTY SECRETARY OF HOMELESSNESS
, THE C I. C H GOVERNOR FROZE,
UH, A BILLION DOLLARS IN HAVE
FUNDING IN NOVEMBER AND THEN
RELEASE THE FUNDS LATER AND, UH
AND I BELIEVE HE, THE GOVERNOR
ISSUED A STATEMENT THAT HE
WANTED TO SEE MORE RESULTS
FASTER. UM, AND THAT THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA WASN'T MEETING THE
MOMENT. HAD UM AND I WAS
WONDERING IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY
TO US LIKE WHAT? HOW HE DEFINES
OR HOW WE SHOULD BE DEFINING
SUCCESS. WHAT ARE THE RESULTS
HE'S LOOKING FOR. UM MAYBE YOU
CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON THAT. I
THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE
DOING IS AS WE'RE DOING HAVE
FULL REVIEW, WHICH IS UNDERWAY
RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE
AGAIN. THESE ARE METRICS THAT
WERE THERE BEFORE, BUT REALLY
MAKING TO ASSURE THAT PEOPLE ARE
REALLY LOOKING AT UNSHELTERED
HOMELESS NERS. HOW MANY PEOPLE
THERE REACHING, I SHOULDN'T
MENTION THERE ARE ALSO RACIAL
EQUITY GOALS CONNECTED TO THESE
METRICS BECAUSE WE THINK THAT'S
IMPORTANT BECAUSE WE HEARD ABOUT
THE OVERREPRESENTATION OF
VARIOUS GROUPS. SO LOOKING AT
ALL OF THOSE METRICS THAT ARE
CONNECTED TO THE MAIN METRICS
AROUND RACIAL EQUITY GOALS, AND
SO WE CONTINUE TO WORK WITH ALL
THE JURISDICTIONS AS WAS
MENTIONED. THERE ARE 114
ELIGIBLE JURISDICTIONS, SO
THAT'S 44 CONTINUUM OF CARE
ENTITIES. VISA ENTITIES CREATED
BY HEARD THAT RECEIVE FEDERAL
FUNDS. 58 COUNTIES AND THE 14
BIG CITIES, RIGHT? BUT EVEN
THOUGH THERE ARE 100 AND 14
ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS BECAUSE
PEOPLE HAVE CHOSEN TO COME IN
JOINTLY, WHICH IS A GOOD THING,
RIGHT, THERE'S REGIONAL
COLLABORATION THAT ALSO, I THINK
IT'S A MEASURE OF SUCCESS. WE
ONLY GOT 75 APPLICATIONS BECAUSE
SO MANY JURISDICTIONS CAME IN
JOINTLY. SO I THINK THERE ARE
VARIOUS WAYS WHERE WE ARE
MEASURING SUCCESS AROUND
REGIONAL COLLABORATION LOOKING
AT HOW THEY'RE BRAIDING FUNDS
LOOKING AT THE WAY RACIAL EQUITY
GOALS ARE WOVEN THROUGHOUT THE
VARIOUS METRICS THAT I MENTIONED
EARLIER AND ALSO THINKING ABOUT
SYSTEMICALLY HOW THEY ARE
BUILDING SYSTEMS TO PREVENT AND
END HOMELESSNESS. EVERY
JURISDICTION IS DIFFERENT. AND I
THINK WE AS DR KUSHELL MENTIONED
12. BE INTENTIONAL ABOUT HOW WE
APPROACH THIS WITHOUT BEING LIKE
A BLUNT INSTRUMENT, BUT REALLY
LOOKING TO SEE THAT IT'S MAKING
SENSE ON THE GROUND. SURE SO LET
ME DELVE A LITTLE DEEPER. GAVE
ME A VERY LONG ANSWER. UH HAD TO
BE SHOT THE NEXT DAY. THAT'S
OKAY. I MEAN, I APPRECIATE THE
DETAIL, THOUGH. I THINK I WANT
TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE
SPECIFIC. SO IF I'M READING FROM
FROM THE GOVERNOR'S PRESS
RELEASE ON NOVEMBER, 3RD WHICH
RIGHTS COLLECTIVELY, THE PLANS
SUBMITTED THE PLANS, AS
SUBMITTED, WOULD REDUCE STREET
HOMELESSNESS STATEWIDE BY JUST
2% AND HE THROWS THOSE DOLLARS
THAT THE BILLION DOLLARS BECAUSE
2% WASN'T ACCEPTABLE. SO ARE YOU
SAYING THAT THE GOAL IS MORE
THAN 2% OR HOW FAR WHAT RESULT
DO YOU WANT TO SEE? DO YOU WANT
TO SEE A REDUCTION IN
HOMELESSNESS, ASSUMING IT'S
EITHER THE POINT IN TIME COUNT
OR THE H M I S NUMBERS. IS IT 5%
REDUCTION? IS IT A 10%
REDUCTION? LIKE WHAT NUMBER ARE
WE LOOKING AT? AS YOU AS, UM, IN
CHARGE OF OVERSEEING THESE AND
REVIEWING THESE H THESE H H AB.
FUNDS. WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR?
WELL AGAIN, I THINK 2% NO. THE
GOVERNOR DIDN'T THINK 2% WAS
ENOUGH WHICH I AGREE WITH HIM ON
THAT ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES MIGHT
BE SURPRISED THAT I WOULD AGREE
WITH THE GOVERNOR ON THAT ONE.
BUT YES, I THINK THAT'S WHY IN
THE HELPFUL REVIEW PROCESS. I
THINK THE HOPE IS WHEN WE LOOK
AT THE AGGREGATED NUMBERS AROUND
THAT MEASURE THAT IT WILL BE
BETTER THAN THAT, BUT I WANT TO
AGAIN STRESS THAT THAT IS ONE OF
MULTIPLE METRICS AS YOU HEARD
FROM DR KUSHELL. WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE TAKING AS
COMPREHENSIVE VIEW AS POSSIBLE
ABOUT THIS BECAUSE IN THE END,
THESE ARE PEOPLE WHO NEED
DIFFERENT TYPES OF CUSTOMIZED
SERVICES. SO I THINK AS YOU
HEARD FROM THE GOVERNOR. 2% WAS
NOT ENOUGH AND WE WILL SEE IN
THE HELPFUL REVIEW PROCESS HOW
PEOPLE COME IN ON THAT MEASURE,
AS WELL AS THE OTHER MEASURES.
SOME MORE THAN 2. BUT DON'T KNOW
MORE THAN THAT. I THINK THAT WE
WILL HAVE TO SEE BECAUSE I DON'T
WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE
LOCALS BECAUSE WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE EACH
JURISDICTION RECEIVED TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE BECAUSE AND I KNOW
YOU WANTED ME TO SHARE. BUT I
THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT. THAT'S
IMPORTANT BECAUSE EARLIER THERE
WAS A DISCUSSION AROUND. SHOULD
WE JUST DO SHELTER? SHOULD WE
JUST DO PERMANENT THE
UNFORTUNATE PIECES? WE HAVE TO
DO ALL OF THEM? DEPENDING ON THE
MONEY WE HAVE AND THE RESOURCES
WE HAVE. SO THIS IS WHY SOME OF
THE CALCULATION WILL BE FROM THE
JURISDICTION SIDE IS HOW MUCH
SHELTER BEDS SHOULD I INVEST IN
VERSUS HOW MUCH PERMANENT
HOUSING SHOULD I INVEST IN
VERSUS HOW MUCH PREVENTION
SHOULD I INVEST IN SO SOME
JURISDICTIONS MAY HAVE FEWER
FOLKS ON THE STREET THAN OTHERS
HAVE? A LOWER AMOUNT THAT THEY
HAVE TO WORK TOWARDS THAN OTHERS
. SO THIS IS WHY IT'S NOT A ONE
SIZE FITS ALL. NOR SHOULD IT BE.
IT WOULD NOT BE A GOOD PROGRAM
TO DR CHO. SHELLS POINT IF IT
WAS A ONE SIZE FITS ALL. I
AGREE. THERE IS NOT ONE SIZE
FITS ALL. WHAT? WHAT WHAT IS
DONE IN CURRENT COUNTY AND
HILLARY COUNTY IS DIFFERENT FROM
RIVERSIDE WAS DIFFERENT FROM L.
A I'M JUST TRYING TO GRAPPLE
WITH AS THE BUDGET COMMITTEE
THAT AS YOU REVIEW THESE
PROPOSALS FROM THESE LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS AND THE C O. C S.
ARE YOU PROVIDE? I GUESS I'M
JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND LIKE
THERE HAS TO BE SOME LIKE
RESULT, SOME ACCOUNTABILITY
MEASURE THAT YOU THAT YOU'RE
JUDGING THESE THESE THESE
PROPOSALS UNDER TO RELEASE THE
FUNDS AND I GUESS FROM FROM OUR
PERSPECTIVE, AND I THINK YOU'VE
HEARD THIS FROM SOME OF OUR
COLLEAGUES IS THAT IF WE DON'T
UNDERSTAND WHAT THE WHAT THE
METRICS ARE AND HOW DO YOU
EXPECT US TO ALLOCATE A BILLION
DOLLARS OR OR 1.5 BILLION OR
FIVE BILLION? THESE ARE
SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF MONEY.
THERE ARE METRICS AS I MET, I'LL
SAY THEM AGAIN. SO THE IT'S A
BILLION OVER FIVE YEARS, RIGHT?
WHICH IS WHY, AS MS MORALES
MENTIONED, PEOPLE ARE ALSO
TRYING TO BUDGET FOR A FIVE YEAR
PERIOD. AND THEY'RE TRYING TO
BUDGET FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF
POPULATIONS BECAUSE SOME OF
WHAT'S IN THE APPLICATION, WHICH
WE ASK FOR IS IN THERE.
APPLICATION THAT YOU TALK ABOUT
THE DEMOGRAPHICS THAT THEY'RE
REACHING YOUTH SENIORS, FAMILIES
WITH CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF
18 SINGLE ADULTS, SO THEY NEED
TO HAVE KIND OF A COMPREHENSIVE
VIEW OF THE DEMOGRAPHICS.
THEY'RE TRYING TO SERVE. NUMBER
ONE. THE OTHER METRICS LIKE I
MENTIONED THERE ARE SIX SYSTEM
PERFORMANCE METRICS, WHICH TRACK
WITH THE HUD METRICS AROUND. HOW
MANY PEOPLE ARE YOU SERVING
EVERY YEAR THROUGH H M. I S WHAT
IS THE POINT IN TIME COUNT AND
HOW DO YOU WANT TO BEND THAT
CURVE RIGHT TO HOW MANY PEOPLE
ARE NEWLY HOMELESS THAT YOU
HAVEN'T SEEN IN A CHAIR? MAYA'S
OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS. YOU'RE
TRACKING THAT HOW MANY PEOPLE
ARE RETURNING? HOW MANY PEOPLE
WENT FROM THE STREETS TO SHELTER
OR FROM THE STREETS TO HOUSING?
SO THOSE ARE METRICS THAT ALL
ALREADY BUILT IN AS
ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES LIKE ANY
GRANT, RIGHT WHICH YOU'RE
MEASURING THEM. BASED ON A
BASELINE FROM H D. I S SO THOSE
ARE METRICS THAT ARE ALREADY
BUILT IN, UM THAT THIS IS THAT'S
PART OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY. THE
OTHER ACCOUNTABILITY, I THINK,
AS YOU HEARD UM, MR HOMESTEAD
MENTIONING IS WE'RE TRYING TO
THINK ABOUT ARE THERE OTHER WAYS
BECAUSE YOU HEARD SOME OF THIS
AROUND IF YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
HOUSING? WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO
PLAY SOMEBODY WHO'S MAKING 900 A
MONTH OR IF YOU'RE A MOTHER ON
CALLE WORKS SINGLE MOTHER WOULD
TEACH TO KIDS MAKING 500 A MONTH
. YOU KNOW? WHERE ARE YOU GOING
TO GO WITH THAT SO SERVICE
PROVIDER CAN WRAPPED WHOLE
AMOUNT OF SERVICES AROUND
SOMEBODY, BUT YOU CAN'T FIND A
UNIT OR EVEN A SHARED UNIT. SO
SOME OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY
THAT'S COMING IN THE NEXT ROUND
POTENTIALLY WILL BE ARE LOOKING
TO SEE HOW JURISDICTIONS ARE
REALLY PLANNING TOWARDS THAT TO
INCREASE THE HOUSING PLACEMENT
PIECE, BUT JUST WANTED TO STRESS
THAT ACCOUNTABILITY IS ALREADY
BUILT IN IN THREE AND FOUR
AROUND THESE MULTIPLE METRICS.
SO IN ALL THESE METRICS, AND I
MEAN, WHAT ARE OVER THEN HOW DO
YOU DEFINE SO USUALLY WE WANT TO
DO YOU WANT TO KNOW HOW MANY ARE
NEWLY HOMELESS? IS THERE A
NUMBER THERE THAT YOU'RE
EXPECTING? I MEAN, LOOK. I AM.
YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA CONTINUE TO
READ FROM FROM THE PRESS RELEASE
THAT THE GOVERNOR SENT AND SAID.
CALIFORNIA IS THE MAN
ACCOUNTABILITY RESULTS NOT
SELLING FOR THE STATUS QUO AS A
STATE. WE ARE FAILING TO MEET
THE URGENCY OF THIS MOMENT.
COLLECTIVELY THESE PLANS SET A
GOAL TO REDUCE STREET
HOMELESSNESS 2% STATEWIDE BY
2024. AT THIS PACE, IT WOULD
TAKE DECADES TO SIGNIFICANTLY
CURB HOMELESSNESS IN CALIFORNIA
. THIS APPROACH IS SIMPLY
UNACCEPTABLE. SO I GUESS LOOKING
AT JUST THE STREET HOMELESSNESS
PIECE. AND A 2% REDUCTION IS DO
YOU HAVE A NUMBER IN MIND OF
WHAT THE CITY IS IN COUNTY
SHOULD DO TO REDUCE STREET
HOMELESSNESS, FOR EXAMPLE, I
MEAN, I THINK THAT AS YOU HEARD
FROM THE PREVIOUS, IF I JUST BE
HONEST IF I HAD THE ANSEL ER
MAGIC BULLET, I DON'T THINK I
WOULD BE HERE. I WILL PROVIDE DO
SOMETHING ELSE. BUT I WHAT I
WILL SAY IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE
AIR HARD, THE 2022 POINT IN TIME
COUNT CALIFORNIA'S STREET
HOMELESSNESS INCREASED AT A RATE
THAT WAS HALF OF THE NATIONALS
RATE. SO I THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY
A TESTAMENT TO THE LEGISLATURE
AND THE INVESTMENT MADE AND SO
JUST AS YOU SAW FROM THE
LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT, THE REACH
THAT THE INVESTMENTS ARE HAVING
IN THE COMMUNITY. I THINK WE
SHOULD ALL KIND OF, YOU KNOW
KUDOS TO THE LEGISLATURE FOR THE
INVESTMENTS BECAUSE IT'S AMAZING
TO ME, WHICH NOBODY'S TALKING
ABOUT THAT THE RATE OF INCREASE
IN CALIFORNIA WAS HALF OF THE
NATIONAL RATE OF INCREASE AROUND
UNSHELTERED HOMELESSNESS. IT'S
STILL A HUGE NUMBER AS DR
CRUCIAL MENTION, BUT IT'S GONNA
TAKE US SOME TIME TO REALLY BE
CONSISTENT AROUND OUR
PROGRAMMING. AND I INVESTMENT
AND REALLY THINK ABOUT HOW WE
CAN CUSTOMIZE INVESTMENTS ON THE
GROUND. I WOULD JUST SAY LIKE WE
WERE PARTNERS WITH YOU IN THIS
AND SO AS AS YOU IDENTIFY YOUR
METRICS, WHICH IS HOW MANY
INDIVIDUALS ARE SERVING HOW MANY
ARE NEWLY HOMELESS? UH STREET
STREET HOMELESSNESS IN IN THE
HOUSING GOALS, RIGHT? I DON'T
DISPUTE ANY OF THOSE GOALS. AND
THOSE METRICS I'M JUST TRYING TO
UNDERSTAND IN IN THE FIVE YEARS
THAT YOU HAVE FOR THIS BILLION
DOLLARS TO BE ALLOCATED WHAT?
WE'RE LOOKING MILESTONE YEAR
OVER YEAR AND IF WE'RE NOT
MEETING THOSE GOALS THAT SAY
NEXT YEAR OR THE YEAR AFTER
THAT, THE YEAR AFTER THAT, AND
WHAT WHAT TRIGGERS ARE IN PLACE
AND TO REEVALUATE THE STRATEGIES
RIGHT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE
TRYING TO ACHIEVE. AS AS THE
CHAIR SAYS. WE ARE LOOKING FOR
OUTCOMES AND RESULTS. ACTUALLY
THAT'S A GOOD POINT, BECAUSE
REMEMBER, HALF IS JUST ONE PIECE
OF THE PUZZLE HAVE IS FLEXIBLE
FUNDS ONE TIME FUNDS OF FIVE
YEARS THAT CAN BE USED IN
FLEXIBLE WAYS. SO FOR EXAMPLE,
WHERE JURISDICTION CAN HAVE A
HOME KEY SITE, WHICH IS CAPITAL
, BUT THEY NEED THE OPERATING
AND SERVICES SUBSIDY CAN BE USED
IN CONJUNCTION WITH HOME KEY. TO
PROVIDE THE OPERATING SUBSIDY. I
GUESS THE CHARIOT GAVE ME A VERY
GOOD QUESTION. I'LL ASK HIM FOR,
UH, IN IN IS ARE YOU USING THE
SAME METRICS ACROSS ALL THESE
ALL THESE PROGRAMS WILL. THERE
ARE DIFFERENT METRICS FOR
CAPITAL RIGHT, WHICH ZACH
MENTIONED BECAUSE YOU WANT TO
BUILD THE UNIT. BUT THEN YOU
HAVE DIFFERENT METRICS FOR HELP,
WHICH THEY ARE TRYING TO SERVE
PEOPLE AND YOU'RE TRYING TO SIT
FILL GAPS. SO I THINK I SAID
THAT BECAUSE HALF CANNOT BE
CONSIDERED ALONE. IT HAS TO BE
CONSIDERED AROUND THE BREATH OF
PROGRAMS THAT SERVE A PERSON AND
I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET
THE DATA AND MAYBE THAT'S THE
CONVERSATION WE HAD EARLIER IN
THE FIRST PANEL IS THE DATA THAT
WE COMPARING APPLES TO APPLES OR
APPLES TO ORANGES. AND SO HOW
ARE WE? I MEAN THAT SAME
QUESTION I WOULD APPLY TO THE
HOME KEY AND TO THE BEHAVIORAL
HEALTH PROGRAMS AND EVERYTHING
ELSE IS THAT WE HAVE TO FIGURE
OUT WHAT SUCCESSES AND OF COURSE
YOU GUYS ARE IMPLEMENTING THE
PROGRAM. YOU'RE TELLING US
WHETHER THESE PROGRAMS ARE
SUCCESSFUL OR NOT. AND OF
COURSE, WE HAVE OUR OWN OPINIONS
TO OF WHAT SUCCESS IS, BUT WE NO
ONE SHOULD EXPECT THE
LEGISLATURE TO CONTINUE TO
INVEST BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IF A
PROGRAM ISN'T WORKING. AND WHAT
I GUESS MY FEAR IS THAT I DON'T
HEAR A LOT OF TIMES SOME HONEST
ASSESSMENT OF LIKE, HEY, IT'S
NOT WORKING. AND WHO IS GOING TO
TELL US WHETHER IT'S NOT WORKING
OR WORKING, AND THIS IS WHY THIS
THERE'S ALWAYS PUSH PULL OF
WHETHER THAT WE WANT AN OUTSIDE
AUDIT OR WHATEVER, BECAUSE WE
NEED AN HONEST ASSESSMENT. I
THINK ON BOTH SIDES, BOTH FROM
THE LEGISLATURE AND FROM THE
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO FIGURE OUT
BECAUSE THIS PROBLEM IS GETTING
MORE INTENSE. IT'S GETTING
BIGGER. THE NUMBERS AND WHETHER
IT'S POINT IN TIME COUNT OR OR
TO MY S, LIKE THE NUMBERS ARE
NOT MOVING IN THE DIRECTION AND
SO THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET
OUT OF HERE. I UNDERSTAND WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING. SO LET ME SAY A
FEW THINGS, I THINK, AS DR
KUSHELL MENTIONED RESEARCH AND
DATA SHOWS, AND THIS GOES BACK
TO LIKE THE EARLY TWO THOUSANDS
SHOULD JUST TO RESEARCH FOR SOME
OF THAT RESEARCH. COST BENEFIT
ANALYSIS WAS DONE IN LIKE 4 4005
. AND THAT'S HOW SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING EMERGED BECAUSE IT IS
ACTUALLY CHEAPER TO BUILD
HOUSING THAT'S AFFORDABLE AS MR
UM, STILL SIT FOR 55 YEARS SO
THAT THAT UNIT IS STAYING
AFFORDABLE FOR 55 YEARS, AND
LIKE THE PLACES WHERE YOU AND I
LIVE, RIGHT AND THEN, WITH THE
SERVICES ATTACHED, IT'S ACTUALLY
CHEAPER FOR THE TAXPAYER, BETTER
OUTCOMES FOR THE PERSON TO
INVEST GOVERNMENT MONEY THERE
VERSUS KEEPING THE PERSON ON THE
STREET RIGHT. SO THAT IS
RESEARCH THAT HAS BEEN
UNDISPUTED SINCE 2004. SO I
THINK YOU ARE ASKED. IS THIS A
GOOD INVESTMENT? I WOULD SAY YES
, BECAUSE YOU ARE ACTUALLY
GETTING BETTER OUTCOMES FOR THE
PERSON. IT IS A BETTER USE OF
PUBLIC FUNDS TO INVEST IN
PERMANENT HOUSING WITH SERVICES
VERSUS DOING THE ALTERNATIVE.
AND I CERTAINLY DON'T DISPUTE
THE NEED FOR PERMANENT HOUSING.
I DON'T DISPUTE INDEED FOR MORE
MENTAL HEALTH ACCESS. TO KIND OF
CHANNEL WHAT ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
MCCARTHY WAS SAYING IS THAT THIS
IS NOT SUSTAINABLE. AND SO THE
AND THEN THAT'S A CHALLENGE IS
THAT YOU? NOT ONLY DO YOU HAVE
TO THREAD KIND OF THE METRICS
AND THE DATA, BUT THEN YOU ALSO
HAVE THE THREAD SUSTAINABILITY
AND IF THE PROBLEM CONTINUES TO
GROW WORSE, ESPECIALLY IN THE
MOST VULNERABLE POPULATIONS IS A
SYMBOL OF OTTO HAS HIGHLIGHTED
RIGHT. WE ARE IN THIS THIS THIS
VICIOUS CIRCLE OF HAVING TO
CONSTANTLY PUT MORE RESOURCES
AND PROBLEM THAT CONTINUES TO
GROW WORSE AND IT'S A RURAL
REPEATED, YOU KNOW, HEARING
WE'RE GONNA HAVE BACK AND FORTH
TO SAY, WELL, WE'RE B. WE'RE
BUILDING ALL THESE THINGS AND
WE'RE GETTING AND WE'RE THESE
ARE THE QUOTE UNQUOTE METRICS,
BUT MAYBE WE'RE NOT MEASURING
THE RIGHT THING. OH I THINK PART
OF IT IS WE'VE BEEN INVESTING
FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS. WE
SHOULD HAVE BEEN INVESTING FOR
30 YEARS. RIGHT SO IF YOU'RE
PLANTING AN OLIVE GROVE, AND
YOU'RE STARTING THE SEEDLINGS
NOW YOU'RE GONNA TAKE SOME TIME
FOR THE INVESTMENT BECAUSE YOU
CAN'T JUST UPROOT LIKE IT'S NOT
GROWING FAST ENOUGH. SO I THINK
SOME OF THIS IS WHERE THE
BEGINNING OF THE INVESTMENT
PERIOD SOME OF THE HOME KEY
SITES ARE GOING TO COME ON BOARD
IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, AND I
THINK THE HALF DOLLARS ARE ALSO
REAPING BENEFITS ON THE GROUND
AROUND. YOU'RE SEEING THE RICH,
SO I THINK SOME OF THIS IS AS DR
KUSHELL ENDED HEADING OUT SOME
GRACE. I THINK SOME OF THIS IS
ABOUT JUST STAYING THE COURSE
YOU KNOW, BUT BUT AS YOU
MENTIONED THERE, THERE HAS TO BE
A BENDING OF THE CURVE. TRUE AND
I THINK WE ARE AND I MEAN, I
DON'T KNOW WHERE WE ARE, BUT I
DON'T SEE THE CURVED BENDING
I'LL GO BACK TO SOMETHING, SHE
SAID IN THE EMERGENCY ROOM,
WHICH SOME OF YOU AND I HAVE
BEEN THERE IF I THERE WERE 100
PEOPLE THERE LAST MONTH WHEN I
WENT, AND NEXT MONTH THEY WHEN
THERE'S 100 PEOPLE THERE. I
DON'T SHAKE MY FIST AT THE
EMERGENCY ROOM DOCTORS AND SAY,
THESE PEOPLE OBVIOUSLY DOING
SOMETHING WRONG. THERE ARE
ALWAYS PEOPLE IN THE EMERGENCY
ROOM OR THE EMERGENCY ROOM IS
SERVING THE FUNCTION OF THE
EMERGENCY. BUT WE HAVE TO DO
BETTER, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT
ASSEMBLY BOND I WAS SAYING ABOUT
GOING UPSTREAM TO THE EDUCATION
SYSTEM THAT MAINSTREAM HOUSING
SYSTEM. TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM
COMING TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM. I
SAY THAT BECAUSE THE INVESTMENT
IN HALF AT HOME KEY MAKES SENSE
BECAUSE YOU ARE MAKING SURE THAT
PEOPLE WHO FALL INTO
HOMELESSNESS ARE BEING SERVED
APPROPRIATELY DOESN'T MEAN THAT
IF THERE ARE MORE PEOPLE, AND
HOPEFULLY THERE ARE LESS PEOPLE
THAN LAST YEAR THAT IT'S A
FAILURE. IT'S JUST MEANS THOSE
OTHER SYSTEMS NEED TO SOMEHOW BE
HELD EARLIER, RIGHT? IT'S THE
IT'S THE OTHER SYSTEMS THAT WE
NEED TO BE ADDRESSING. I'M NOT.
I MEAN, I CERTAINLY THINK THAT
WE SHOULD BE RELEASING THE FUNDS
TO OUR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. THEY
ARE DEALING WITH HOMELESSNESS
CRISIS THAT'S CONTINUED TO
INTENSIFY. THE QUESTION I HAVE
IS THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO FIX
THE BROKEN SYSTEMS, AND WE HAVE
TO BE ABLE TO MEASURE IT AND IF
WE ARE GOING TO MEASURE IT,
MEASURE IT CORRECTLY, CORRECT IF
WE'RE GOING TO DEFINE SUCCESS,
OF COURSE THAN SUCCESSES, EITHER
NUMBER OF PEOPLE HOUSE A
REDUCTION IN THE STREET
HOMELESSNESS. THE THOSE ARE THE
METRICS I WOULD HOPE TO HEAR
WOULD BE THE KEY ONES ARE
DEFINITELY THE KEY ONES FOR THE
HOMELESS SYSTEM, BUT I THINK IF
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THE UPSTREAM
SYSTEMS, THAT'S WHY THAT'S A
DIFFERENT WHICH WE DON'T CONTROL
, RIGHT? SO YOU'D HAVE TO THINK
ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE. THERE I
WILL SAY, WHICH IS NOT PART OF
THIS THAT THIS IS WHERE THE
INTERAGENCY COUNCIL THE STATE
COUNCIL IS IMPORTANT WITH THE
STATE ACTION PLAN, WHICH
INCLUDES 18 STATE MEMBER
DEPARTMENTS, BECAUSE THAT'S
WHERE WE CAN REALLY THINK ABOUT
THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM AND THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, WHICH
IS AGAIN. NOT THE HOMELESS
SYSTEM THAT WE ARE MEASURING,
BUT WE ARE MEASURING OUTCOMES IN
THE HOMELESS SYSTEM THAT NEEDS
TO BE A CONNECT OVER THERE, TOO.
YEAH THE FLOW AND I DON'T
BELIEVE IT. I WON'T BELABOR THE
POINT, BUT WE'RE HAVING A BUDGET
HEARING ON HOMELESSNESS PROGRAM
THAT THAT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING
TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF METRICS
ON THAT RIGHT ON THE HOMELESS
SYSTEM, WHICH WE ARE COLLECTING
. I APPRECIATE YOUR CANDOR. AH
I'M GOING TO MR MCCARTHY AND MR
BENEFIT BEFORE WE GET. I DON'T
WANT TO LEAVE MR FUNK'S POINT,
SO I GET THE PROGRAMS ARE
DIFFERENT. BUT AGAIN THE GOAL.
THE GOAL IS THE SAME IS TO GET
PEOPLE HOUSE, SO I THINK I WANT
TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE'RE
LOOKING AT THE METRICS THAT EVEN
THOUGH WE HAVE DIFFERENT
PROGRAMS THAT WERE ULTIMATELY
STAYING FOCUSED ON WHAT THE
ULTIMATE GOAL IS RIGHT, BECAUSE
THE CHALLENGES THAT YOU COULD
HAVE A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM, BUT
IF THEY'RE FALLING THROUGH THE
GAPS THEN IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT,
YOU KNOW, IF STEP ONE IS
SUCCESSFUL, BUT WE DIDN'T DO
STEP TWO AND SOMEHOW STEP THREE
SUCCESSFUL. THE FACT THAT PEOPLE
CAN'T GET FROM STEP ONE TO STEP
THREE IS A PROBLEM, SO I THINK
THAT'S WHERE WERE WE'RE
STRUGGLING. UM I THINK THE OTHER
THING THAT I'LL ASK LATER AS
AGAIN. UH, WE KNOW THE MONEY HAS
BEEN APPROPRIATED BY HOW MUCH
HAS ACTUALLY BEEN GIVE IT OUT,
WRITES A WHOLE NOTHER THING
BETWEEN THE MONEY'S IN THE
AGENCIES. THAT MONEY HAS BEEN
APPROPRIATED BUDGET, BUT WE KNOW
THAT IT HASN'T HIT, YOU KNOW,
HAS A HIT. SAN FRANCISCO HAS
IT'D BAKERSFIELD HASN'T HIT THE
PLACES WHERE IT NEEDS TO HELP,
SO I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT
I WILL ASK LATER, BUT I'M GOING
TO GO TO MR MCCARTY. MR BENNETT,
MR AS QUICKLY AS YOU CAN HEAR.
DOES THE ADMINISTRATION VIEW THE
HOUSING CREATED BY THE HOME KEY
PROGRAM AS SHELTER HOUSING OR AS
UH OR AS. YOU KNOW, MORE
PERMANENT, FLEXIBLE TOPOLOGY
THAT ALLOWS FOR BOTH INTEREST.
IT'S A IT'S FLEXIBLE THAT ALLOWS
FOR BOTH INTERIM AND PERMANENT
AND IN SOME CASES, INTERIM
HOUSING THAT WILL BE CONVERTED
TO PERMANENT HOUSING LATER THE
LAST ROUND. IT'S 60% OF THE
PROJECTS WERE PERMANENT HOUSING
, WITH THE REMAINDER BEING
INTERIM OR INTERIM PERMANENT. SO
A LOT OF IT'S ABOUT MEETING THE
COMMUNITY WHERE THEIR NEEDS ARE
RIGHT. WE HAD SEEN IN THIS
ESPECIALLY IN THE FIRST ROUND OF
HOME BECAUSE MR MCCARTHY'S
GRACIOUSLY GIVING ME SOME TIME
HERE. UM BUT SO INTERIM HOUSING
WOULD BE COUNTED AS HOUSING AND
NOT AS SHELTER HOUSING. IT'S NOT
PERMANENT HOUSING. PEOPLE DO NOT
HAVE LEASES THERE. IT WOULD BE A
FORM OF SHELTER. SECOND QUESTION
IS, WE ARE WE'VE BEEN
SUBSIDIZING THE PURCHASES OF
THESE MOTELS, ETCETERA FOR THE
HOME KEY PROGRAM. ARE THEY AREAS
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE? UM AND WHAT WE
HAVE PRETTY ATTRACTIVE PRICES
UNIT PRICING THERE FOR THE HOME
KEY PROJECTS 175,200. AND 50,000
. YOU KNOW ROUGHLY. WHAT ABOUT
THE ONGOING COST? HAVE THEY BEEN
REASONABLE? HAVE THEY BEEN $300
A NIGHT PER PERSON? $100 A NIGHT
PER PERSON OF THEY'VE BEEN MUCH
LESS THAN THAT. WELL IN
PERMANENT HOUSING. YOU DON'T DO
A CAPITATED RATE LIKE THAT. IT'S
JUST WHAT THE COST IS TO OPERATE
AND MAINTAIN THE BUILDING. AS I
MENTIONED, WE DO PROVIDE
OPERATING SUPPORT IN THEIR HOME
KEY AS WELL. WE ASSIST WITH THE
ACQUISITION AS YOU NOTED, AND IT
IS THE LOCALITIES WHO ARE THE
OWNERS, OR THEY SEEK TO WORK
WITH PARTNERS TO BE THE OWNERS.
IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY THAT
OPERATING, BUT WE DO HAVE
PROVIDED UP TO THREE YEARS OF
OPERATING SUPPORT AND COUPLED
WITH OTHER INVESTMENTS THEY HAVE
WE'RE SEEING ABOUT 5 TO 7. YEARS
OF OPERATING SUPPORT ON THE
BOOKS FOR WHICH THEY HAVE SOME
KIND OF AVERAGE OF WHAT THE
AVERAGE PER UNIT OPERATING COST
IS FOR HOME HOME ON THE PROJECT
AND THEIR EXPENSES, WHETHER
THEY'RE INTERIM OR PERMANENT,
MORE EXPENSIVE FOR INTERIM
BECAUSE OF HIGHER STAFFING
NEEDS, AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER,
BUT PERMANENT HOUSING IS JUST
PROPERTY MANAGED TO STANDARD
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT. AND YOU
HAVE RENTS COMING IN TO HELP
SUBSIDIZE THAT IT'S GOING TO
VARY BUT CAN YOU GIVE ME THE
RANGE? I CAN'T BECAUSE, LIKE I
SAID, THE DIFFERENT TYPE
APOLOGIES ARE QUITE DIFFERENT
FOR THIS. SO UM, ON AN INTERIM
SITE, YOU MIGHT SEE MORE OF A
SHELTER KIND OF COST MODEL BASED
ON THE STAFFING FOR A PERMANENT
HOUSING. SOMEONE WHO HAS LEASE
RIGHT THEY'RE PAYING RENT THAT
OPS THAT OFFSETS THE OPERATING
EXPENSES. AND SO THEY'RE THE
WHAT? MY FINAL QUESTION. DO IS
IT THE STATES? THERE'S THE STATE
THINK THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF
THERE ARE MANY MORE HOME KEY
OPPORTUNITIES OUT THERE. IF WE
HAD ENOUGH FUNDING, OR DO WE
THINK WE'VE PICKED ALL OF THE
LOW HANGING FRUIT THERE, WE SAW
SIGNIFICANT TAKE UP IN THE LAST
ROUND, AS WAS MENTIONED BY MY
COLLEAGUE AT THE LEO. WE
ACTUALLY EXTENDED AND MOVE
FORWARD FROM THE FUNDING SO WE
COULD FUND ALL THOSE PROJECTS
BECAUSE WE HAD HIGHER DEMAND
THAN WHAT WAS AVAILABLE. SO
WE'RE PRETTY OPTIMISTIC. WE'RE
SEEING A LITTLE BIT HIGHER COSTS
ON ACQUISITION AS CAN BE
UNDERSTOOD, BUT WE'RE STILL
STEALING SIGNIFICANT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH, MR MCCARTHY. SHE ATE
IT. MR RICCARDO RESPONDED. YES
THANK YOU. I KNOW THIS HEARING
IS TO ASK QUESTIONS, BUT ALSO,
IT'S A CHANCE TO TALK. TO US. WE
WRITE THE BUDGET BILL, RIGHT?
LAST TIME I CHECKED. SO. TO MR
TING AND MISS CREATE OUR
ESTEEMED BUDGET LEADERS ON SUB
FOUR AND BUDGETS. BUDGET
COMMITTEE AS A WHOLE. I JUST
THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT
SIMPLE MATHEMATICS AND YOU KNOW,
WE CAN'T DO EVERYTHING FOR
EVERYTHING. SO EVERYTHING FOR
EVERYBODY AND JUST A CRISIS ON
OUR STREETS THAT WE NEED TO
FOCUS ON EMERGENCY SHELTER RIGHT
NOW. AND I'D LIKE TO FOCUS ON
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
BUT, UM IT WOULD TAKE, YOU KNOW.
HE 100 YEARS TO GET THERE BASED
UPON WHAT WE'VE BEEN, AND HERE'S
WHAT I SAID THIS HAS BEEN A
DEBATE IN SAN FRANCISCO FOR
DECADES AROUND. PERMANENT
SUPPORTIVE VERSUS EMERGENCY. I
THINK WE GOT LOCAL PANELISTS
COMING UP AND I THINK YOU SHOULD
ASK THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE SEEING
IT ON THE STREET, SO THEY'RE
ACTUALLY MAKING THOSE DECISIONS
DAY BY DAY AND HAVING TO
STRUGGLE BETWEEN YOU KNOW WE
HAVE OUR WE HAVE OUR ESTEEMED
MAYOR HERE WE'VE GOT THEY'RE
LOOKING AT WHETHER YOU KNOW
SHOULD WE DO SHELTER TODAY? OR
PERMANENT SHELTER TOMORROW. I
THINK THOSE ARE TOUGH, TOUGH
CHOICES. BUT WITH ALL DUE
RESPECT OUR MAYOR HERE RECENTLY
THEY MADE A CHOICE TO DO
PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING,
AND THERE'S NO MONEY FOR
SOMETHING. THEY LITERALLY JUST
SHUT DOWN THE SHELTER OVER HERE
. 10 BLOCKS FROM THE CAPITOL. UM
AND THEY'RE TRYING TO GET SOME
COUNTY MONEY TO REPURPOSE IT,
BUT THAT'S THAT'S NOT THEIR
PLAN, AND THEY'RE GOING TO BE
ABLE TO BE PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING FOR 83 PEOPLE IN THE
NEXT MAYBE THREE YEARS, WHEREAS
WE COULDN'T USE THAT MONEY TODAY
FOR SHELTER FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE
SLEEPING IN THE RAIN SO TO OUR
STATE AGENCY DIRECTOR, I KNOW
YOU MENTIONED THAT THE RATIO WAS
LIKE 60 40 FOR EMERGENT FOR 40
60 EMERGENCY. THE LAST ROUND OF
HOME COMMITTEE. IT WAS WELL,
ACTUALLY, IT WAS ABOUT 40% IN
THE FIRST ROUND AT HOME. HE WENT
FOR PERMANENT HOUSING. NOW IT'S
60% IN THE SECOND ROUND. YEAH,
FOR PERMANENT HOUSING. 40
EMERGENCIES SUBSIDY PER ABOUT.
YEAH, IF WE WANT TO, YOU KNOW,
MEET THE MOMENT AND ADDRESS WHAT
WE SEE OUT THERE IN OUR
COMMUNITY TODAY. DO YOU THINK
THAT'S THE RIGHT RATIO? I DON'T
KNOW IF IT'S FOR ME TO ANSWER
WHAT AT A COMMUNITY LEVEL, I
THINK THE WHAT I WAS GOING TO
SAY TO YOUR TO YOUR COLLEAGUE IS
I THINK THAT ONE OF THE REAL
STRONG BENEFITS OF HOME KEYS
ADMIT MEETS COMMUNITIES WHERE
THEY WERE AT RIGHT. A LOT OF
COMMUNITIES. THEY MAY NOT HAVE
HAD A SHELTER AT ALL, AND
INTERIM SITE REALLY MAKES SENSE,
RIGHT. IF SOME COMMUNITIES MAY
SAY WE HAVE A LOT OF SHELTER, WE
WANT TO INVEST MORE IN PERMANENT
HOUSING. SO WHEN THEY HAVE THESE
SITES OR THESE OPPORTUNITIES, I
THINK YOU KNOW THEY'RE THE ONES
COMING TO US SAYING HERE'S WHAT
HERE'S WHAT WE NEED. UM AND WE
WERE HAPPY TO HELP WORK WITH
THEM AND THAT WE DO PRE
APPLICATION CONSULTATION SO WE
CAN TALK THERE. HERE'S WHAT THE
COST IS GOING TO BE FOR YOU TO
RUN A PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING VERSUS IRAN AND INTERIM
HOUSING RIGHT BECAUSE THE
OBLIGATIONS ARE ULTIMATELY ON
THAT LOCALITY. SO I THINK IT
DOES DEPEND ON THE COMMUNITY AND
THEIR NEED. WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS A
GROWTH RIGHT IN THE IN ROUNDS IN
COMMUNITIES SEEKING MORE
PERMANENT HOUSING THAN INTERIM
HOUSING AS THEY, YOU KNOW,
REMEMBER, THIS STARTED AS A
PANDEMIC RESPONSE, GETTING FOLKS
WHO WERE VERY HIGH AT RISK. AND
SO I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE
REASONS WHY WE'VE SEEN A LITTLE
BIT MORE GRAVITATION TOWARDS THE
PERMANENT HOUSING SOLUTIONS. UM
AND SO I THINK IT DOES DEPEND ON
THE COMMUNITY. BUT IT IS THAT
BOTH AND APPROACH THAT MOST ARE
TAKING AND THEN HOW? HOW MUCH
HOW UM HOW MUCH CAPACITY YOU
THINK IS AS OUT THERE FOR
UNDERUTILIZED HOTEL ROOMS LIKE
IF YOU IF YOU DRIVE OUT OF THE
CAPITAL RIGHT NOW AND HAVE A 1
60 LIKE YOU AND OUR INFIRM. ALL
THE FOLKS WHO DON'T KNOW THE
AREA. THERE'S A NEW, UM, SELF
STORAGE PLACE RIGHT THERE. AND
IT WAS THE HOTEL. IT WAS THE
RADISSON HOTEL LIKE 200 PLUS
ROOMS, AND IT CLOSED DOWN AND
IT'S LIKE THAT'S GONE FOREVER.
SO HOW? HOW MANY UNDERUTILIZED
UM, HOTELS ARE REALLY OUT THERE
THAT WE COULD BE USING. AND YOU
KNOW, 100, AS YOU TOLD MR
BENNETT. I THINK HE SAID 100 AND
70 70 SOMETHING PER UNIT. I
THINK THAT WAS WHAT HE QUOTED.
THERE WERE PROJECTS THAT COST
THAT MUCH. WE'RE SEEING A LITTLE
BIT HIGHER IN THE SECOND ROUND
AS THE COST OF ACQUISITIONS GO
UP FOR PROPERTIES ASSUME IT'S
EVEN HIGHER THAN 1 77. IT'S NOT
600,000 FAR LESS THAN NEW
CONSTRUCTION WE'RE SEEING ABOUT
ABOUT 242 150,000. THAT'S A
BARGAIN COMPARED TO THE OTHER
OPTIONS. SO HOW MUCH CAPACITY DO
WE REALLY HAVING SOME
UNDERUTILIZED HOTEL ASSETS
ACROSS? WE CERTAINLY SAW HOTELS
B A BIG PART OF THAT FIRST
ROUND, RIGHT? WE WERE REALLY
SEIZING ON THE MOMENT OF A
DISTRESSED ASSETS DURING DURING
THE EARLY DAYS. OF THE PANDEMIC.
AH UM IT IS NOT THE ONLY
TYPOLOGY, RIGHT? WE'RE SEEING
MODULAR HOUSING. UM SOMETIMES
ACQUISITION OF MULTI FAMILY
EXISTING MULTI FAMILY BUILDINGS
THAT MAYBE WERE BUILT AT MARKET
RATE, BUT THAT DEVELOPER WANTS
TO GET OUT OF IT. UM IT'S REALLY
AN ADAPTIVE REUSE MODEL OVERALL
AND CERTAINLY HOTELS. MOTELS ARE
ONES THAT LOTS OF COMMUNITIES
LOOK AT. UM BUT IT'S GOING TO
DEPEND TOO ON WHERE THAT HOTEL
IS, AND SOMETIMES A LOT OF BIG
PART OF THIS WAS ALSO THE
ASSESSMENT OF THE APPRAISAL
RIGHT OF THE CONDITION OF THE
PROPERTY BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE
TO BUILD IN REHAB COSTS AS PART
OF IT, SO MAYBE A MOVE IN READY
HOTEL MAYBE COST A LITTLE MORE.
BUT IT WAS A RESIDENCE IN THAT
MADE A LOT OF SENSE BECAUSE IT
COULD CONVERT RIGHT AWAY TO
HOUSING VERSUS SOMETHING YOU
GOTTA PUT KITCHENETTES IN OR
WHATEVER. SO THERE'S A LITTLE
BIT OF THE AVAILABILITY, WHICH
IS MIGHT NOT BE WHERE
COMMUNITIES WANT THEM. BUT I
STILL THINK WE'RE SEEING
SIGNIFICANT INTEREST. I'M STILL
SEEING CITY COUNCILS RIGHT?
PREPARE FOR THE NEXT ROUND IN
TERMS OF ACQUISITION OF MOTELS
AND HOTELS, SO IT'S JUST IT'S
COMMUNITY SPECIFIC INVENTORY. A
OR THAT ANALYSIS, I GUESS IS HOW
HOW HOW MUCH CAPACITY IS OUT
THERE WITH EXISTING HOTEL MOTEL
WILLINGNESS TO SELL, REMEMBER
FOR THESE OPERATORS TO RIGHT?
SO, UM I DON'T HAVE THAT WE
COULD ASK OUR DEPARTMENT THAT
DEPARTMENT GENERAL SERVICES WHO
ARE PARTNER HERE IN THE SYSTEM
WITH APPRAISALS AND THE LIKE.
BUT I GUESS I'LL SAY THIS. WE
WEREN'T WE DID NOT SEE A LACK OF
DEMAND IN THIS SPACE RIGHT IN
THE SECOND ROUND. WE STILL SAW
EXCESSIVE DEMAND FOR WHAT WE HAD
AVAILABLE, SO I'M PRETTY
CONFIDENT GIVEN THE INTEREST
COMMUNITY OF CITIES STILL
REACHING OUT TO US ABOUT WHEN
THE NEXT ROUNDS COMING THAT WILL
PROBABLY SEE THE SAME THIS
COMING THIS FINAL ROUND. AND
THEN LASTLY, SOME OF THE MONIES
THAT WE USE DURING COVID WERE TO
LEASE THE HOTELS VERSUS PURCHASE
THEM. RIGHT SO MY DEPARTMENT DID
NOT DO THAT DEPARTMENT SOCIAL
SERVICES DID WHAT WAS CALLED
ROOM KEY, RIGHT WHEN THAT WAS
THE KIND OF MASS RELEASING THE
HOTEL ROOMS THAT'S CORRECT.
GOING FORWARD. WE DON'T WANT TO
GO THAT ROUTE. WE WANT TO DO THE
ALL OUT PURCHASES THAT I CAN'T
SPEAK TO IT. WE WERE WE WERE
IMPLEMENTING THE HOME KEY
PROGRAM, WHICH WAS ON THE
PERMANENT ACQUISITION. SO A
SEPARATE PROGRAM FROM THE
LEASING OF THE ROOMS THAT
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
AND OUR PARTNERS, OKAY. THANK
YOU. SO THE BOTTOM AND THEN AS A
MEMBER OF CAREER THANK YOU. I
JUST WANTED TO TURN OUR
ATTENTION FOR DID YOU WANT TO
RESPOND? BY THE WAY IT WAS
CARILLO T█g7. WHAT WHY DON'T YOU
GO AHEAD AND DO THAT AND ASK MY
QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MISS
MONTANA. UM TO YOUR POINT
ASSEMBLY MEMBER OF THE WORK THAT
WE DO IN FOREIGN, THE OVERALL
WORK THAT WE DO AND STUFF FIVE
AS WE HAVE A CONVERSATION
AMONGST OURSELVES HERE. UM I
JUST WANT TO REMIND FOLKS THE
NEW MEMBERS AS WELL THAT THE
INVESTMENTS FOR HOUSING AND
HOMELESSNESS THROUGH THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA ARE FAIRLY NEW.
IT'S SO THE RESULTS THAT WE'RE
GETTING OUR NEW THE REPORTS THAT
WE'VE MANAGED TO PUT TOGETHER
OUR NEW THIS IS NOT SOMETHING
THAT THE STATE HAS BEEN ACTIVELY
ENGAGED ON. AND SO THE CHALLENGE
THAT WE FACE IS THAT WE ARE
TRYING TO SOLVE A CRISIS THAT WE
SEE EVERY DAY. BUT THE PROGRAMS
AND IMPLEMENTATIONS AND STUDIES
AND REPORTS ARE ALL NEW. THEY'RE
ALL LESS THAN 44 5 YEARS OLD AND
SO I WANT TO THANK THE
DEPARTMENTS AND ALL THOSE
INVOLVED IN ALL THE PANELISTS
BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO SOLVE A
VERY BIG, BIG PROBLEM. WHILE AT
THE SAME TIME COUNTIES. AND
CITIES OFTEN TIMES ACROSS THE
STATE. 58 COUNTIES ACROSS THE
STATE. DON'T SHARE DATA DON'T
SHARE INFORMATION. THAT'S ALSO A
NEW PROCESS THAT WE'VE
IMPLEMENTED. UM I CAN SPEAK FROM
THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES. THE
CITY OF LOS ANGELES DOES NOT
HAVE ITS OWN HEALTH DEPARTMENT.
IT RELIES ON THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AND
SO THEY HAVE TO WORK IN
COLLABORATION. THE BUREAUCRACIES
OF GOVERNMENT OFTEN GET IN THE
WAY OF THE WAY IN WHICH THINGS
ARE CHANNELED AND FUNNELED IN
THE WAY THAT MONEY AND RESOURCES
ARE THEN OPERATING ON THE GROUND
, AND SO FOR ALL OF THE
DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES, ALL OF
THE DIFFERENT COUNTIES ALL OF
THE DIFFERENT CITIES, ALL OF THE
DIFFERENT CONTINUUM OF CARE. ALL
OF THE DIFFERENT AGENCIES AND
RESOURCES. IT IS A TON. OF
INFORMATION THAT WE AS A STATE
ARE ONLY BEGINNING TO TRY. TO
SURF THROUGH. AND SO THE
QUESTION THAT I OFTEN ASK HIM
THAT WE HAVE BEEN ASKING AND
STUFF FOR IS WHAT ACTUALLY IS
THE ROLE OF THE STATE ASIDE FROM
IMPLEMENTING THESE HUGE PROGRAMS
AND THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDING AT
SOME POINT THE STATE ACTUALLY
DOES. KIND OF RELEASE ITS ITS
POWER AND CONTROL. TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS. AND SO WE ARE. WE
ARE TRYING OUR VERY BEST TO, UM
HAVE RESOURCES HAVE ANSWERS HAVE
REPORTS. WELL AT THE SAME TIME,
I THINK PROVIDING A LITTLE BIT
OF GRACE TO THE FOLKS THAT ARE
DOING IT ON THE GROUND. AND YES
, I AGREE WITH EVERYONE LIKE THE
RESULTS ARE NOT FAST ENOUGH. THE
ENCAMPMENTS CONTINUE TO GROW. IT
CONTINUES TO APPEAR. TO THE
GENERAL PUBLIC AS IF WE'RE NOT
DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT, BUT
IT'S QUITE THE OPPOSITE. AND SO
AGAIN. I JUST SHARE THAT AS A AS
A JUST AS A MOMENT OF OUR OWN
REFLECTION. OF WHAT THE ROLE OF
THE STATE IS AND AGAIN JUST A
REMINDER THAT IT IS A FAIRLY NEW
PROCESS THAT THE STATE IS
ENGAGING ON. UM WITH EVERYBODY
THAT HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS ON
THE GROUND, AND I HAVE A LOT
MORE QUESTIONS, ESPECIALLY ON
JUST THE LEVELS OF, UM,
ACCOUNTABILITY ON ON HOME CARE,
IN PARTICULAR IN THE LONG TERM
INVESTMENT THAT I HOPE TO HEAR
FROM YOU, BUT I DEFER BACK TO
YOU SOMETHING MEMBERS WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
RESPOND. THANK YOU. I DID WANNA
THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT AND
ACTUALLY PICKS UP ON MY QUESTION
AROUND THE ENCAMPMENT RESOLUTION
FUNDING. IN PARTICULAR. SO JUST
RECOGNIZING THAT I REPRESENT
OAKLAND, SO HAVE FIRSTHAND KIND
OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE ISSUES THAT
WE'VE HAD THERE. UM AND I'M JUST
LOOKING AT THE E R F ROUND ONE
FUNDING. WE HAD $50 MILLION IN
ROUND ONE FUNDING 50. WE
ANTICIPATED THAT THAT WOULD
ENSURE THAT 1400 PEOPLE WOULD BE
ANTICIPATED TO SUPPORT WE
ACTUALLY WERE ABLE TO SERVE 1500
ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATIONS.
BUT ONLY 418 PEOPLE AND ENTERED
INTO SOME KIND OF TRANSITIONAL
HOUSING OR PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING. THINK AH, THAT'S
$35,000 36,000 DOLLARS ROUGHLY
PER PERSON FOR THOSE
APPLICATIONS. I KNOW AND
RECOGNIZE THAT, UM, SUPPORT FOR
ENCAMPMENTS HAVE TO BE THE
COSTLIEST, MOST EMERGENT. UH,
AREA OF FUNDING ALLOCATION THAT
WE CAN OFFER. I AM CONCERNED,
THOUGH, THAT WE ARE WITH THE
LINE IN HERE THAT SAYS, WE ARE
UNCLEAR HOW THE OTHER 1100
INDIVIDUALS EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS WERE SERVED WITH
THIS FUNDING. UM AND I DON'T I
WOULD LOVE FOR YOU JUST TO BE
ABLE TO EXPOUND UPON THAT A
LITTLE BIT. WHETHER IT'S A CITY
COUNTY DATA AND INFORMATION
SHARING ISSUE OR CONCERN THAT WE
HAVE WHETHER WE CAN MAKE ANY
CORRECTIONS FROM ROUND ONE
FUNDING. UM THAT CAN SHOW UP IN
THE ROUND THREE FUNDING AROUND
THE COLLABORATION THAT'S
REQUIRED, UH AND TO MR FANG'S
POINT AROUND, MAKING SURE THAT
WE HAVE THE KIND OF METRICS IN
PLACE TO BE ABLE TO GET MORE
INFORMATION ABOUT THAT, UM, JUST
SO THAT WE'RE BEING DILIGENT IN
OUR EXPENDITURES DID WANT YOU TO
SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S SO
THEY HAND OUT BEFORE YOU THAT
YOU WERE REFERENCING SORT OF
ALLOWED US TO SORT OF CAPTURE
SOME OF THE INFORMATION THAT HAS
BEEN SHARED WITH OUR OFFICE, THE
LAO FROM THE ADMINISTRATION. AND
SO IT'S REFLECTING THE
INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED TO
US AT THIS POINT, I THINK ONE OF
THE CHALLENGES THAT MAYBE HAS
COME UP. PREVIOUSLY IN THIS
HEARING IS SORT OF THE
INFORMATION THAT'S MAKING IT TO
OUR OFFICE INTO THE LEGISLATURE
AND THE PUBLIC. MORE BROADLY, UM
WE TALKED ABOUT THE SYSTEM,
HAVING SORT OF A WEALTH OF
INFORMATION, BUT FOR A WHOLE
HOST OF REASONS, YOU KNOW, THE
STATE OF OUR OFFICE DOESN'T
NECESSARILY HAVE, YOU KNOW,
DIRECT ACCESS TO THAT THAT NEEDS
TO BE SORT OF PACKAGED AND
CLEANSED. AND, UM THE UM, YOU
KNOW, IDENTITY SORT OF PROTECTED
, AND SO I THINK THAT'S A TURN
IT OVER TO THE ADMINISTRATION
TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL
ABOUT WHAT ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION THEY HAVE, BECAUSE
AGAIN, THIS SORT OF REFLECTS
WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO GATHER
BASED ON THE AVAILABLE DATA
SOURCES. BUT THERE MIGHT BE A
WEALTH OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
THAT WE JUST HAVEN'T TAPPED INTO
YET. THANK YOU JUST TO ADD TO
THAT ASSEMBLY WOMAN, SO THIS IS
A FAIRLY NEW PROGRAM. AND SO
THIS IS THE FROM THE FIRST
QUARTERLY REPORTS. IT DOESN'T
MEAN THOSE OTHER FOLKS ARE NOT
GOING TO CONTINUE TO BE SERVED
AND PLACED INTO HOUSING. BECAUSE
THIS IS THE FIRST QUARTERLY
REPORT THE FIRST KIND OF DATA WE
ARE SEEING. SO I THINK, THOUGH
THE FIRST QUARTER REPORT IS
STILL SHOWING QUITE GOOD
PROGRESS BECAUSE I USED TO WORK
AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. SOMETIMES IT
CAN TAKE 9 10 MONTHS TO REALLY
ENGAGE SOMEBODY AND GET THEM
INTO HOUSING. AND SPEAKING OF,
YOU KNOW, CONNECTING THIS TO A
PREVIOUS CONVERSATION. THE
NORTH'S DIES. ALWAYS GETTING
SOMEBODY INTO HOUSING OR INTERIM
HOUSING AND THEN PERMANENT
HOUSING WITH SERVICES. SO IT
DOESN'T MEAN THE FOLKS ARE THAT
THE PROGRAM IS OVER. IT'S JUST
BEGINNING SO WE WILL SEE FUTURE
QUARTERLY REPORTS THAT WE CAN
COME BACK AND PROVIDE KIND OF
THE CONTINUING WORK ON THESE
VARIOUS PROJECTS ACROSS THE
STATE. THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE
THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE'RE ALWAYS IN A SITUATION
WHERE WHEN WE ARE LEARNING FROM
OUR THE OPPORTUNITIES THAT WE
HAVE, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES
TO THAT THOSE ENCAMPMENTS I DID
WANT TO JUST MOVE A LITTLE BIT
TO THE EUROPE PROGRAM. UM
RECOGNIZING THAT IT'S A PORTION
OF THE HAP PROGRAM. UH THE THIS
LAST MONTH, THERE WAS A PRESS
RELEASE ISSUED BY THE WESTERN
CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY
AMONGST OTHERS, AND I LEARNED
THAT THERE'S A REMAINING $177
MILLION. ALLOCATED TO THE STATE
EMERGENCY TO IRAQ PROGRAM AND
THAT MAY END UP BEING USED TO
PRIMARILY SUPPORT ADMINISTRATIVE
FEES ASSOCIATED WITH LEGAL
NOTICES OF WHY ASSISTANCE WAS
DENIED. INSTEAD OF PROVIDING
APPLICANTS SEE ASSISTANCE, WHICH
THEY HAVE BEEN WAITING ON FOR
MONTHS. ADDITIONALLY WE KNOW
THAT THE PRIVATE CONTRACTOR
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT IN THIS, UH
RELEASE IS RECEIVING $8 MILLION
A MONTH TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
THAT INFORMATION. WHEN THE
PROGRAM CLOSES. WE'RE GOING TO
END UP WITH APPLICANTS WHO ARE
NOT DON'T HAVE RESOLUTION OR
DISPOSITION AND WHO ARE NOT
GOING TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THAT
FUNDING. SO IN THE SPIRIT OF
MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE SPEAKING
MORE TO OVERSIGHT. I WOULD LIKE
YOU TO JUST EXPAND A BIT ON, UH
WHETHER THESE FUNDS COULD BE
BETTER USED BESIDES DEALING WITH
THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
ASSOCIATED WITH THAT, PROVIDING
THE SUPPORT THAT WE NEED TO OUR
DEPARTMENT ADMINISTERS THOSE
FUNDS, AND UNFORTUNATELY, I
CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO IT. IT'S
AN ACTIVE LITIGATION SO I CAN'T
REALLY SHARE ANYTHING TO THAT
MATTER. BUT WE ARE QUITE PROUD
THAT WE'VE HELPED OVER UP TO
360,000 HOUSEHOLDS AND YOU KNOW,
OVER FOUR BILLION FUNDING, SO
UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T SPEAK TO
IT TO THE ACTIVE LITIGATION
AROUND THAT MATTER. THANK YOU
MISS SCRIPT. YOUR TURN. THANK
YOU, MR CHAIR. UM AND THE ISSUE
OF ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY AND JUST WHAT WHAT
WORKS. ARE YOU ABLE TO PROVIDE
US WITH AND AGAIN AS AS I
MENTIONED EARLIER, KNOWING THAT
THESE PROGRAMS ARE NEW, AND THAT
WE ARE THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IS INVESTING. IN THESE PROGRAMS,
PARTICULARLY, UM. WHAT DO YOU
THINK WHEN IT COMES TO HOME KEY?
HOW WILL WE MEASURE SUCCESS?
FIVE YEARS FROM NOW? 5 TO 7
YEARS FROM NOW. IS IT BY UNITS.
IS IT BY PEOPLE? ARE THE
MEASUREMENTS DIFFERENT IN TERMS
OF FAMILIES AND INDIVIDUALS. UM
. EARLIER IN THE PANEL WE TALKED
ABOUT, UM, WITH DR KUSHNER ALL
THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF, UM
HOMELESSNESS RIGHT THOSE THAT
ARE ON THE BRINK OF
HOMELESSNESS. THOSE THAT ARE
BEING DISPLACED BY MASSIVE
GENTRIFICATION, WHICH IS WHAT I
SEE IN MY COMMUNITY AND PROBABLY
WHAT YOU SEE IN OAKLAND AND
ANOTHER AREAS. VERSUS THOSE THAT
ARE CHRONICALLY HOMELESS OR
CHRONICALLY SUFFERING FROM
SUBSTANCE ABUSE, MENTAL HEALTH
CHALLENGES, ETCETERA. EVERYONE
REQUIRES DIFFERENT LEVELS OF
TREATMENT AND DIFFERENT LEVELS
OF OPPORTUNITY TO BE HOUSED. SO
HOW WILL WE THINK ABOUT THE
FUTURE AS WE DEVELOP POLICIES TO
MR MCCARTY'S POINT, UM, AND IN
BUDGET, NOT ONLY JUST ALLOCATING
FUNDS BUT SEEING PROGRAMS THAT
ARE FUNCTIONAL, EFFECTIVE
WORKING AND ULTIMATELY GETTING
PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS. YEAH. I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE WAY YOU
FRAMED THAT. WE ARE AND HOME
CARE THAT SCORES OF PRODUCTION
PROGRAM IT'S INCREASING THE
CAPACITY AND THE PORTFOLIO
WITHIN COMMUNITIES ACROSS OUR
STATE, SO IT'S ONE OF MANY. IT'S
CERTAINLY TARGETED TOWARDS
TOWARDS OUR HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS
. SO CERTAINLY THE UNITS WE
CREATE OUR CRITICAL RIGHT, BUT
IT'S THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE WITHIN
THOSE UNITS, RIGHT AND THAT'S
WHY I THINK IT WAS REALLY
IMPORTANT THAT I MENTIONED THAT
WE HAVE AFFORDABILITY COVENANTS
ON THESE UNITS, ESPECIALLY THE
PERMANENT UNITS IN THE ROOM CAN
BE A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT. BUT
THE PERMANENT UNITS WE CREATE
OUR AFFORDABLE FOR DECK FOR
DECADES TO COME. THEY SERVE
MANY, MANY HOUSEHOLDS, EVEN
HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS, YOU KNOW,
ARE GOING TO HAVE TURNOVER
RATES. AND SO WE NEED TO THINK
ABOUT THAT IN HUMAN PERSON
TERMS, RIGHT IF WE CREATE 13,000
UNITS OF HUNKY RIGHT NOW, RIGHT?
WE'RE GONNA HAVE YOU KNOW, MAYBE
EVEN A CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE AT
1.5% PER UNIT RIGHT FOR THE YOU
KNOW FOR THOSE UNITS, AND THEN
WE GET THOSE FOR DECADES. SO WE
ARE BUILDING THAT CAPACITY FOR
OUR COMMUNITIES, SO THAT WHEN
THEY'RE THE OTHER PROGRAMS
WITHIN THIS CONTINUUM UM YOU
KNOW, ARE WORKING. THERE ARE
PLACES FOR PEOPLE TO GO. RIGHT
SO IT'S NOT JUST THE HOME KEEPER
PROJECTS, BUT THE OTHER
AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE'RE
CREATING RIGHT? 22,000 PLUS IN
CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW, 24,000
ALREADY FUNNY. WE HAD THREE
BILLION MORE IN FUNDING COMING
NOTICES A FUNNY AVAILABILITY
JUST ACROSS OUR PROGRAMS THIS
YEAR ALONE. SO WE ARE STILL
BUILDING THAT PIPELINE TO YOUR
POINTS AND IT'S COMING RIGHT?
WE'RE RIGHT ON THE PRECIPICE OF
REALIZING A BIG INFUSION OF
THESE AFFORDABLE HOMES IN OUR
COMMUNITIES, MANY OF WHICH ARE
TARGETED TOWARDS EXTREMELY LOW
INCOME AND HOMELESS HOUSEHOLDS.
SO HOME IS JUST ONE OF THEM. AND
CERTAINLY I THINK WE TOO OFTEN
TALK ABOUT UNITS. WE'RE NOT
TALKING ABOUT THE HOUSEHOLD
BEHIND THAT, AND WE'RE NOT
ACTUALLY THINKING ABOUT THESE
THESE THESE MULTI GENERATIONAL
INVESTMENTS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
THEM AT ONE TIME EXPENSE TERMS.
BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THAT'S THE
ONE TIME EXPENSE THAT IS MANY,
MANY TIMES MANY, MANY OUTCOMES
OVER THE LIFE OF THOSE
INVESTMENTS. NOT JUST THAT ONE
HOUSEHOLD WHO MOVES IN FIRST SO
I WOULD SAY THAT IT'S
APPROPRIATE FOR US TO BEGIN
THINKING ABOUT IT IN THOSE THOSE
TYPES OF TERMS. AH UNITS ARE AN
EASY THING TO MEASURE. SO YOU
OFTEN SEE THAT TALKED ABOUTUT
I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US
TO BEGIN THINKING ABOUT. UM WHAT
WE'RE WHAT WE'RE BUILDING FOR
OUR COMMUNITIES IN TERMS OF THAT
PIPELINE SO THAT THEY ARE BOTH.
THERE ARE PLACES TO TRANSITION
INTO ON THAT PERMANENT HOUSING
SPECTRUM. THE PERMANENT HOUSING
UH, PORTION ON COVENANTS IS
REALLY INTERESTING. WE JUST DID
SOMETHING THROUGH BUDGET LAST
YEAR, AND I THINK THIS IS
IMPORTANT FOR MEMBERS. ALSO THAT
IT'S WE OFTEN TALK ABOUT LOCAL
CONTROL AND WHAT LOCAL CONTROL
MEANS RIGHT? AND IN, UM ONE OF
OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE E
OF THE BIGGEST ISSUES. IN L. A
COUNTY. WE ENTERED INTO A
COVENANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING THAT
EXPIRED. AND SO IN THE CITY OF
LOS ANGELES. WE HAD WHAT DR
KUSHNER MENTIONED EARLIER. THE
LOW INCOME SENIOR INDIVIDUAL
ELDERLY AGE PAIN $700 A MONTH
FOR A ONE BEDROOM APARTMENT IN
CHINATOWN. THAT COVENANT HAS
EXPIRED AFTER 80 YEARS IT
EXPIRED AND THERE WAS NO THERE
WAS NO SAFETY NET. FOR ALL OF
THE INDIVIDUALS THAT LIVE IN
THIS COVENANT APARTMENT OF LOW
INCOME, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, SO
THEIR RENT WENT FROM $700 A
MONTH, WHICH IS HIGH. FOR AN
INDIVIDUAL LIVING ON SOCIAL
SECURITY. AND, UM VERY, UH AH
SMALL INCOME. TO NOW BEING
MARKET RATE. UH $2000 PLUS A
MONTH. CREATING IMMEDIATE. ON
HOUSE COMMUNITIES OF SENIOR
CITIZENS AND ELDERLY PEOPLE. AND
SO ON A POLICY SIDE OUTSIDE OF
BUDGET WHEN WE'RE THINKING ABOUT
WHAT HOUSING LOOKS LIKE FOR THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, THAT LOCAL
GOVERNMENT PEACE IS A HUGE PART
OF A CHALLENGE AND HURDLE THAT
WE HAVE TO OVERCOME WHEN IT
COMES TO PERMANENT, AFFORDABLE,
LOW INCOME HOUSING, ESPECIALLY
FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE
COMMUNITIES, SO I APPRECIATE YOU
BRINGING IT UP AND I THINK IT'S
AN IMPORTANT PIECE OF THE
CONVERSATION. WHEN WE THINK
ABOUT AND HOUSING OR LOCAL
GOVERNMENT POLICY AREAS, HOW WE
THINK ABOUT THE CREATION OF WHAT
IT TRULY MEANS TO CREATE
AFFORDABLE, LOW INCOME HOUSING,
NOT JUST TEMPORARY, NOT JUST FOR
X AMOUNT OF YEARS, BUT
PERMANENT. SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE
THESE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE
SENIOR CITIZENS AUTOMATICALLY
BEING, UM AH, DUMPED ON THE
STREET FOR LACK OF A BETTER
TERM, UNFORTUNATELY, WHICH IS
WHAT WE'VE SEEN HAPPEN AND
IMMEDIATELY DISPLACED, LIVING IN
THEIR CARS AND NOT IN A
DIGNIFIED MANNER OF SOMEONE YOU
KNOW, OBVIOUSLY THAT THAT NEEDS
SUPPORT AND SERVICES AT THAT AGE
OR THOSE WITH DISABILITIES,
WHICH WE ALSO SEE AS WELL. SO
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT, I THINK
FOR THE COMMITTEE AND FOR THE
MEMBERS WHEN YOU GO BACK TO TALK
TO OTHER FOLKS ABOUT POLICY
IDEAS. JUST SOMETHING TO THINK
ABOUT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR
KELLY. THANK YOU, MR CHAIR, AND
I APPRECIATE THE QUESTIONS AND
THOUGHTFULNESS TODAY. I WANT TO
DRAW YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS
CHART. I JUST PULLED UP HERE.
THIS CAL MATTERS CHART. AND YOU
COULD SEE SINCE 2014 THE
HOMELESS, UM RATE HAS INCREASED
WHEN GOING FROM AROUND 100,000.
NOW WE'RE UP TO 170,000, MOSTLY
IN THE UNSHELTERED POPULATION.
SO, UM. WOULD WE AGREE THAT WHAT
WE'VE BEEN DOING SO FAR IS NOT
WORKING. MR OLMSTEAD. I MEAN, I
WOULDN'T AGREE BECAUSE, AS WAS
MENTIONED, WE'VE ONLY HAD A
COUPLE OF YEARS OF INVESTMENT.
SO WE'RE NOT SEEING THE PAYOFF
THE UNITS. I SAID THAT OUR
DEPARTMENT'S FUNDING FOR EXAMPLE
IN CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW,
DEVELOPMENT TAKES A COUPLE OF
YEARS. EVEN IF WE DEPLOY THOSE
FUNDS VERY QUICKLY SO I CAN
SPEAK FOR OUR DEPARTMENT. YOU
KNOW, WE HAVEN'T BEEN GIVEN THE
CHANCE TO SEE THE IMPACT YET FOR
FIVE YEARS, NOT ENOUGH CURIOSITY
OUT OF CURIOSITY. WHAT HAPPENED
IN 2014? UM THAT MIGHT HAVE
INFECTED THIS. THIS GRAPH. ANY
IDEAS. ANYONE ON THE PANEL. 2014
. WHY WHY SUCH AN UPTICK
BEGINNING THAT YEAR. DO YOU
KNOW, DR. I'M SORRY, MISS. UH,
QUICK, QUICK. PREMIER. CLOSE
DUCK SHAKER WITH CREMA. YES UM,
I MEAN, THERE ARE MULTIPLE
FACTORS. SO IF YOU GO EVEN
BEFORE 2014, RIGHT, 2014,
SOMETIMES THINGS THAT HAPPENED
LIKE 56 YEARS BEFORE 2014 IS
WHEN YOU START SEEING KIND OF
LAGGING RESULTS OF WHAT HAPPENED
BEFORE SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE
FACTORS THERE IS A PROFESSOR AT
USC CALLED DOUBLE MYERS, WHO
LOOKS INTO CENSUS DATA. AND WHAT
HE'S SHOWN IS AFTER THE
RECESSION IN 2008, LIKE MANY
HOMEOWNERS, LOST HOMES, AND WHAT
DID THEY DO? THEY ENTER THE
RENTAL MARKET, RIGHT? SO WHEN
HOMEOWNERS WITH MORE PURCHASING
POWER INTO THE RENTAL MARKET,
WHAT HAPPENS, THEY PUSH OUT
PEOPLE AT THE LOWER INCOME RATES
SOMETHING UNIQUE ABOUT 2014.
EVERYTHING GOES UP AFTER THAT,
AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT'S WHEN
PROP 47 WAS ENACTED. SO PROP 47
I CAN TELL YOU THE PROSECUTOR
WAS A REALLY IMPORTANT TOOL
BECAUSE IT GAVE US THE ABILITY
TO GET PEOPLE INTO TREATMENT WHO
WERE ON THE STREETS AND USING
DRUGS EITHER TO SELF MEDICAID OR
BECAUSE OTHER SITUATION. THEY
BECAME ADDICTED, SO WE HAD A
MECHANISM. TO GET PEOPLE, UM
AFTER UGGS AND INTO REHAB AND
THEN INTO SERVICES, AND I CAN
TELL YOU THE PROSECUTOR, WE
DIDN'T PUT ANYONE WHO IS
ADDICTED TO DRUGS IN JAIL. WE
SIMPLY BROUGHT THEM TO COURT. WE
GAVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
REHAB. UM SO I JUST WANT TO
POINT THAT OUT, BECAUSE I THINK
THAT'S AN IMPORTANT STATISTIC. I
WANT TO FUNDAMENTALLY AGREE WITH
ASSEMBLYMAN MCCARTHY. I JUST
THINK THE OBSESSION WITH HOUSING
FIRST IS WRONG AND IT'S HARMFUL
. WE HAVE PEOPLE WHO NEED HELP.
NOW NOT LATER, NOT IN 10 YEARS.
YOU HAVE PEOPLE ON THE STREETS
OF L. A SACRAMENTO SAN FRANCISCO
, UM, LIVING IN IN TERRIBLE
STANDARDS, AND I DON'T THINK
THAT'S COMPASSIONATE. SO WHAT
ARE WE DOING NOW? TO GET THESE
PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS? UM MR
OLMSTEAD, YOU WORKED FOR THE
GOVERNOR. CORRECT. I'M APPOINTED
BY THE GOVERNOR APPOINTED BY THE
GOVERNOR IS THE GOVERNOR THOUGHT
ABOUT DECLARING AN EMERGENCY OR
SETTING UP EMERGENCY SHELTERS.
WHAT ARE WE DOING TO GET PEOPLE
OFF THE STREET? UNFORTUNATELY
I'M APPOINTED BY HIM. I DIDN'T.
I'M NOT ON A SPEAKING VICTOR
BASIS WITH HIM. NOT THAT HIGH UP
IN THE IN HIS IN HIS OFFICE, BUT
YOU AGREE, IT'S A CRISIS. I
MEAN, YOU'VE BEEN AROUND L. A
LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT IS AN
IMPLEMENTER OF FUNDS. WE'RE NOT
. WE'RE NOT IN THE BUSINESS OF
DOING EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS,
AND THAT WAY WE IMPLEMENT THE
FUNDS. THE LEGISLATURE AND THE
GOVERNOR AGREED TO FUND AND WE
DELIVER ON THOSE PROBLEMS. COME
ON, YOU CANNOT. YOU'RE JUST
FOCUSED ON MONEY. YOU'RE NOT
CONCERNED ABOUT POLICY. INTERNET
LAWS TO INCLUDING ALL THE
HOUSING LAWS OF THEM PASSED LAST
COUPLE OF YEARS. SO YOU DO YOU
DO DISCUSS POLICY. YOU ARE
INTERESTED IN POLICY. WE
IMPLEMENT THOSE POLICIES AND YOU
DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD BE A
DISCUSSION AT THE EXECUTIVE
LEVEL. WHAT DO WE NEED IT
WHETHER WE NEED EMERGENCY
SHELTERS TO HOUSE PEOPLE WHO ARE
OUT IN THE STREETS LIVING IN
SQUALOR. IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE
HAVING THAT DISCUSSION RIGHT
NOW. SO I THINK THAT'S HEALTHY.
WHAT BAFFLES ME IS THIS? IT
SOUNDS LIKE AN ACADEMIC
CONVERSATION. MEANWHILE THERE
ARE PEOPLE SUFFERING OUTSIDE AND
WE'RE JUST TALKING ACADEMICALLY
ABOUT IN THE FUTURE. 5 10 YEARS
FROM NOW, WE MIGHT HAVE A HANDLE
ON THIS AND I JUST I DON'T I SEE
NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT. I
THINK THE FOCUS SHOULD BE
SHELTERED FIRST. HOUSING EARNED
. WE HAVE TO GET PEOPLE OFF THE
STREETS. I DO NOT THINK IT'S
ACCEPTABLE IN A CIVILIZED
SOCIETY TO ALLOW THE NUMBER OF
PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE LIVING ON
THE STREETS ARE, UM I JUST IT
BAFFLES MY MIND, SO I WANT TO GO
BACK TO SOMETHING YOU SAID. WHEN
YOU WERE ASKED ABOUT THE MEASURE
OF SUCCESS, YOU SAID, IT'S YOU
MEASURE THE NUMBER OF UNITS
BUILT OR MADE AVAILABLE. IS THAT
CORRECT? THAT'S ONE. THAT'S ONE
MEASURE THAT'S OFTEN TALKED
ABOUT. YES. IS THAT YOUR PRIMARY
MEASURE? I THINK IT'S THE
MEASURE THAT MOST NOT JUST OUR
DEPARTMENT, BUT MOST OF THE
INDUSTRY AND THE WORLD USES. I
DON'T THINK IT'S THE MOST
IMPORTANT MEASURE AROUND. RETURN
ON INVESTMENT AND IMPACT. THAT'S
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE WE HOUSING
WITHIN THOSE UNITS, AND FOR HOW
LONG AND HOW. HOW MUCH OF RETURN
IT OF INVESTMENT. WE'RE GETTING
. WELL, WE'RE NOT THE
GOVERNMENT'S NOT INTO THE HOUSE
BUILDING BUSINESS. WE'RE NOT
HOME BUILDERS, RIGHT? I THINK
THE FOCUS SHOULD BE ON HOW MANY
PEOPLE WE GET OFF THE STREET
CORRECT TO BRING THE HOMELESS
NUMBER. DOWN, DON'T YOU THINK
THAT NUMBER IS MORE IMPORTANT
THAN THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT
ARE BUILT TO CREATED? THE WERE
IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAMS AS
THEY'RE STRUCTURED IN THE
STATUTES GIVEN TO US, WHICH ARE
PRODUCTION PROGRAMS WERE
ASSISTING DEVELOPERS TO CREATE
THOSE PROGRAMS. SO WE'RE
IMPLEMENTING THE PROGRAMS THAT
HAVE BEEN CREATED BY THIS
LEGISLATURE. WITH FUNDING
APPROPRIATED BY THE LEGISLATURE.
AND WE ARE PRETTY PROUD OF THE
WORK THAT WE'RE DOING PROUD OF
THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING. OKAY
QUESTION. UM, WHAT I HEAR AND
THIS COULD DIRECT ANYONE ON THE
ON THE PANEL. WHAT I'M HEARING
IS AN AFFORDABILITY CRISIS IN
CALIFORNIA. WOULD YOU AGREE? AS
WHAT? WHAT IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM
THAT YOU GUYS HAVE IDENTIFIED.
COST OF LIVING IN CALIFORNIA.
ABSOLUTELY WE HAVE AN
AFFORDABILITY CRISIS. WE THINK
HOMELESSNESS IS A HOUSING
PROBLEM. OKAY AND HAVE YOU GUYS
LOOKED AT ANY OF THE POLICIES
THAT ARE DRIVING UP THE COST OF
LIVING IN CALIFORNIA, SUCH AS
WHAT'S DRIVING UP THE COST OF
UTILITIES. HAS ANYONE LOOKED AT
AT THAT? I CAN'T SPEAK TO THAT.
IT'S NOT OUR IT'S NOT MY AREA OF
EXPERTISE, SO THAT WOULD BE A
QUESTION. I THINK FOR THE
UTILITIES, YOU KNOW ASPECTS OF
THE OUR ADMINISTRATION. WELL YOU
KNOW, IT'S NOT JUST RENT THAT
DRIVES PEOPLE HOMELESS. THERE'S
OTHER COSTS. YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR
GROCERIES, UTILITIES. YOU HAVE
TO LIVE. YOU GUYS HAVE NOT
LOOKED AT ALL WHAT THE OTHER
CONTRACT CONTRIBUTORS TO THE
COST OF LIVING SUCH AS UTILITIES
, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE WERE HIT WITH
HUGE OTHER PEOPLE. DIFFERENT
SUBCOMMITTEE DIFFERENT HEARING.
OKAY? DIFFERENT SO I JUST THIS
IS A UNDERSTAND YOUR LINE OF
QUESTIONING, UH, PANEL SPECIFIC
. THESE ARE EXPERTS THAT OVERSEE
HOUSING, SO YOU MAY WANT TO
FOCUS YOUR QUESTIONS ON THAT.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR. I GUESS THE
DIFFICULTY I'M HAVING IS THIS IS
NOT A IT'S NOT A SINGLE ISSUE OF
HOUSING. IT'S A VERY COMPLEX
ISSUE, AND I'M NOT CONVINCED.
THAT THE SOLUTION IS TO JUST
SPEND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON
SUBSIDIZING OR BUILDING HOUSING.
I THINK THAT'S A PART OF IT. BUT
THERE'S SO MANY OTHER ISSUES TO
LOOK AT THAT ARE DRIVING UP
HOMELESSNESS, AND I DON'T THINK
IT'S FAIR. TO THE VOTERS OR
TAXPAYERS TO JUST FOCUS SOLELY
ON HOUSING. WE HAVE TO HAVE A
BROADER CONVERSATION, UM AND
ESPECIALLY TO THE POINTS OF
SHELTERING GETTING PEOPLE OFF
THE STREETS. IT'S JUST IT'S AN
EMBARRASSMENT, I THINK, BUT WITH
THAT I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE
QUESTIONS. AND AGAIN. I WOULD
TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. THERE
WAS A, UH, HOUSING COMMIT
HOUSING HEALTH COMMITTEE. UM
FIVE HOUR HEARING LAST YOU SAIDU
BROUGHT UP MENTAL HEALTH
PREDICTION. THESE ARE ALL
INTERRELATED YOU WHETHER AREAS
AROUND THAT THIS HEARING WAS
MEANT TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE
NARROW, SO I DON'T WANT TO LIMIT
YOUR QUESTIONS, BUT JUST SET THE
PROPER CONTEXT. I THINK YOUR
FRUSTRATIONS AND YOUR POINT OF
QUESTIONINGS ARE VALID BECAUSE
YOU'RE RIGHT. IT IS VERY, VERY
COMPLEX, AND IT IS THERE. THERE
IS NO SINGLE BULLET, I WOULD SAY
PART OF HOW WE GOT HERE IS WE
HAVEN'T HIT THE MARK ON A
VARIETY OF LIKE YOU LIKE YOU HAD
MENTIONED. WE HAVE A HIT THAT
MARK ON A VARIETY OF ISSUES. SO
I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
ASCERTAINING IN A VERY NARROW
WAY. AT LEAST AT THIS PARTICULAR
HEARING IS JUSTRE
CERTAIN WAYS THAT WE CAN NOW
THAT THE MONEY IS JUST STARTING?
AND THE MONEY IS JUST
APPROPRIATED, AND THAT MEANS
IT'S JUST GOT TO THE CITIES. THE
CITIES ARE JUST STARTING TO
SPEND IT, SO AH, YES, MY ONLY
QUESTION ON THAT. IS THERE
ANYTHING WE CAN DO NOW? NOT IN
TWO YEARS OR THREE YEARS OR FIVE
YEARS. IS THERE ANYTHING WE
COULD DO IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS
OR MONTHS? TO SET UP SOME
TEMPORARY HOUSING TO GET PEOPLE
OFF THE STREETS THAT I GUESS
THAT THAT'S A QUESTION QUESTION
. WE GOT THREE LOCAL PANELISTS
COMING UP. I'M HOPING ASK THEM
BECAUSE I THINK THEY THEY FACE
THAT QUESTION TONIGHT, RIGHT?
NOT YESTERDAY. NOT TOMORROW
DEFICIENT YESTERDAY. TONIGHT AND
TOMORROW, RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S
THAT'S THE QUESTION THAT THEY'RE
GOING TO. THEY ARE GRAPPLING
WITH AS WE SPEAK EVERY DAY, SO I
THINK TOTALLY GONNA ASK YOU TO
HOLD THAT. SO UM, JUST GOING
BACK TO THIS THIS PANEL FOR THE
STATE. UM, AS I
MENTIONED JUST KIND OF DOVE
TAILING OFF MR FONG'S COMMENTS.
THERE'S A LOT OF, UM PROGRAMS A
LOT OF MEASURES. I THINK THIS
REPORT IS GREAT BECAUSE IT
PROVIDES THE FIRST COMPREHENSIVE
LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENT
THINGS. WE'RE DOING. I THINK ONE
OF THE CHALLENGES THAT I THINK
IT GOES GOES PARTLY TO MR
AUSTRALIA'S COMMENTS IS UH, YOU
KNOW, SHOULD SHOULD THERE BE ONE
PLACE. IN THE STATE. THAT IS
JUST SORT OF FOCUSED ON THIS
ISSUE. WE GOT SUBSTANCE ABUSE.
WE'VE GOT MENTAL HEALTH OVER IN
, YOU KNOW, H H S. YOU KNOW YOU
YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE THE
DIVISION FOR BUSINESS, CONSUMER
PROTECTION, YOU KNOW, AND THEN
WE GOT YOU KNOW OTHER OTHER
AREAS. YOU KNOW, SOME OF THIS IS
EDUCATION RELATED, SO IT'S SORT
OF A DIFFERENT PART OF MONEY. I
THINK I THINK ONE OF OUR
CHALLENGES IS, UM, YOU KNOW, A
LOT OF THESE PROGRAMS ARE
RELATIVELY NEW WHEN I WHEN I GOT
UP HERE IN 2012. IT WAS THAT THE
ISSUE WASN'T HOUSING. IT WAS
JOBS WERE COMING OFF OF
FORECLOSURE CRISIS COMING FOR
BIG RECESSION WAS TALKING JOBS
AND JOBS AND JOBS. WE DID START
TALKING ABOUT HOUSE UNTIL ABOUT
FOUR YEARS LATER BECAUSE, LIKE
YOU SAID, THE NUMBERS STARTED
GOING UP. AND WE WILL WE GOT
HERE WHEN I GOT HERE IN 2012. WE
WERE GETTING OUT OF THE HOUSING
BUSINESS. WE HAD LAID OFF A LOT
OF H C D. YOU KNOW, YOU'RE
YOU'RE PROBABLY A NEW EMPLOYEE.
EVERYONE THERE IS PROBABLY NO
EMPLOYEE BECAUSE WE WERE GETTING
RID OF THAT DIVISION. PART OF IT
IS THIS IS WHAT HAD HAPPENED.
BASED ON THE RESPONSE TO THE
GREAT RECESSION. UH AND NOW WE
HAVE TO RESPOND BECAUSE THIS HAS
BECOME A HAS BECOME AN
EMERGENCY. SO, UM I THINK. WE I
THINK WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW
WE COORDINATE THIS BETTER AND
WHAT THE MEASUREMENTS THAT WE'RE
LOOKING AT ARE. I THINK THAT'S
ONE OF THE MAJOR MAJOR
CHALLENGES THAT WE ARE FACING.
SO I GUESS WE HAD TALKED A
LITTLE BIT. YEAH YOU'RE YOU'RE
SORT OF INFERRED A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT HAP SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE
THERE'S A FOCUS ON HAP HAP IS
ONLY ONE BILLION OF THE NINE
BILLION THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE ONE
YEAR, SO I GUESS HOW DO WE MAKE
SURE THAT WHILE WE DO THE
PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR HALF
THAT WE'RE ALSO GETTING THE
PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR ALL
THESE OTHER AREAS, SO THEY'RE
LINKING UP AND WE'RE ACTUALLY
GETTING TO OUR GOAL. AND THAT'S
A EXCELLENT QUESTION. AND I
THINK THE SO HAVE, FOR EXAMPLE,
PART OF THIS IS LOOKING AT HOW
WE ARE DOING AT THE LOCAL LEVEL
AROUND, MAKING SURE PEOPLE CAN
BREED, FOR EXAMPLE, USE HAVE AS
THE OPERATING SUBSIDY FOR THE
HOME KEY. YOU NEED SOME MORE
PEOPLE CAN MOVE IN QUICKLY ON
THE ENCAMPMENT RESOLUTION FUND,
FOR EXAMPLE, WE ARE LOOKING AT
THOSE LEVERAGE POINTS WHERE
PEOPLE ARE USING ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION TODAY TO HELP PEOPLE
IN ENCAMPMENTS, FOR EXAMPLE,
MOVE THEM INTO INTERIM HOUSING.
COULD BE A HOME KEY SITE COULD
BE HAPPY, FUNDED AND THEN MOVE
THEM INTO PERMANENT HOUSING WITH
AN EYE TOWARDS THE HOME KEY, SO
I THINK SOME OF THIS IS GOING TO
BE CHATTING. UM MORE COMPLEX
THAN WE WANT. BUT LOOKING AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL, HAVE ALL THESE
PIECES ARE COMING TOGETHER
BECAUSE THE FACT OF THE MATTER
IS, UNFORTUNATELY WELL, YOU
WOULD WANT EVERYTHING IN ONE
PLACE. AND I USE THIS EXAMPLE
THAT ANOTHER HEARING. IF YOU'RE
A WOMAN VETERAN, YOUR CHILDREN
HAVE BEEN TAKEN AWAY FROM YOU.
YOU'RE LIVING IN YOUR CAR. YOU
HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES. THERE
ARE SERIES OF INTERVENTIONS THAT
ARE NEEDED, AND SOMETIMES
THEY'RE ALL NEEDED AT THE SAME
PLACE, SO IT'S TOUGH TO THINK
THAT ONE PLACE COULD PROVIDE ALL
OF THAT TO THAT PERSON. SO, BUT
I THINK IT'S A GOOD QUESTION
THAT WE SHOULD GRAPPLE WITH THE
ROUND. HOW TO REALLY THINK ABOUT
HOW THE HOMELESS PIECE MEETSHE L
JUSTICE, PEACE MEETS THE
SUBSTANCE USE AND MENTAL HEALTH
PEACE SO THAT WE ARE KIND OF
PROVIDING POINT OF SERVICE TO
PEOPLE WHEREVER THERE WERE THEY
ON THE PREVENTION SIDE. WHETHER
THEY EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS,
WHETHER THEY MEAN HOUSED AND YOU
WANT THEM TO RETAIN HOUSING.
BECAUSE BECAUSE, LIKE JUST JUST
LOOKING AT PAGE 69 OF THE REPORT
UM, IT WAS THE 10 MOST COMMON
PATHWAYS FROM FIRST TO SECOND
ENROLLMENT MEANING THERE. I
GUESS YOUR FIRST ENROLLMENT WITH
HDS AND YOUR SECOND ENROLLMENT,
THE TOP TWO WERE EMERGENCY
SHELTER TO EMERGENCY SHELTER SO
THAT THAT WAS SORT OF LIKE, VERY
COMMON. RIGHT. SO THAT'S THEY'RE
STUCK IN THAT SYSTEM. NUMBER TWO
WAS STREET OUTREACH TO ST OUT
TRAIN, WHICH TELLS ME THERE ON
THE STREET THERE. JUST GET IN
TOUCH AT THE STREET LEVEL, RIGHT
AND SO AND THE THIRD WAS MORE
YOU KNOW, HOPEFUL WAS IN
EMERGENCY SHELTER TO RAPID RE
HOUSING. AND THEN STREET
OUTREACH TO EMERGENCY SHELTER,
SO I GUESS IT'S LIKE IT'S GOOD
TO HAVE THIS THIS DATA, BUT IT'S
TRYING TO YOU KNOW, HOW DO WE
ENSURE THAT WE ARE ALL SORT OF
BRINGING TOGETHER THIS
INFORMATION TO GET TO THEIR GIFT
TO THE RESULT? AND I DON'T KNOW
IF THAT IS THE QUESTION, BUT IN
CASE IT WAS HD I S IS FOR THE
VERY FIRST TIME LIKE YOU
MENTIONED, ALLOWING US TO KIND
OF GET INSIGHT INTO THE PATHWAYS
, AND I WILL JUST MENTION
THERE'S ANOTHER BILL A B 977
THAT WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF
IMPLEMENTING NOW THAT WILL BRING
EVEN MORE DATA POINTS INTO HD. I
S HOME KEY, AND SOME OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES.
KELL WORKS SO THAT WILL AGAIN
HELP US TO THINK THROUGH
CONNECTIONS ACROSS SYSTEMS AND
HOPEFULLY FORGE BETTER
COLLABORATION FOR THESE FOLKS
WHO ARE SHARED CLIENTS. UM GOT
IT. ONE THING WE DIDN'T HAVE A
CHANCE TO TOUCH ON ONE OF DO
THIS VERY QUICKLY, BECAUSE I
KNOW WE HAVE THE OTHER PANELISTS
WAITING FOR US. YES HOW LONG'S
IT TAKE US TO GET THE MONEY OUT?
BECAUSE BECAUSE I KNOW PART OF
OUR JUST SAY MY FRUSTRATION AS
WE APPROPRIATE THE MONEY. WE
KNOW YOUR DEPARTMENTS HAVE TO DO
REX THAN THEY DO A PROPOSALS.
THEY GET THE MONEY OUT. IT JUST
TAKES, IT SEEMS JUST SEEMS LIKE
IT TAKES TIME AND PART OF THE
FRUSTRATION. I THINK MR ASTLEY
HIGHLIGHT HIGHLIGHTED, LIKE
WHAT'S GOING ON? BECAUSE PART OF
THE CHALLENGES WE APPROPRIATE
THE MONEY THREE YEARS AGO. IT'S
JUST SOME OF IT'S JUST STARTING
TO GET OUT NOW. RIGHT OR TWO
YEARS AGO. WE'VE AWARDED OVER 13
BILLION SINCE 2018, YOU KNOW, SO
, UH, I THINK WE'VE DONE A
PRETTY GOOD JOB HOME KEY. ONE
POINT. OH, WE HAD TO HAVE THAT
ALL OUT AND ALLOCATED IN
COUNTRIES IN SIX MONTHS. I'M
JUST SAYING SO. I WE'VE
AGGRESSIVELY PUT OUT THAT MONEY
HOME TIME TABLE. RIGHT? BRAND
NEW. WE TILTED UP LIKE AN
EMERGENCY. SO THEY JUST MOVE
THAT OFF WHEN YOU LOOK AT
EVERYTHING ELSE, WE WERE DOING
EVERYTHING THAT WAS KIND OF OUR
STUFF. WHETHER IT WAS, YOU KNOW
THE LONG TERM HOUSING TAX
CREDITS WHAT IT WAS CALLED
WORKS, WHETHER IT WAS EVEN HEAP
AND HALF IT JUST TOOK A WHILE.
TO DO. I'M JUST TRYING TO ASK
THE QUESTION. IS THERE IS THERE
ANY WAY TO DO THAT FASTER? I
THINK HAPPENED HAS GONE OUT
PRETTY FAST. TO BE HONEST,
BECAUSE HAVE ONE AND TWO ALREADY
OUT AND HAVE THREE WENT OUT IN
DECEMBER. AND YOU KNOW THOSE
THOSE APPLICATIONS CAME IN.
YEAH, BUT HAVE ONE WAS 2019 OR
2018 2019. KEEP. BUT IT SEEMS
LIKE IT STILL TAKES ALMOST OVER
A YEAR FOR THE MONEY TO GO. I
CAN ONLY SORRY. I JUST JOINED
THE STATE. THAT'S OKAY. THAT'S
MY QUESTION. IT'S I'M JUST
SAYING IT SEEMS LIKE THE DATA TO
MIND MY RECOLLECTION COULD BE
INCORRECT. SO YOU CAN FEEL FREE
TO YOU KNOW, I CAN JUST SAY
HAPPY WENT OUT PRETTY FAST
BECAUSE THE FAST MEANING YOUR
TIME BECAUSE THEIR APPLICATIONS
MR ROSSELLI HE'S TALKING ABOUT
YESTERDAY. I'M THINKING FAST
WOULD HAVE BEEN IT WAS DONE
YESTERDAY. RIGHT? SO THAT'S FAST
TO ME. I WANT TO HEAR THE
FASTEST WASN'T YEAR. SO JUST TO
GIVE YOU CONTEXT HAVE THREE
APPLICATIONS CAME IN AT THE END
OF JUNE. AND DECEMBER, THE
CHECKS WENT OUT. THAT'S SIX
MONTHS. BUT THEN WHEN DID YOU
GET HALF THREES? MONEY? I GUESS.
WAS HAVE THREE APPROPRIATED. IN
THAT FISCAL YEAR WITH THE
PREVIOUS YEAR. MEANING HIS JUNE
THE JUNE IS THE END OF OUR
FISCAL YEAR HELP. THREE WAS 2021
22, RIGHT? YES, IT WAS 21 22. I
HAVE THREE WAS 21 22 FISCAL
YEAR. SO THE FUNDING WILL COME
DECEMBER 22 RIGHT, SO IT TOOK A
YEAR. TO GET THE SO THAT TOOK A
12. THERE WAS A 12 MONTH PERIOD
JUST TO ISSUE THE PROPOSAL OR
WHATEVER. IT'S THE DOCTOR.
WHATEVER DOCUMENTS WE CALL, SO
THAT TOOK A YEAR AND A HALF. SO
A YEAR AND A HALF IS NOT IN MY
ESTIMATION, NOT FAST TO AND I
THINK THIS IS WHERE THE BALANCE
BETWEEN WE CAN BE. WE CAN DO
BETTER, RIGHT BALANCE AROUND
ACCOUNTABILITY AND METRICS
BECAUSE SOME OF THAT IS MAKING
SURE PEOPLE ARE APPLYING WITH
ACTION PLANS THAT INCLUDE
METRICS, WHICH ARE GOING TO TAKE
TIME FOR LOCALITY. SO THERE'S A
BALANCE ALWAYS. BUT I THINK, UM
, BUT I TAKE YOUR POINT AROUND
IT WAS APPROPRIATED. 21 22 WENT
OUT THE CHECKS. I WILL SAY,
THOUGH, HAVE THERE WAS A STARTUP
FUNDS SO THEY WERE GIVEN 20% OF
THEIR FUNDS AHEAD OF TIME. SO
THAT HELPED KIND OF START THE
PROGRAM GOING BEFORE THE FINAL
DISBURSEMENT. GREAT. THANK YOU.
WE APPRECIATE ALL THREE OF YOU
BEING HERE, APPRECIATE YOUR
ASSISTANCE AND WILL PROBABLY BE
HAVING MORE MORE INFORMATION.
MORE HEARINGS IN SUB FOUR. THANK
YOU WITH THAT. WE'RE GONNA CALL
UP OUR OUR NEXT PANELIST. AH WE
HAVE OUR GREAT FORMER
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MAYOR, TODD
GLORIA FROM SAN DIEGO. UH THANK
YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE MIRROR,
GLORIA. WE HAVE, UH, MR BRAD
JENSEN, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS FROM SAN
BERNARDINO COUNTIES. APPRECIATE
HIM FROM COMING UP. AND MR PETER
REDO, WHO'S ASSISTANT CITY
MANAGER FOR NEIGHBORHOOD
SERVICES CITY OF BERKLEY.
APPRECIATE ALL THREE OF YOURS IN
YOUR PATIENTS IN WAITING AROUND.
GLORIA, GOOD TO WELCOME BACK.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIRMAN. IT'S
GREAT TO BE BACK. I MEAN THAT
WITH ALL SINCERITY? NO I
APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO BE HERE
WITH ALL OF YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR THE TIME. AS I
MENTIONED I'M SANYO MAYOR TODD.
GLORIA I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO. I'M ALSO HERE
WEARING THE HAT IS THE CHAIR OF
THE CALIFORNIA BIG CITY MAYORS
COALITION WERE BIPARTISAN
COALITION OF THE 13TH LARGEST
CITIES IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, RESPECTIVELY,
SERVING 11 MILLION CALIFORNIANS.
I WANT TO SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT
IT SHOULD COME AS NO SURPRISE
THAT CALIFORNIA'S HOMELESSNESS
CRISIS IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE
FACING US AS MAYORS, AND I'D
LIKE TO BELIEVE THAT IT'S THE
TOP ISSUE FOR ALL OF YOU AS
LAWMAKERS AS WELL, HOMELESSNESS
AND THE LACK OF AFFORDABLE
HOUSING STIFLE A NUMBER OF
THINGS WE CARE ABOUT EQUITY,
ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY,
EXACERBATES DISABILITIES AND
PUBLIC EDUCATION OUTCOMES. THIS
IS ALL STUFF THAT YOU KNOW. I
BELIEVE THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT
TO DEMAND RESULTS AND
ACCOUNTABILITY ON THIS IMPORTANT
ISSUE IN THE FUNDING ALLOCATED
TO ADDRESS IT. GO TO THE
SOLUTIONS THAT YOU ALL HAVE BEEN
TALKING ABOUT THIS AFTERNOON. I
WANT TO SHARE THIS AFTER THIS
RIGHT NOW THAT ARE BIG CITY
MAYORS, GROUPS SHARE THE SENSE
OF URGENCY THAT I BELIEVE YOU IN
CALIFORNIANS HAVE ON THIS ISSUE.
WE ARE COLLECTIVELY COMMITTED TO
GETTING THE RESULTS THAT YOU ALL
WANT TO SEE. AND WE WELCOME THE
ACCOUNTABILITY RECOGNIZING THAT
WERE HELD ACCOUNTABLE EVERY
SINGLE DAY BY THE PEOPLE THAT WE
REPRESENT IN THE CITIES THAT WE
SERVE. I'M HERE TO MAKE SURE
THAT WE CAN DEVELOP A SHARED
UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THAT
EXACTLY MEANS. I WANT TO BE
BRIEFING MY PRESENTATION.
RECOGNIZING THAT ONCE SAT IN
YOUR SEAT, AND THESE THINGS CAN
GO ALONG. YOU GOT OTHER THINGS
YOU NEED TO DO, BUT I WANT TO
POWER THROUGH MAYBE THREE QUICK
POINTS. IF I MAY 1ST I WANT TO
SHARE WITH YOU WHAT SAN DIEGO
AND OTHER BIG CITIES ARE DOING
WITH THE MONEY YOU HAVE
ENTRUSTED TO US. SECONDLY, I
WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU HOW WE'RE
WORKING TO COLLABORATIVE WITH
COUNTIES AND COC S TO GET THE
RESULTS AGAIN THAT YOU'RE
LOOKING FOR. AND I SAID, I WANT
TO SHARE WHAT I BELIEVE THAT YOU
MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER WHEN
LEGISLATING WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY
MEANS IN CALIFORNIA. AT THE
OUTSET. I SHOULD JUST SAY THANK
YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE FUNDING
THAT YOU SAID TO US. AS BAD AS
THE PROBLEM IS, IT WOULD BE
INFINITELY WORSE WITHOUT YOUR
ALLOCATIONS, AND WE APPRECIATE
IT. I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT WHAT
WAS JUST DISCUSSED BECAUSE I DO
THINK IT'S A MAJOR FAILING,
WHICH IS THE NEED TO ACTUALLY
GET THE MONEY THAT YOU APPROVED
INTO THE HANDS OF THOSE OF US
THAT ARE ASKED TO PUT IT TO WORK
AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE TO BE
ABUNDANTLY CLEAR. THE MONEY YOU
VOTED ON IN JUNE OF 2021 ONLY
JUST CAME TO US LAST MONTH. IF
THIS IS THE BIGGEST ISSUE IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IT
SHOULDN'T TAKE 20 MONTHS FOR US
TO GET THE FUNDING THAT YOU'VE
ALLOCATED TO US. THAT IS NOT
URGENCY THAT YOU'RE TALKING
ABOUT THAT I'M TALKING ABOUT AND
THE PEOPLE OF CALIFORNIA ARE
TALKING ABOUT. AND SO AND THAT
CAN WE CAN ALSO GO ON ANOTHER
THINGS ALONG THOSE SAME LINES,
BUT I THINK THAT'S A POINT OF
POTENTIAL PROGRESS. I BRING THIS
UP BECAUSE AS WE'RE NOT THE
AMOUNT OF MONEY THE BILLION
BUCKS THAT YOU PUT IN THAT
PARTICULAR ALLOCATION IS ONLY
JUST NOW HITTING OUR CITIES. SO
WHEN YOU'RE UNDERSTANDABLY
ASKING ABOUT WHERE THE RESULTS
YOU CAN ABSOLUTELY SAY THE MONEY
I CAN SHARE WITH YOU. WELL WE'RE
JUST NOW GETTING THIS MONEY AND
WE HAVE OUR OWN PROCESSES THAT
WE HAVE TO FOLLOW IN TERMS OF,
YOU KNOW, PROCUREMENT,
COMPETITIVE BID, ETCETERA,
ETCETERA, AND BY THE WAY, IF
NONE OF YOU SHOULD EITHER SIDE
OF THE SHELTER I'D INVITE YOU TO
GO UP ON THAT ODYSSEY WITH ME.
IT IS NEVER QUICK OR AS EASY AS
PEOPLE LIKE TO MAKE IT OUT TO
BE. THAT SAID COLLECTIVELY, OUR
CITIES HAVE ADDED 9000 BADLY
NEEDED SHELTER BEDS TO OUR
EMERGENCY RESPONSE SYSTEM
STATEWIDE AND SERVED OVER 25,000
PEOPLE. WITH SOME OF THIS
FUNDING. OUR CITIES HAVE SET UP
CONGREGATE, NON CONGREGATE
SITES, SAFE PARKING LOTS,
COORDINATED OUTREACH, RAPIDLY
HOUSING. THE LIST GOES ON AND ON
IN SAN DIEGO, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO
GROW OUR SHELTER SYSTEM TO
NEARLY 2000 BEDS. IN FACT, WHILE
I WAS ON THE WAY UP HERE TODAY
WE ANNOUNCED THE ALLOCATION OF
ANOTHER. 164 BEDS FOR FAMILIES
IN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, RIGHT
AS ON THE WAY UP HERE TODAY,
THAT'S YOUR MONEY AT WORK.
THAT'S BY THE WAY, NOT
REFLECTING THE NUMBERS. I JUST
GAVE YOU, UM IN THE LAST FIVE
YEARS. THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO
GROUP SHELTER SYSTEM FROM 100
BEDS TO 1100 BEDS. SAN JOSE'S
FUNDED MODULAR, QUICK BUILD.
OAKLAND OPERATES SAFE PARKING
LOTS AND SAFE CABIN COMMUNITIES
. BAKERSFIELD HAS OPERATED
SHELTERS WITH ENHANCED MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES. POINT IS, THIS
IS NOT JUST IN SAN DIEGO. IT'S
STATEWIDE COLLABORATION AS I
MENTIONED AN IMPORTANT THEME. I
THINK THAT'S WHAT YOU EXPECT
FROM US AND AT LEAST IN THAT
AREA. I THINK THERE'S SOME GOOD
WORK. THERE COULD ALSO BE SOME
IMPROVEMENTS. THE REALITY IS
THAT ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT
HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY YOU'VE HEARD
ABOUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
NEEDS SECTION EIGHT VOUCHERS.
YOUR FUNDING ARE VENUES,
AUTHORITY COUNTIES, MIDDLE
HEALTH ABILITIES. COLLECTIVELY
THAT'S HOW YOU ADDRESS THIS
ISSUE. COMPREHENSIVELY THE CITY
YOU'RE HALF FUNDING HAS FORCED
THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, THE
CANYON, SAN DIEGO AND OUR COUNTY
COC TO WORK TOGETHER TO USE THE
SAME BASELINE DATA. WHEN YOU'RE
ASKING ABOUT RESULTS WERE
FINALLY STARTING TO USE THE SAME
DATA TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE'RE
GOING AND WHAT GOALS TO SET. WE
HAVE THE SAME SET OF GOALS TO
FOLLOW. PROJECT HOME KEY FUNDING
AGAIN, YOU PROVIDED ALLOWED THE
CITY TO SECURE AND SUSTAINED
FUNDING FOR ROUGHLY 370
PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
UNITS IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. THIS IS A
SOLUTION WHERE THE CITY
PURCHASED THE HOUSING AND THE
COUNTY PAYS FOR THE SERVICES.
THE CITY IS ALSO PARTNERED WITH
THE COUNTY ON SHELTERS THAT ARE
ON THEIR PROPERTY. BUT WE FUND
THE SERVICES AGAIN WITH YOUR
MONEY. WE'RE WORKING WITH A
MULTITUDE OF OTHER WAYS. MY
POINT IS THAT YOU'RE FORCING US
TO DO COLLABORATION THAT I, AS A
FORMER LOCAL OFFICIAL DID NEVER
REALLY SEE BEFORE, AND IT'S
HAPPENING NOW. I THINK THIS IS
NECESSARILY STATEWIDE AND IT'S
UH, DISTRIBUTION. BUT I WOULD
LIKE TO THINK THAT SAN DIEGO IS
A LEADER IN THIS LASTLY TO THE
NATURE OF THIS PRESENT OF THIS
HEARING ACCOUNT. ABILITY I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE GOALS
THAT WE SET AS A PART OF THIS
CONVERSATION ARE CLEAR AND
MEASURABLE. I THINK YOU COULD
PROBABLY AGREE WITH THAT. WHEN
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS MET WITH
GOVERNOR NEWSOM LATE LAST FALL.
WE BROKE THE RELEASE OF OUR
FUNDS FUNDING DOWN TO TWO SIMPLE
GOALS, FIRST, REDUCING
UNSHELTERED, HOMELESSNESS AND
SECOND, PLACING MORE PEOPLE INTO
PERMANENT HOUSING. THESE GOALS
SHOULD BE ALSO DIRECTLY
CORRELATED TO THE INVESTMENTS
THAT YOU'RE MAKING. I WOULD
POINT OUT THAT HAPPENS, NOT THE
ENTIRETY OF WHAT WE SPEND MONEY
ON, RIGHT. WE HAVE LOCAL FUNDS
THAT WE COMMIT TO THIS. WE HAVE
FEDERAL FUNDS THAT WE RECEIVED.
THERE ARE OTHER WAYS THAT WE
FUNDED THIS PARTICULAR SYSTEM.
AND SO AS YOU MAKE YOUR GOALS
AND AFTER THESE GOALS ARE FOR
THE TOTALITY OF WHAT WE'RE
DOING, BUT UNDERSTANDING THAT
YOU'RE JUDGING IT BY A SMALLER
AMOUNT OF THAT FUNDING THAT CAN
ONLY BE USED IN CERTAIN WAYS. I
THINK THAT IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE
TO LET ME SKIP ALL THAT PART IN
CENTRAL COUNTY LAST YEAR, WE
HOUSE 12,000 PEOPLE, BUT 15,000
FELL INTO HOMELESSNESS. SO THAT
MEANS THAT FOR EVERY 10 PEOPLE
WE GET OFF THE STREETS. 13
BECOME HOMELESS. THAT'S NOT JUST
THE SAN DIEGO THING IN
SACRAMENTO. I'M TOLD THE NUMBERS
ARE FOR EVERY 10 HOUSED 12
BECOME HOMELESS IN L. A FOR
EVERY 209 PEOPLE HOUSED 221
BECOME HOMELESS, SO WITH REGARD
TO THE OBSERVATION THAT WE'RE
SPENDING MORE THAN WE EVER HAVE
, WE'RE NOT SEEING THE RESULTS.
IT IS LARGELY ABOUT THE INFLOW.
WE DO HAVE A SYSTEM THAT CAN
SUCCESSFULLY GET PEOPLE OFF THE
STREETS INTO SHELTER AND INTO
PERMANENT HOUSING. BUT OF
COURSE, THAT SYSTEM ISN'T SIZED
TO MATCH THE DEMAND THAT IS OUT
THERE. WE HAVE TO DO MORE OF THE
TO ADDRESS UPSTREAM CAUSES
SPECIFICALLY AROUND PREVENTION
IN TERMS OF THE INFLOW ONTO THE
STREETS, AND I BELIEVE THAT HAVE
FUNDS. PLANS AND REPORTS SHOULD
MORE DIRECTLY BE TIED TO
MEASURING OUTCOMES OF THE
PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN FUNDED
BY HAP ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD
ALSO CONSIDER THINGS LIKE LOW
VACANCY RATES. HIGH RENT RATES
THE SUNSETTING OF MANY COVID ERA
PROTECTIONS THAT HAVE GONE OUT
THERE THAT ARE ACTUALLY
CONTRIBUTING TO THIS INFLOW OF
FOLKS FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS
. AND WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS THAT
IF WE WANT GREATER RESULTS FROM
OUR INVESTMENTS, WE NEED TO HAVE
MORE RESOURCES AND MORE
CONTINUOUS FUNDING. AS CHAIRMAN
AND MR MCCARTHY, I BELIEVE
MENTIONED THIS EARLIER. YOU'RE
NOT GOING TO BE SURPRISED TO
KNOW THAT IF YOU WANT US TO BE
ABLE TO DO MORE, WE NEED MORE.
THAT'S JUST THE FACT OF THE
MATTER. AND I UNDERSTAND THE
FINANCIAL REALITIES THAT THIS
LEGISLATURE STARING DOWN RIGHT
NOW. BUT THE FACT THE MATTER IS
AGAIN IF WE ALL AGREE. THIS IS
THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IN THE STATE
OF CALIFORNIA. YOU'RE GOING TO
SPEND $300 BILLION THIS YEAR AND
BILLION DOLLARS FOR HALF FUNDING
IS A SIGNIFICANT SUM. THAT'S
REAL MONEY. BUT AGAIN IS THIS
THE BIGGEST ISSUE? IF IT IS, I'D
ASK YOU TO FUND IT ACCORDINGLY.
AND IMPORTANTLY, I WOULD TELL
YOU THAT WHEN YOU MAKE IT
ONGOING, I CAN DO MORE. WITH
LESS. THAT SHELTER I JUST
MENTIONED IS ON A ONE YEAR LEASE
BECAUSE YOU GIVE ME HAPPENED ONE
YEAR OUT ALLOCATIONS. I CAN'T
LEASE IT FOR MULTIPLE YEARS THAT
I DON'T KNOW THAT FUNNY IS GOING
TO BE COMING REGULARLY, SO IT
MAKES THAT THE PRICE POINT THAT
I PAID PROBABLY HIGHER THAN IT
WOULD BE IF I COULD MAKE A
LONGER TERM COMMITMENT AND THE
GOALS THAT YOU SET FOR ME. I
CAN'T MAKE AS SUBSTANTIAL AS YOU
WANT, BECAUSE THOSE FUNDING
ISN'T THERE. WE HAVE TWO OTHER
WITNESSES, BUT I WANT AND I WANT
TO BE SUCCINCT. BUT I WANT TO
POINT OUT THAT THE BIG CITY
MAYORS GROUP HAS ASKED FOR A
GREATER ALLOCATION OF BOTH HALF
AND OF HOME KEY FUNDING. ONE WAS
A QUESTION WAS ASKED. WHAT CAN
YOU DO IMMEDIATELY? HOME KEY
TYPICALLY IDENTIFIES HOUSING
THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS THAT WE
CAN BRING INTO THE PUBLIC
ECOSYSTEM AND PUT TO WORK. WE
BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE
SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNTS OF HOME KEY
OPPORTUNITIES ACROSS THE STATE.
BUT WE KNOW THAT THIS PROGRAM IS
ALREADY BE OVERSUBSCRIBED ON DAY
ONE AND THE INABILITY TO BRING
THESE UNITS INTO OUR CONTROL
MEANS THAT OTHERS WILL GET THEM
NOT FOR THE USE OF THE HOME FOR
THE HOMELESS, BUT FOR OTHER
PURPOSES THAT MAY HAVE PUBLIC
BENEFIT. BUT YOU SHOULD CONSIDER
WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS THE TIME
TO TRY AND GRAB THOSE UNITS AND
PUT THEM INTO USE FOR IT AGAIN.
THE BIGGEST PROBLEM FACING OUR
COMMUNITY. LASTLY IT ISN'T ALL
JUST ABOUT MONEY. MR CHAIRMAN.
IT'S ALSO ABOUT LAND USE
REGULATION, STREAMLINING WHICH
YOU HAVE DONE AND YOU CAN
CONTINUE TO DO MORE OF CITY. SAN
DIEGO'S ALREADY IMPLEMENTED SP
NINE WERE UNDERWAY ON
IMPLEMENTING SB 10 AND MORE WILL
BE DONE GOING FORWARD AND
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH REFORM IS ALSO
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. BIG CITY
MAYORS GROUP IS JUST BIG FANS OF
CONSERVATORSHIP PERFORM AND
WE'RE STANDING IN SOLIDARITY
WITH SENATOR EDMUND TO TRY AND
GET THAT DONE THIS YEAR TO
ADDRESS THE SEVERELY MENTALLY
ILL THAT IS SO TROUBLING TO SO
MANY OF OUR CONSTITUENTS. WE'RE
ALSO I'M ALSO SPONSORING A B 3
67 SP 44 WHICH SEEK TO ADDRESS
OUR FENTANYL CRISIS WHICH I
BELIEVE IS SUPERCHARGING OUR
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS AND MAKING
THE RESOLUTION OF THE
ENCAMPMENTS THAT SO MANY OF YOU
HERE ABOUT MORE DIFFICULT TO DO.
I COULD GO ON FOR MUCH LONGER.
MR CHAIRMAN BY RECOGNIZED THE
TIME AND THE NEED FOR OTHER
WITNESSES TO COMMENT, BUT I'M
HAPPY THAT I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE THIS POINT
OF VIEW AS THE MAYOR OF A BIG
CITY AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH. WE'RE GOING TO GO
TO MR GENTS. GOOD AFTERNOON,
EVERYONE. I'M BRAD JENSEN ON THE
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS DIRECTOR FOR
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY. I
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
TESTIFY TODAY AND I ECHO THE
COMMENTS MADE BY THE MAYOR. I
THINK THEY ARE VERY MUCH SPOT
ON. WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL FOR THE
FUNDING THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED
TO US AS A LOCAL GOVERNOR AS A
LOCAL GOVERNMENT. AND WE
APPRECIATE THAT. THE INVESTMENT
BY THE STATE AND THE GOVERNOR IN
THIS IN ADDRESSING THIS THIS
HUGE CRISIS THAT WE FACE. UH
I'LL SHARE MY COMMENTS A LITTLE
BIT. I THINK THE GOVERNOR HAS
LAID THE GROUND FOR THE MAYOR'S
LAID THE GROUND VERY, VERY WELL.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK IS
THE PERSPECTIVE AS A COUNTY
COUNTY IS A RATHER UNIQUE ONE IN
THE STATE. IT'S THE LARGEST
GEOGRAPHIC COUNTY IN CALIFORNIA
IS THE LARGEST COUNTY IN AMERICA
. IT'S AT OVER 20,000 SQUARE
MILES, AND YET IT HAS A
POPULATION OF 2.2 MILLION. IT
HAS A KIND OF A DENSE SUBURBAN
CORE, BUT VERY, VERY, VERY VAST
DESERTS AND MOUNTAINS AND ALL OF
THEM FACE HOMELESS PROBLEMS. AND
SO FOR US WHEN WE LOOK AT THE
HOMELESS CRISIS, IT'S VERY
SEVERE IN OUR COUNTY IN THE LAST
FIVE YEARS, BASED ON OUR 2022
POINT IN TIME COUNT WE HAVE 3333
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE HOMELESS.
THAT'S A 54.7% INCREASE SINCE
2018 NEARLY 60. THAT IS A VERY
SEVERE CRISIS AND WE ARE DOING
EVERYTHING WE CAN TO ADDRESS IT.
WE APPRECIATE THE INVESTMENT BY
THE STATE AND THE RESOURCES THAT
HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO US
TO DO THAT, AND YET IT IS AN
ONGOING STRUGGLE. WE DO NOT HAVE
THE SAME KIND OF PROBLEMS THAT
SAY A LOSS ANGELES THE SAN
FRANCISCO OR SAN DIEGO HAS BUT
IT IS A PROBLEM FOR OUR
RESIDENTS, AND IT IS A CHALLENGE
FOR US TO CONTINUE TO ADDRESS
IT. WE HAVE VERY HARDWORKING MEN
AND WOMEN IN OUR COUNTY WHO
COLLABORATE AND WORK WITH OUR
LOCAL GOVERNMENT PARTNERS OR
CITIES AS WELL AS OVER 400
NONPROFIT PROVIDERS AND OUR
CONTINUUM OF CARE. WE HAVE A
VERY EFFECTIVE SYSTEM WE HAVE
INVESTED IN OUR RELATIONSHIPS.
WE ARE TRYING TO ADDRESS THE
PROBLEM AS BEST WE CAN. AND YET
IT'S AN ONGOING STRUGGLE. THE
INVESTMENTS MADE BY THE STATE
ARE SUBSTANTIAL. WE APPRECIATE
THEM AND I ECHO THE COMMENTS BY
THE MAYOR THAT THEY NEED TO BE
ONGOING. HOWEVER WE'RE TRYING TO
USE THOSE DOLLARS EFFECTIVELY TO
PUT THEM WHERE WE NEED IT.
THAT'S ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS
ABOUT THE HALF DOLLARS IS HOW
FLEXIBLE THEY ARE, HOW THEY CAN
BE USED AND REPURPOSED TO
ADDRESS NEW ISSUES AND NEW
PROBLEMS THAT ARISE OVER TIME. I
WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF MY
POINTS HERE JUST IN THE INTEREST
OF TIME, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I
WILL SAY IS THAT OUR CONTINUUM
OF CARE IS VERY, VERY EFFECTIVE
AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE
SHOULD DISCUSS. I THINK AS A
STATE ABOUT HOW LOCAL PARTNERS,
ESPECIALLY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS,
WORK WITH THEIR NON PROFITS. IN
IN A IN PROVIDING VERY EFFECTIVE
SERVICES FOR THE HOMELESS
POPULATION. WE HAVE ALL 24 OF
OUR CITIES INVOLVED IN THE
CONTINUUM OF CARE, WHICH IS RUN
BY OUR COUNTY AND HAS BEEN RUN
SINCE 2008. HAS OVER 400
PROVIDERS AND AS AN AVERAGE
BUDGET OF AROUND 15 TO $20
MILLION EVERY YEAR. WE FEEL THAT
IT'S VERY EFFECTIVE. WE'VE
INVESTED IN THESE RELATIONSHIPS
WERE ABLE TO PICK UP THE PHONE
AND TALK ABOUT ORGANIZATIONAL
AND COMMUNICATION ISSUES ABOUT
PROVIDING QUALITY SERVICES TO
THOSE WHO ARE HOMELESS. UM WE
HAVE USED HUNKY AND ROOM KEY
VERY, VERY EFFECTIVELY. WE HAVE
BUILT EIGHT NEW PROJECTS, ADDING
310 UNITS WITH MORE ON THE WAY
THAT HAS ENABLED US TO HOUSE 800
PEOPLE IN THE LAST TWO YEARS.
THAT'S A VERY, VERY SIGNIFICANT
NUMBER. AND YET IT'S STILL NOT
ENOUGH. AS THE MAYOR SAID. WE
HAVE MORE PEOPLE BECOMING
HOMELESS MORE RAPIDLY THAN WE
CAN HOUSE THEM. AND FOR US,
THAT'S A VERY SCARY PROPOSITION.
HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET HOLD ON
THIS PROBLEM? IF THE NUMBERS
CONTINUE TO INCREASE, NO MATTER
HOW MANY PEOPLE WE HAVE UM, WE
HAVE, I THINK DONE SOME
INNOVATIVE THINGS IN OUR COUNTY
. WE HAVE A VERY EFFECTIVE
OUTREACH EFFORT. THAT'S LED BY
OUR SHERIFFS AND ALSO BY OUR
COUNTY FIRE TEAMS IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH OUR DEPARTMENT OF
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND WITH OTHER
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS. UM A FEW
POINTS HERE. JUST ON HALF
FUNDING IS THAT THE FLEXIBILITY
IS VERY IMPORTANT AND WE'VE
TRIED TO ALLOCATE IT ON A BROAD
SPECTRUM TO ADDRESS RAPID
REHOUSING DOING CONTINUED
OUTREACH SYSTEM SUPPORT
ADMINISTRATION YOUTH PROGRAMS.
AND YET ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE
STRUGGLING WITH IS THE ADDICTION
CRISIS, ESPECIALLY WITH
FENTANYL. FENTANYL HAS EXPLODED
ON OUR STREETS IN THE LAST FEW
YEARS, IT IS KILLING THOUSANDS
OF CALIFORNIANS. IT'S SOMETHING
THAT REALLY IS OUT OF CONTROL. A
NUMBER OF PIECES OF LEGISLATION
HAS BEEN INTRODUCED THIS YEAR,
AND WE APPRECIATE THOSE, BUT YET
WE'RE STRUGGLING WITH COPING
WITH THIS CRISIS. HOW DO WE
HANDLE THIS TYPE OF HIGHLY
ADDICTIVE, VERY DEADLY DRUG UM
MY LAST POINT HERE IS JUST
BEFORE I TURNED THE TIME OVER IS
JUST THE CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE
IN WORKING WITH OUR NONPROFITS,
MANY OF OUR NONPROFIT,
ESPECIALLY IN THE INLAND EMPIRE,
AND NOT SOPHISTICATED
OPERATIONS. THEY MAY BE CHURCH
BASED OR FAITH BASED RELATED.
THEY MAY BE SMALL MOM AND POP
OPERATIONS AND YET THEY HAVE A
DESIRE TO PROVIDE SERVICES. AND
YET WE USUALLY HAVE TO DO A LOT
OF HAND HOLDING AND COACHING TO
HELP THEM THROUGH A VERY
COMPLICATED ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCESS, FILLING OUT THE
PAPERWORK, GETTING THE MONEY
WHERE IT NEEDS TO GO. IT'S A
CHALLENGE FOR US. AND IT IS ALSO
A CHALLENGE. THIS IS SIMPLY LOOK
IN THE LONG TERM OVER THE NEXT
FIVE OR SIX YEARS. HOW MUCH
PROGRESS ARE WE GOING TO
REALISTICALLY MAKE IN ADDRESSING
OUR HOMELESS PROBLEM? UH, WE'VE
HAD AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION
THIS AFTERNOON WHERE WE'VE
TALKED ABOUT THE LARGER PICTURE
OF HOMELESSNESS. THE WAY I LOOK
AT IT, AND I THINK THE MEN AND
WOMEN IN MY COUNTY LOOK AT IT IS
THAT WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE'RE
WE'RE DOING OUR PART WITHIN THE
STATE. WE'RE LIFTING WHERE WE
STAND. AND WE'RE DOING THE VERY
BEST WE CAN. WE APPRECIATE THE
DOLLARS, WHICH HAS BEEN A BIG
HELP. AND WE WERE GOING TO DO
THE BEST WE CAN WITH IT AND HOLD
OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE TO DELIVER
SERVICES FOR OUR RESIDENTS.
THANK YOU, MR CHAIR AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY NAME IS
PETER READY WITH THE CITY OF
BERKELEY. AND I WANT TO THANK
YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK
TO YOU TODAY ABOUT WHAT THE CITY
OF BERKLEY HAS DONE IN PLANS TO
DO AROUND ENCAMPMENTS
SPECIFICALLY AND HOW STATE
FUNDING HAS SUPPORTED THAT WORK.
BROOKE. EXCUSE ME. BERKELEY IS
THE CITY OF ABOUT 125,000 PEOPLE
. BUT ON ANY GIVEN NIGHT WE HAVE
ABOUT 1000 PEOPLE EXPERIENCING
HOMELESSNESS AND WHAT WE SAW A
5% DECREASE IN OUR HOMELESS
POPULATION BETWEEN 2019 AND 2022
. WE ACTUALLY SAW 70% INCREASE
IN TENSION AND KIM AND
HOMELESSNESS OVER THAT SAME TIME
PERIOD. BERKELEY'S ENCAMPMENTS
LIKE OUR PEER CITIES ACROSS THE
STATE. ARE NOTHING SHORT OF A
HUMANITARIAN DISASTER. THEY ARE
POSING INCREASINGLY SERIOUS
HEALTH AND SAFETY RISKS TO THE
RESIDENTS OF THOSE ENCAMPMENTS
AS WELL AS TO THEIR NEIGHBORS,
AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THINGS
LIKE ACTIVE RODENT, BURROWS
LOOSENED AND LOOSENED. SCATTERED
SYRINGES, UNMITIGATED HUMAN AND
PET WASTE, UH TOTAL AND COMPLETE
BLOCKAGE OF SIDEWALKS, EVEN
SOMETIMES LANES OF TRAFFIC FIRES
AND FIRE HAZARDS. THE LIST GOES
ON AND ON. THIS IS ACTUALLY
INCREASING PEOPLE LIKELIHOOD OF
DEATH. UM AND I CAN ALSO SAY,
THOUGH, THAT WITH THAT BEING
SAID THE CITY OF BERKLEY PUNCHES
WELL ABOVE ITS WEIGHT FOR CITY
OF OUR SIZE IN TERMS OF FINDING
PROGRESSIVE SERVICE FORWARD
RESPONSES TO ENCAMPMENTS IN 2021
OF COUNCIL FUNDED THE
INTERDEPARTMENTAL HOMELESS
RESPONSE TEAM, WHICH I DIRECT,
WHICH IS THE FIRST POINT OF
RESPONSE FOR HOMELESS
ENCAMPMENTS. AND SINCE SEPTEMBER
OF 2021 WHEN THAT TEAM WAS STOOD
UP WE HAVE CONDUCTED 41 TENT IN
AN RV CLOSURES. WE'VE CLEANED AN
ADDITIONAL 30 ENCAMPMENTS, 475
PEOPLE AND AGAIN A POPULATION IN
ANY GIVEN NATIVE 1000 HAVE BEEN
OFFERED SHELTER AND THE OVERALL
ACCEPTANCE RATE IS 40% NOTABLY
WHEN WE MAKE NON CONGREGATE
SHELTER OFFERS LIKE MOTEL ROOMS
. THAT ACCEPTANCE RATE JUMPS TO
84. SO WE'VE MADE A MEANINGFUL
AND VISIBLE IMPACT ON OUR
ENCAMPMENT LANDSCAPE IN BERKELEY
AND ALL THIS DESPITE NOT BEING A
DIRECT RECIPIENT OF HAP FUNDS,
WE DO NOT. WE'RE NOT ONE OF THE
DIRECT RECIPIENTS OF STATE
FUNDING. UM BERKELEY CATED SOURF
FUNDING TO DO ANY ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION OR SHELTERING WORK,
EXCEPT FOR WHAT WE CAN MUSTER
THROUGH OUR GENERAL FUND AND OUR
VOTERS ARE VERY GENEROUS, BUT
THERE'S A LIMIT TO WHAT WE CAN
DO. UM THIS IS WHY WE JUMPED AS
A CITY AT THE OPPORTUNITY TO
APPLY FOR THE ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION FUND GRANT PROGRAM
AND WE WERE ONE OF THE 1ST 19
CITIES TO BE AWARDED A GRANT.
UNDER THAT PROGRAM. IT ALLOWED
US TO MASTER LEASE A 42 ROOM ATM
SORRY $4.7 MILLION TO RESOLVE
THE ENCAMPMENT IN PEOPLE'S PARK
IN BERKELEY TO MAKE WAY FOR
AFFORDABLE HOUSING, STUDENT
HOUSING, LOW INCOME HOUSING AND
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ON
THAT SITE. IN AN UNPRECEDENTED
TOWN GOWN PARTNERSHIP, THE CITY
AND THE UNIVERSITY WORKED VERY
CLOSELY TOGETHER OVER THE COURSE
OF SEVERAL MONTHS IN 2022 TO
RESOLVE THAT ENCAMPMENT. AND
WHILE THE UNIVERSITY'S ULTIMATE
EFFORT TO CLOSE THAT PARK WERE
NOT SUCCESSFUL, I CAN TELL YOU
THAT THE RESOLUTION OF WHAT AT
THE TIME WAS THE LARGEST, MOST
ENTRENCHED IN MOST DANGEROUS AND
CAMPING IN BERKELEY, WAS A
RESOUNDING SUCCESS. THANKS TO
THIS STATE FUNDING 73% OF THE
ENCAMPMENT, RESIDENTS WERE
SHELTERED AND AN ADDITIONAL 13%
WERE HOUSED DIRECTLY FROM THE
PARK. THAT'S 86% MOVING INDOORS
. ONLY 14% RELOCATED TO OTHER
SHELTER AND SHELTERED LOCATIONS
. AND ALL OF THAT, WITHOUT
CITING OR ARRESTING ANYBODY FOR
BEING HOMELESS. SINCE THAT TIME
, THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACTUALLY
MOVED INTO THE MOTEL WHICH IS
ALMOST 100, PEOPLE AT THIS
1000.50% OF ALL EXITS HAVE BEEN
TO PERMANENT HOUSING, AND I
THINK THAT'S ACTUALLY REMARKABLE
FOR A PROGRAM THAT DOES NOT HAVE
ANY PERMANENT HOUSING OR DEEP
SUBSIDIES TIED TO IT. ON THE
BACK END. CONSIDER THAT THE
STATE CURRENTLY REQUIRES THAT
HOME KEY, FOR EXAMPLE. RECEIVE
ALL REFERRALS THROUGH ITS COC.
IN BERKELEY. THIS WELL INTENDED
POLICY IMPACTED OUR RESOLUTION
EFFORTS AT AT PEOPLE'S PARK IN A
VERY SIGNIFICANT AND MEANINGFUL
WAY AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE
MASTER WASTED MASTER LEASE THE
42 ROOM RODEWAY INN TO RESOLVE
THE PEOPLE'S PARKING CAMP MINT.
WE ALSO WERE AWARDED HUNKY FUNDS
TO BUY A 42 ROOM MOTEL. THE
GOLDEN BEAR IN WITH WHICH HAD A
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
CONVERGENT TIMELINE THAT WAS
ALMOST IDENTICAL TO THE RECEP
TIMELINE FOR THE ROADWAY. AND
YET WE COULD NOT CREATE A
PIPELINE. FROM ONE TO THE OTHER
BECAUSE OF THE REQUIREMENT TO GO
THROUGH OUR COC. IMAGINE WHAT WE
COULD DO. WITH STATE SUPPORT TO
INTENTIONALLY ALIGNED HOUSING
EXITS ON THE BACK END OF ER F
FUNDED PROJECTS NEXT WEEK.
BERKELEY INTENDS TO APPLY FOR
THE SECOND ROUND OF THE R F
FUNDING TO MASTER LEASE ANOTHER
HOTEL TO RESOLVE TO ENCAMPMENTS
IN WEST BERKELEY THAT ARE NOW
OUR LARGEST AND LONGEST
REMAINING, AND WE ALSO INTEND TO
APPLY FOR HOME KEY THREE WHEN
THAT WHEN THAT NOVA'S RELEASED
LATER THIS SPRING. WE WOULD BE
STRONGLY SUPPORTIVE OF STATE
LEGISLATION OR GUIDANCE THAT
WOULD ALLOW FOR A DIRECT
PIPELINE DIRECT REFERRALS FROM
ER FUNDED PROJECTS INTO HOME KEY
AND OTHER STATE FUNDED PERMANENT
HOUSING PROJECTS. PLEASE LET ME
BE CLEAR THIS PROJECT OR THIS
PROPOSAL. THIS POLICY PROPOSAL
IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE
COORDINATED ENTRY. THAT'S A WELL
INTENDED FEDERAL POLICY THAT
REALLY IS DESIGNED TO ENSURE
THAT THE PEOPLE WITH THE
GREATEST NEEDS RECEIVED THE MOST
INTENSIVE RESOURCES. INSTEAD
IT'S SIMPLY AFFIRMS WHAT WE IN
BERKELEY ALREADY KNOW TO BE AN
UNDENIABLE TRUTH THAT SIMPLY
LIVING IN A LARGE AND DANGEROUS
ENCAMPMENT ISN'T OF ITSELF A
HEALTH RISK THAT INCREASES A
PERSON'S VULNERABILITY TO
PREMATURE DEATH, AND IT DESERVES
TO BE EXPLICIT. WE WAITED AS
SUCH WHEN WE MAKE PRIORITIZATION
DECISIONS. SO THANK YOU AGAIN
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY, AND I'M
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THEY MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. I'M
GONNA GO TO MR ASTLEY BECAUSE HE
HAD QUESTIONS. AND THEN WHAT DO
YOU WANT TO GO? MR MCCARTY UP TO
YOU? OKAY MR MCCARTNEY. YEAH
THANK YOU. SO, UM, I REALIZED
TOO, THAT THAT THIS ISSUE HAS,
UH, MISS CARILLO STEPPED OUT IS
A NEW ISSUE FOR STATE GOVERNMENT
STEPPING IN AND SPENDING HUGE
SUMS OF MONEY AND FOR CITIES AS
WELL, PREDOMINANTLY, IT'S BEEN
RESPECTFULLY ACCOUNTING ISSUE,
RIGHT? SO I'M SURE THE CITY OF
SAN DIEGO BUDGET DID NOT HAVE A
MASSIVE INFUSION OF MONEY FOR
HOMELESSNESS. I KNOW OUR CITY OF
SACRAMENTO. UM DID NOT SO, BUT
THIS IS AN ALBATROSS AROUND ALL
OF OUR NEXT. I KNOW THAT YOU
KNOW WHEN YOU STEPPED UP AND
LEFT THE GREAT STATE ASSEMBLY
HERE TO RUN THE BEAUTIFUL CITY
OF SAN DIEGO. YOU KNEW THAT THIS
WAS AN ISSUE THAT YOU WANT TO
TRY TO FIX. BUT YOU KNOW YOU
COULDN'T TACKLE IT OVERNIGHT.
AND YOU'RE KIDDING YOURSELF. IF
YOU IF YOU THOUGHT THAT YOU
COULD, AND I KNOW THAT ALL BIG
CITY MAYORS WE'RE JUST TRYING
THEIR BEST TRYING TO CONTAIN IT.
STOPPING IT IS ONE THING TRYING
TO CONTAIN IT. MAKE FROM
SPREADING. UM AND THE NUMBERS
YOU POINT OUT OUR ILLUMINATE THE
ISSUE THAT YOU SOLVED LIKE WHACK
A MOLE. HE SAW ONE PROBLEM HERE
AND YOU HAVE 1.5 PROBLEMS OVER
HERE. BUT AT SOME POINT, OUR
CONSTITUENTS JUST LIKE YOUR
CONSTITUENTS ARE ON YOU LIKE
THEY THEY SEE IT WITH THEIR OWN
TWO EYES. THEY WANT TO ADDRESS
IT. SO HOW DO YOU GRAPPLE WITH
COMING UP WITH LONG TERM
SOLUTIONS WITH THE BAND AIDS
TODAY? I MEAN, THE ACTUAL
EXAMPLES THAT YOU TALKED ABOUT
IN BERKELEY SOUND HORRIFIC, BUT
YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY'RE RIGHT
HERE IN SACRAMENTO, T█g7. SO UM,
YOU KNOW, I KIND OF THINK LIKE,
SOMETIMES WE NEED TO BE LIKE AN
ER, DOC AND JUST TRIAGE. AND SO
HOW DO YOU WHAT DO YOU THINK
THAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM
YOUR CITY SHOULD BE VERSUS SHORT
TERM? LIKE CHAOS IN FRONT OF US
VERSUS SOLUTIONS SEVERAL YEARS
DOWN THE ROAD. WHY NO, BECAUSE I
WATCHED YOU WORK FOR MINIMUM
YEARS. UM REMEMBER, I WATCHED,
YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I WATCHED YOU
FOR MANY YEARS. DO THIS WORK
THAT YOU'RE CAPABLE OF
MULTITASKING, WHICH IS WHAT
REQUIRES US TO DO. WE HAVE TO
ADDRESS THE IMMEDIATE
CATASTROPHE THAT IS ON OUR
STREETS WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY
MAKING SURE THAT WE ACTUALLY GET
THE HOUSING CAPACITY AND SUPPLY
THAT WE HAVE NOT HAD FOR A LONG
TIME WHEN I MENTIONED SB NINE SB
10 THAT'S TAKING THE GOOD IDEAS
THAT YOU'RE CREATING UP HERE AND
IMPLEMENTING IN MY CITY AND
FRANKLY GOING BEYOND THAT, YOU
CAN LOOK AT WHAT WE'VE DONE
AROUND ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS.
YOU ALL GAVE US A BASELINE.
WE'VE GONE BEYOND THAT, IN ORDER
TO CREATE NATURALLY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE
MONEY FROM THE TAXPAYERS,
ACTUALLY. CREATE UNITS THAT ARE
THAT ARE AFFORDABLE. SO YOU
KNOW, WHILE WE TRIAGE AND
EXPLAIN STAND UPS, COORDINATE
STREET OUTREACH WHERE WE BUILD
THE SHELTERS. WE CREATE THE
PRIVATE, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
THROUGH THINGS LIKE HOME KEY. WE
HAVE TO DO THOSE REFORMS AND DO
THEM BOTH. AT THE SAME TIME, I
HAVE A COUNCIL THAT'S BEEN VERY
SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. THERE'S
CERTAINLY IS PUBLIC PUSHBACK
FROM FOLKS WHO ARE CONCERNED
ABOUT CHANGING THEIR
NEIGHBORHOODS IN TERMS OF THE
HOUSING DENSITY INTENSIFICATION.
BUT YOU KNOW, AND YOU WON'T BE
SURPRISED TO KNOW THAT A LOT OF
MY DAY IS SPENT GETTING YELLED
AT ABOUT HOMELESSNESS, WHILE
SIMULTANEOUSLY BEING TOLD NOT TO
BUILD MORE HOUSING IN YOUR
NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEY DON'T
NECESSARILY SEE HOW THAT'S
CONTRADICTORY. BUT THE POINT IS,
YOU JUST HAVE TO MULTITASK AND I
WOULD JUST SHUDDER TO THINK WHAT
HOW THIS WOULD GO WITHOUT YOUR
SUPPORT AND PART OF WHY I'M HERE
ASKING FOR, IF NOT ADDITIONAL
SUPPORT, ONGOING SUPPORT.
BECAUSE WHAT I FE REMEMBER IS TE
SHELTERS THAT WILL BE ABLE TO
INCREASE IN MY CITY THANKS TO
YOUR SUPPORT. THOSE ARE ANNUAL
ALLOCATIONS AND I HAVE TO KEEP
THOSE THINGS RUNNING. I HAVE TO
TELL THE PROVIDERS. YOU CAN KEEP
THOSE FOLKS ON STAFF. I HAVE TO
TELL THE PEOPLE WHO LIVED THERE
THAT THEY NEED TO BE. THEY'LL
HAVE A PLACE TO BE TOMORROW IN
THE WEEK AFTER THAT, SO I WOULD
SAY AS THIS GROUP AND AS ALL OF
YOU CONSIDER WHAT CHANGES YOU
MAKE? CONSIDER THE FACT THAT
THEY ARE IN MY CITY THOUSANDS OF
PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING IN THESE
SETTINGS BECAUSE YOU'VE ALLOWED
THEM TO BE IN ANY CHANGES WILL
DISRUPT, CERTAINLY THEIR LIVES
AS WELL AS OUR ABILITY TO
ACTUALLY DO MORE, BUT IT'S
MULTITASKING. THAT'S ALL THERE
IS TO IT. YEAH, AND I KNOW TO
THE YOU SEE, YOU KNOW WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN THE WORLD AND YOU
KNOW THERE'S A $20 BILLION
DEFICIT. AND COMING UP HERE TO
GET MORE ONGOING, PERMANENT
MONEY, SO THAT'S A DISCONNECT AS
WELL. RIGHT BUT BUT YOU ALSO
SAID SOMETHING VERY ILLUMINATING
TO IS THAT THE MONEY FROM 2021
LIKE WE'RE SEEING IN ALL OF OUR
BUDGET. AND ACTIONS TAKES TIME
TO GET OUT THERE. SO YOU YOU
JUST GOT IT A FEW MONTHS AGO, SO
IT WAS, YOU KNOW, 15 MONTHS, SO
THERE'S MONEY FROM 2022 AS WELL.
SO GOING. FORWARD UNCERTAIN
WHETHER OR NOT YOU HAVE
PERMANENT LONG TERM MONEY. THE
MONEY IS THAT YOU'RE GETTING IN
YOUR CITY AND THEY CAN ASK
BERKELEY. ARE YOU GONNA
PRIORITIZE MORE? THE CRISIS WE
SEE TODAY THAT THEY NEED FOR
SHELTER TODAY. WHEN LIKE
LITERALLY LIKE I TOLD YOU
EARLIER, SACRAMENTO'S GOT THE
FIRST DAY SNOWING. MAYBE IN 30
YEARS TONIGHT. AND THEIR
PRIORITY IS HERE IN OUR CITY IS
BUILDING HOUSING ONE DAY THREE
YEARS FROM NOW, AS OPPOSED TO
DOING SHELTER TODAY, AND I
DISAGREE WITH THAT POLICY AND
FRANKLY, OUR CONSTITUENTS ARE ON
THE SAME SPOT. THEY WANT US TO
TACKLE THE PROBLEM IN FRONT OF
US TODAY. WHAT THE LET ME
THERE'S A COUPLE THINGS IN THEIR
FIRST. IF I CAN SAY NOT JUST THE
SPEED WITH WHICH THE MONEY BUT
LET ME ALSO POINT OUT THAT
THERE'S $360 MILLION IN BONUS
HAVE FUNDS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN
ALLOCATED YET LIKE THAT'S NOT
ADDITIONAL BUDGET CAPACITY. YOU
COULD MAKE THAT HAPPEN. I WOULD
GET THAT MONEY OUT THE DOOR. I
MEAN, I COULD DO. WE COULD ALL
DO A LOT WITH THAT MONEY IF IT
WERE ALLOCATED NOW, RIGHT, SO
THAT WOULD YOU USE THAT FOR
EMERGENCY HOUSING TRANSITIONING
TO THAT THING, AND IF I MAY SAY,
YOU KNOW, WE TALK A LOT ABOUT
OUR SHELTER OPERATIONS AMONGST
THE DIFFERENT LAYERS AND MY
UNDERSTANDING THIS CITY
SACRAMENTO INTENDS TO REPLACE.
LISA PORTION OF THOSE SHELTER
BEDS THAT WERE THAT WERE ENDED
THAT YOU REFERENCED A COUPLE OF
TIMES. BUT HERE'S HERE'S MY
ATTITUDE. WE HAVE TO DO
SOMETHING RIGHT NOW. NOT JUST
BECAUSE IT WAS MENTIONED. THIS
IS A THIS IS A HEALTH THREAT TO
PEOPLE RIGHT NOW LIVING ON THE
STREETS. BUT IT'S ALSO ABOUT THE
FACT THAT THIS IS WHAT
CONSTITUENTS THE MOST ANGRY
ABOUT, AND SOMEONE CONSIDERING
THESE HOUSING INTERVENTIONS OR
PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE HOUSING OR
SHELTER. WHATEVER IT IS, PEOPLE
ARE SO ANGRY. IT CAN BE
DIFFICULT TO GET THEM TO ACCEPT
THESE INTERVENTIONS BECAUSE
THEY'RE JUST SO FRANKLY ANGRY,
AND SO ONE OF THE BEST THINGS WE
CAN DO IS GET PEOPLE OFF THE
STREETS BECAUSE IT KEEPS THEM
SAFER. AND SO FOR ME, WE HAVE
PUT A HIGH PRIORITY ON
ADDITIONAL SHELTER CAPACITY. IN
THE TWO YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO.
WE'VE INCREASED SHELTER CAPACITY
BY OVER 60% AGAIN. THANK YOU TO
YOUR FUNDING FOR MAKING THAT
POSSIBLE, AND THAT'S SIMPLY
BECAUSE EVEN IN SAN DIEGO, WE
HAVE A VERY LARGE STORM COMING
AT US RIGHT NOW. WE'RE BATTENING
DOWN THE HATCHES FOR IT, AND I
KNOW THAT THERE WILL BE HUNDREDS
OF NOT THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
LIVING ON OUR STREETS, GETTING
THEM OFF THE STREETS. NOW TODAY
IS PREFERABLE TO MAKING THEM
WAIT. WHAT IS TAKE YOUR TAKE
YOUR MEASURING STICK
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S, BUT IF YOU
WANT A SECTION EIGHT VOUCHER IN
THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO, THAT'S A
12 YEAR. WAIT SO THAT GIVES YOU
A SENSE OF HOW LONG PEOPLE MUST
WAIT TO GET TO THIS KIND OF
HOUSING. AND THERE ARE CERTAINLY
PEOPLE WHO PUSH BACK AND MY
ANSWER IS WE HAVE TO DO A LITTLE
BIT OF EVERYTHING. BUT THE FACT
THAT MATTER IS WE'VE GOT TO GET
PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS TODAY FOR
THEIR OWN SAFETY AND TO ENJOY
THE CONTINUED SUPPORT OF THE
GENERAL PUBLIC FOR THE REFORMS
THAT WILL SOLVE THIS PROBLEM,
LONG TERM, WHICH IS THE HOUSING
DENSIFICATION EFFORTS. SO IF
REALLOCATE IF WE RE ALLOCATED
THIS 3 60 PLUS FOR EMERGENCY
HOUSING WELL, THE BIG CITY
MAYORS RESPONSE TO THAT BEING WE
AS YOU HEARD FROM SAN
BERNARDINO. WE WANT FLEXIBILITY.
I MEAN, BECAUSE HERE'S WHAT
WE'RE ABLE TO DO WITH THE MONEY
BECAUSE YOU MAKE IT SO FLEXIBLE
IS THAT I CAN TAKE SOME LOCAL
FUNDING LOCAL HOUSING TRUST FUND
COUNTY MONDAY. I HAVE C O C
MONEY. I HAVE FEDERAL HOUSING
VOUCHERS AND I'M ABLE TO FIND
WHERE THOSE GAPS ARE AND PUT IT
TO WORK. SO TO THE QUESTION I
FIND GREAT SUCCESS IN GETTING
SHELTERS DONE BECAUSE THERE YOU
CAN, USUALLY WHETHER TO SPRUNG
STRUCTURE, WHETHER IT'S A HOTEL
CONVERSION. IT'S A RELATIVELY
QUICK THING TO DO THE HOUSING IF
YOU'RE BUILDING NEW CONSTRUCTION
THAT'S 18 MONTHS, TWO YEARS
POTENTIALLY LONGER AND AGAIN.
THAT DOESN'T MATCH THE URGENCY
WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I WOULD
JUST SIMPLY SAY ALLOWING US HAVE
THE FLEXIBILITY WHILE
ENCOURAGING, YOU KNOW THAT WHEN
YOU HAVE THE GOALS AND YOU SAID
THAT YOU WANT LESS PEOPLE ON THE
STREETS, YOU WANT MORE EXITED
PERMANENT HOUSING. I THINK YOU
WILL GET THAT REACTION. BUT I
WOULDN'T I WOULD IMPLORE YOU TO
ALLOW US TO CONTINUE TO HAVE THE
FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE GETTING AS MANY PEOPLE OFF
THE STREETS QUICKLY AND I THINK
WE END UP IN THE SAME PLACE.
THAT SHELTER IS THE WAY TO DO
THAT. WELL HERE'S THE PROBLEM
WITH THE FLEXIBILITY AND I LOVE
MY MAYOR. AMAZING GUY. YOU KNOW
HIM VERY WELL. AND I DISAGREE
WITH HIM AND IN OUR CITY, AND I
TOLD HIM THIS AS RECENTLY AS
LAST WEEK. THEY HAD AN
ALLOCATION FOR EMERGENCY SHELTER
HOUSING. THEY DECIDED THAT THEY
THAT THEY WANTED TO BUILD FOCUS
ON PERMANENT HOUSING INSTEAD, SO
THEY REDIRECTED THE MONEY FOR
EMERGENCY HOUSING OVER OVER TO
BUILD THAT, AND SO I DON'T THINK
THAT'S AN EVIL DECISION TO MAKE,
BUT IT IGNORES THE IMMEDIATE
CRISIS TODAY. AND I DON'T THINK
THAT THAT'S GOING TO SOLVE THE
PROBLEM WE'RE FACING TODAY IN
OUR COMMUNITIES, AND SO UNLESS
WE HAVE MORE DIRECTION THEN THE
FLEXIBILITY. THAT YOU'RE ASKING
FOR MAY NOT GET THE RESULTS THAT
WE, AS A BODY ARE TRYING TO
ACCOMPLISH WITH. THE GOVERNOR
HAS ASKED FOR IT TO HAVE RESULTS
NOW. GIVE US THE FLEXIBILITY
WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF SAYING YOU
HAVE TO GET AN X AMOUNT OFF THE
STREETS, BECAUSE IF YOU DO IT
WHAT YEAR OVER YEAR IT'S GONNA
GO WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
BECAUSE WAITING 23 YEARS TO
CONSTRUCT. SOMETHING JUST WON'T
DO IT. BUT THE FLEXIBILITY IS
SOMETHING THE MAYOR'S GROUP VERY
MUCH. WANTS TO SEE MAINTAINED.
OKAY, THANK YOU THINK THAT'S
STRICTLY ALL TOO MISS PARKER. I
THANK YOU SO GOOD TO SEE YOU,
MAYOR GLORIA AND I CONTINUE TO
HEAR FLEXIBILITY AND OPPORTUNITY
TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT IS
CRITICAL. UM ONE OF THE THINGS
THAT I ALSO HEARD WAS THE IMPACT
OF OUR ONE TIME FUNDING APPROACH
FOR YOU ALL FROM AN
IMPLEMENTATION PERSPECTIVE. IT'S
IN FACT, I CAN YOU HAVE EVIDENCE
TO BE ABLE TO ACTUALLY SAY THAT
IT ACTUALLY IS MORE COSTLY IN
SOME WAYS TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT,
BECAUSE YOU CAN'T ACTUALLY
ANTICIPATE BEING ABLE TO SECURE
LEASES AND TAKE OTHER
OPPORTUNITIES. SO I JUST WANTED
TO FOR YOU TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK
TO THAT AND ALSO JUST WANTED TO
HAVE YOU MR RADIO SPEAK TO THE
OPPORTUNITY TO BE ABLE TO LINK
THE ENCAMPMENT RESOLUTION
FUNDING TO OTHER OPPORTUNITIES
AND SOURCES. I THINK YOU MADE A
REALLY GREAT KIND OF POTENTIAL
POLICY. POINT ABOUT HOW WE
SHOULD BE ABLE TO PROVIDE
FLEXIBILITY AROUND THE CADET
PIECES OF THE E R A FUNDING TO
OTHER OTHER FUNDING SOURCES, AND
I JUST WANTED TO HAVE THAT BE
LAID OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE
CLEARLY. QUESTION. THANK YOU, MR
MARY. UM AND ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S, I
THINK, UM FEDERAL LAW. REQUIRES
THAT WE PARTICIPATED IN A SYSTEM
CALLED COORDINATED ENTRY. WE
HAVE TOO FEW RESOURCES, AND SO
WE HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO RATION
THEM AND FOR BETTER OR FOR
WORSE, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
HAS SAID. YOU SHOULD DO THAT ON
THE BASIS OF VULNERABILITY.
THERE'S A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY. IN
MY ESTIMATION, HAVING BEEN
SOMEBODY ELSE WORKED AROUND
THESE FEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR
THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS IN HOW WE
INTERPRET THAT AND SO I THINK
ANY GUIDANCE FROM THE STATE OR
ANYTHING THAT WE CAN DO AT THE
STATE LEVEL AND AT THE LOCAL
LEVEL TO EXPLICITLY CONSIDER
ENCAMPMENTS AS A UNIT OF
ANALYSIS WHEN MAKING
VULNERABILITY DETERMINATIONS IS
ALL THAT I'M SAYING HERE. WE
CURRENTLY OFTEN LOOK ONLY AT
INDIVIDUAL CHARACTERISTICS. SO
WHAT ARE YOUR WHAT? YOUR
HOMELESS HISTORY. WHAT'S YOUR
MEDICAL HISTORY? HOW CLOSE TO
YOU? HOW CLOSE ARE YOU AS A
PERSON TO DEATH? WELL WE'RE NOT
LOOKING AT ARE THINGS LIKE
SYSTEMIC FACTORS. WHAT WAS THE
LAST ZIP CODE THAT YOU LIVED IN?
UM AND? AND AND WHAT ARE THE, UH
, YOU KNOW, SOCIOECONOMIC
CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT
ZIP CODE THAT MADE
DISPROPORTIONATELY CAUSE YOU TO
FALL INTO AND REPEATEDLY FALL
INTO HOMELESSNESS WERE ALSO NOT
LOOKING AT THINGS THAT I WOULD
CALL CIRCUMSTANTIAL FACTORS,
RIGHT? DO YOU LIVE IN A VERY
DANGEROUS ENCAMPMENT? THAT IS
AND THIS IS THE CASE FOR THE
ENCAMPMENT THAT ONE OF THE
INCUMBENTS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT
RESOLVING AND TRYING TO FIND
RESOURCES TO DO IT. IN BERKELEY,
IT IS LITERALLY ABOUT FIVE FT.
AWAY FROM THE AMTRAK LINE. IF
SOMEBODY GETS TOO DRUNK AND
STUMBLES IN THE WRONG WAY, BOOM
, THEY'RE DEAD. AND THIS HAS
HAPPENED IN BURKE WAY THAT IS A
RISK FACTOR. AND WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT PUBLIC HEALTH THINGS LIKE
THE COVID RESPONSE. WE WERE VERY
INTENTIONAL AND LOOKING AT HOW
YOU KNOW ZIP CODE IMPACTS YOUR
LIKELIHOOD OF CONTRACTING COVID.
AND SO WE RESPONDED BY BY
PRIORITIZING TESTING AND VACCINE
RESOURCES, THE CODED ACCORDINGLY
. I THINK WE CAN AND SHOULD DO
THE SAME WHEN WE LOOK AT, UH,
ENCAMPMENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE
DISPROPORTIONATELY INFECTED
AFFECTING LOW INCOME ZIP CODES,
AND THEY'RE DISPROPORTIONATELY
POPULATED BY PEOPLE THAT WERE
LAST HOUSED. AND THOSE WELL
INCOME ZIP CODES. SO THAT'S ONE
THING, UM AND JUST TO THE
MAYOR'S POINT MORE FLEXIBILITY
LOCALLY. I THINK THE STATE HAS
DONE A LOT OF GOOD WORK
SPECIFICALLY WITH A B, I THINK
WAS 13 80 FROM SEVERAL YEARS AGO
THAT CREATED THE HOMELESS
MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAMS. UH,
GIVE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS THE
CAPACITY TO HAVE SOME OF THE
CLINICAL DETERMINATIONS COMING
OUT OF THAT INFORMATION SHARING
BE SOMETHING THAT THAT INFORMS
COORDINATED ENTRY PLACEMENT
DECISIONS RIGHT NOW, I THINK, AT
LEAST IN ALAMEDA COUNTY, IT'S
BECOME SO SCORE BASED AND SO
TECHNOCRATIC THAT WE LOSE SOME
OF THAT. JUST REALITY CHECKING
IN TERMS OF HAVING CLINICAL
JUDGMENT, AND IF YOU DEFER TO
LOCAL EXPERTS WHO ARE WORKING
WITH THESE CLIENTS EVERY SINGLE
DAY AND WHO ARE VERY FAMILIAR
WITH THEIR WITH THEIR
CIRCUMSTANCES, AND YET FOR
WHATEVER REASON, AND I CAN THINK
OF SEVERAL PEOPLE IN THE
INCUMBENTS THAT WE WORK WITH
RIGHT NOW, FOR WHOM THIS IS THE
CASE THEY ARE UNABLE OR
UNWILLING TO COMPLETE A
COORDINATED ENTRY ASSESSMENT. SO
THEY'RE NOT EVEN KNOWN TO THE
SYSTEM. AND YET WHEN WE FIND
THEM, THEY'RE LAYING IN THEIR
FECES AND A TENT. THEY'RE
EXTREMELY VULNERABLE, BUT
THEY'RE JUST NOT ENGAGING, AND
SO WE'RE NOT THAT WE SHOULD BE
GIVING OUR LOCAL CLINICIANS SOME
VOICE AND MAKING THOSE
PRIORITIES PRIORITIZATION
DETERMINATIONS, SO THIS IS A NO
TO VERY LOW COST POLICY PROPOSAL
THAT I THINK COULD CREATE A LOT
MORE THAT COULD CATALYZE A LOT
MORE MOVEMENT OUT OF
ENCAMPMENTS. AND I WOULD JUST
SAY TO YOUR QUESTION ABOUT
ECONOMY, MR MCCARTHY. MR TEAM
KNOW THAT I'M CHEAP. AND SO WHEN
I'M DOING THESE MASTER LEASE
AGREEMENTS, IT SOUNDS LIKE
BERKELEY IS DOING SOMETHING
SIMILAR. IT'S JUST LOGIC. IF
YOU'RE GOING TO OFFER SOMEONE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO LEAVE SOMETHING
FOR A YEAR OR TWO, DO IT FOR
THREE YEARS. YOU'D UNDERSTAND
WHY THE PRICE POINT WOULD BE
DIFFERENT. THINK THAT'S ALSO
TRUE FOR SOMETIMES THE MINOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS THAT MIGHT
BE NECESSARY. HOW FAR ARE YOU
GOING TO GO? IF YOU CAN ONLY
MAYBE MAINTAIN, I HAVE A COUPLE
OF SHELTERS WHERE I THINK WE
NEED TO MAKE SOME INVESTMENTS.
BUT I DON'T HAVE THE KNOWLEDGE
THAT WHETHER NOT THAT MONEY IS
GOING TO BE THERE. AND SO IT
JUST GETS KIND OF COMPLICATED,
ACKNOWLEDGE THE REASONS FOR WHY
WE'RE WHERE WE'RE AT. BUT I
THINK IN THE REQUEST FROM
CITIES, COUNTIES AND COKES TO DO
MORE AND TO ACHIEVE MORE, AND TO
DO IT AT A LOWER PRICE POINT, I
THINK THIS IS ONE WAY TO DO IT,
MAYBE SOMEWHAT COUNTER
INTUITIVE, BUT FROM THE FROM THE
GROUND VIEW DOWN ON THE SIDEWALK
LEVEL. THAT'S THE REALITY. THANK
YOU, MR SEVEN. THANK YOU, MR
CHAIR AND THANK YOU FOR BEING
HERE AND I ACTUALLY HAVE A LOT
OF SYMPATHY FOR YOU GUYS.
BECAUSE A LOT OF TIMES THE STATE
CREATES AN ISSUE WHETHER
INTENTIONALLY OR IN
INTENTIONALLY, UNINTENTIONALLY
AND SORT OF DUMPS THE PROBLEM ON
THE LOCALS TO FIGURE IT OUT. SO
YOU GUYS ARE ON THE FRONTLINE
DEALING WITH THIS DAY TO DAY.
AND SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT
STOOD OUT TO ME, MR BEAR, AS YOU
SAID, FOR EVERY 10 PEOPLE YOU
TAKE OFF THE STREET. 13 MORE. GO
ON THE STREET. SO WHAT? IN YOUR
EXPERIENCE IS CAUSING THE
ACCELERATION OF PEOPLE INTO
HOMELESSNESS. THE HIGH COST OF
HOUSING IS IT JUST HOUSING OR IS
IT JUST THE COST OF LIVING IN
GENERAL? WHEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT
THESE NUMBERS ARE? BECAUSE OFTEN
WAS WE DISCUSSED THE DATA HERE
IS NOT ALWAYS PURE, BUT WHEN I
TALK TO PEOPLE OR JUST WHAT I
ABSOLUTELY OBSERVED, IF YOU
HAVING $3000 MONTH, ONE BEDROOM
APARTMENTS LIKE WE HAVE IN THE
CITY OF SAN DIEGO, OF COURSE,
YOU'RE GOING TO END UP WITH A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TENT
ENCAMPMENTS. IT'S JUST GOING TO
BE THE CASE NOW. WITHIN THAT
POPULATION. DO YOU HAVE FOLKS
THAT ARE DEALING WITH SEVERE
MENTAL ILLNESS AND SEVERE
SUBSTANCE ABUSE DISORDER.
ABSOLUTELY THERE'S NO QUESTION.
I THINK BOTH HAVE BEEN
SUPERCHARGED. I DON'T THINK WE
TALK ENOUGH ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH
ISSUES AND GENERALLY, AND I
THINK THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS
OR CAUSE AND REASON TO MAKE THAT
WORSE. CERTAINLY SUBSTANCE ABUSE
HAS ALWAYS BEEN A PROBLEM, AND I
WOULD I WOULD SUGGEST THAT
FENTANYL IS ABSOLUTELY MAKING
THIS WORSE. SO ALTOGETHER THESE
THINGS ARE NOT HELPFUL. THERE
ARE CERTAINLY OTHER OUTLIERS
THAT ARE OUT THERE. BUT THE ROOT
CAUSE, AND MY JUDGMENT IS THE
COST OF HOUSING. NO QUESTION.
BUT THERE ARE THESE OTHER
COMPONENTS FOR WHICH IS THE
REASON WHY I BROUGHT UP THE
ISSUES ABOUT CONSERVATIVE SHIP
PERFORMANCE, MOTHER I THINK
CRIMINAL JUSTICE AND OTHER
PREVENTION EFFORTS TO COMPANY
YOU WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT
THAT, BUT I FEEL LIKE WE TALKED
ABOUT HOMELESS. THERE'S ALMOST
TWO CATEGORIES OF HOMELESSNESS.
YOU HAVE TRANSITIONAL PEOPLE WHO
ARE KIND OF TRANSITIONING
THROUGH HOMELESSNESS. AND I
THINK TO ME. THAT'S THE TYPICAL,
YOU KNOW, PERSON WHO GOT KICKED
OUT OF THEIR APARTMENT OR GOT
FIRED OR LAID OFF OR WHATEVER,
AND THEY'RE SORT OF
TRANSITIONING. BUT THEN YOU HAVE
THE CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS AND I
THINK THAT'S WHAT WHEN THE
PEOPLE ARE UPSET OR COMPLAINING
ABOUT. IT'S THAT ELEMENT OF THE
CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS, PROBABLY
AT THESE CAMPS THAT YOU
MENTIONED. THAT ARE THINK A
BIGGER CHALLENGE. UM, TO DEAL
WITH AND TO YOUR POINT. IF YOU
HAVE SOMEONE IN A CAMP OR
SOMEONE WITH MENTAL HEALTH OR
ADDICTION ISSUES, AND THEY DON'T
WANT HELP. WHAT CAN YOU DO? WELL
THIS IS WHERE OUR HANDS ARE
OFTEN TIED, RIGHT? AND WHO DID
THE TIME IS ALWAYS NOT MATTER OF
ARGUMENT, BUT DOESN'T MATTER THE
AND INTO THE SHOP OWNER TO THE
RESIDENT. THEY DON'T CARE. THEY
JUST THIS PERSON IS THERE. WHAT
I THINK YOU MAKE AN IMPORTANT
POINT THAT WE NEED TO TALK MORE
ABOUT THE MAJORITY OF THE FOLKS
WHO WERE CONCERNED OURSELVES TO
MEET THE LEGAL DEFINITION OF
HOMELESS GO OVERLOOKED RIGHT
THERE. SLEEPING IN A CAR
DISCREETLY, COUCHSURFING.
THEY'RE LIVING IN UNSTABLE
HOUSING ENVIRONMENTS, AND
THEY'RE ELIGIBLE FOR EVERYTHING
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT TODAY. THAT
IS THE VAST MAJORITY, BUT THERE
IS THAT HIGHLY VISIBLE MINORITY
THAT CONSUMES A TREMENDOUS
AMOUNT OF RESOURCES LIKE A WHOLE
LOT OF THE RESOURCES AND THEN TO
YOUR POINT. WHAT CAN WE DO? WELL
I WOULD ARGUE THAT A LOT OF
SEVERELY MENTALLY ILL THE
THRESHOLD TO TRY AND SERVE THEM.
IS ARTIFICIALLY HIGH AND SHOULD
BE REDUCED BECAUSE THERE ARE
PEOPLE WHO SAY MARIJUANA. AREN'T
YOU DOING SOMETHING ABOUT THAT
PERSON OVER THERE? AND MY ANSWER
IS THAT CURRENTLY THERE DEFINED
TO NOT BE HARMED HIMSELF TO
OTHERS, EVEN THOUGH THEIR
BEHAVIOR IS CONCERNING BOTH FOR
THEMSELVES AND FOR THE BROADER
PUBLIC AROUND THE SUBSTANCE USE
ISSUES. I MEAN, WHEN I WAS ON
THE CITY COUNCIL SPICE WAS THE
THING WE HAD TO DEAL WITH THAT
RIGHT NOW IT'S FENTON ON, I
WOULD SAY THAT'S A MILLION TIMES
WORSE, BUT POINT IS, THIS THING
IS EVER EVOLVING. AND WE JUST
HAVE TO FIND NEW WAYS TO DEAL
WITH THESE THINGS AS THEY
PRESENT THEMSELVES. WHEN YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS
MORE ORDERS OF MULTITUDE, MORE
ADDICTIVE THAN HEROIN, WHEN YOU
TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS
EXTREMELY CHEAP AND VERY EASY TO
TRAFFIC. YOU UNDERSTAND WHY THIS
PROBLEM IS GETTING WORSE? YOU BE
AN OUTREACH WORKER, AND THIS IS
NOT POINTED, BUT YOU BEING
OUTREACH WORKER AND TRY AND TALK
TO SOMEBODY WHO'S HIGH ON
FENTANYL. THEY'RE GONNA ACCEPT
THE HELP. NO THEY'RE NOT GOING
TO. UM AND WE HAVE TO HAVE OTHER
OPTIONS, NOT JUST INCARCERATE
OPTIONS, BUT OTHER OPTIONS TO
TRY AND GET THEM OFF THE
SIDEWALK. AND I WOULD SAY IF YOU
IF WE GET A BETTER HANDLE THE
STATE ON THE CHRONIC
HOMELESSNESS, WHICH I THINK IS
THE ELEMENT THAT'S MOST VISIBLE.
I BELIEVE THE PUBLIC WOULD BE
MORE SUPPORTIVE OF THE PROGRAMS
IN GENERAL, BECAUSE THE PROBLEM
IS YOU'RE SPENDING A LOT OF
MONEY. ON THE OTHER MAJORITY OF
PEOPLE, BUT THE PROBLEM PEOPLE
SEE ON THE STREETS IS NOT
CHANGING. IT'S GETTING WORSE. SO
IN THEIR MINDS, THE PROBLEM'S
GETTING WORSE. IT'S NOT GETTING
BETTER. SO WOULD YOU SUPPORT UH
UM, CHANGES IN POLICY OR LAW TO
FORCE PEOPLE INTO TREATMENT
AGAINST THEIR WILL. YES IT'S THE
THERE'S GROUP IS SUPPORTING OR
WILL. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING OUT
OF THE OUT OF THE BAG THERE'S
ANNOUNCEMENT LIKE NEXT WEEK, BUT
AS B 43, WHICH IS SENATOR
EDMONDS, BILL AROUND
CONSERVATORSHIP REFORM, WE
SUPPORTED VERSION OF IT LAST
YEAR CAME CLOSE TO PASSING.
WE'RE SUPPORTING IT AGAIN THIS
YEAR. UM I THINK THAT WOULD BE
VERY WE WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF
CARE COURT. MANY OF US STOOD
WITH THE GOVERNOR WHEN HE
ANNOUNCED IT LAST YEAR. WE STOOD
WITH HIM WHEN HE SIGNED IT, SO
WE ARE WILLING TO ENGAGE IN THIS
ISSUE, AND THAT'S A PARTNERSHIP
AND AN OFFER I'D MAKE TO THIS
THIS COMMITTEE AND OTHER MEMBERS
OF THE LEGISLATURE IF THERE'S
WAYS THAT WE CAN WORK TOGETHER,
SO WE HAVE MORE TOOLS TO TRY AND
RESPOND TO THESE FOLKS AGAIN.
YOUR I THINK YOU HAVE IT EXACTLY
RIGHT. PEOPLE ARE FOCUSED ON
THAT SUBSET. AND WHEN WE TALK TO
THEM ABOUT THE SUCCESS THAT
WE'RE HAVING PEOPLE THINK WE'RE
CRAZY BECAUSE THEY DON'T THEY
DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE'RE
ACTUALLY MAKING PROGRESS IN
TERMS OF ACTUALLY GETTING PEOPLE
OFF THE STREETS. THEY STILL HAVE
THAT PERSON STANDING ON THE
STREET CORNER NEAR THEIR
BUSINESS SCREAMING, AND THEY WE
HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING ABOUT THAT
PERSON AND UNAWARE OF THE FACT
THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO
TRANSITION THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE,
INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES OFF THE
STREETS THAT GOES UNNOTICED
BECAUSE AGAIN THE VAST MAJORITY
OF THE PROBLEM. IS VERY
DISCREETLY HANDLED AND NOT
NOTICED BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC,
EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE BULK OF THE
POPULATION AND THIS POLICY
CHANGE DO YOU BELIEVE WOULD END
UP SAVING RESOURCES? YOU'RE NOT
HAVING TO CHRONICALLY REPEATEDLY
DEAL WITH SOME OF THE SAME
INDIVIDUALS OR WHO'S GONNA PUT
YOU KNOW WHO'S GOING TO PAY FOR
ALL THIS CONSERVATORSHIP? I
THINK THE COUNTY MAYBE THE
BETTER SUITED TO ANSWER THAT.
YOU KNOW, I THINK THE
CONSERVATIVE CONSERVATORSHIP
CONVERSATION IS REALLY DIFFICULT
. ONE PART OF IT IS THAT THERE'S
OBVIOUS CLEAR NEED TO DO THAT.
I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. HERE
ARE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT HAS
OPERATED AN OUTREACH TEAM CALLED
THE HOPE TEAM SINCE 2014. ON
AVERAGE, THAT TEAM HAS TO
CONTACT A HOMELESS INDIVIDUAL
OVER 60 TIMES BEFORE THEY ACCEPT
ASSISTANCE AND RESOURCES. AND
THAT'S THE WAY THAT WE USE TO
TRY TO PROVIDE RESOURCES AND
AVOID INCARCERATION AND ARRESTS.
BUT YOU KNOW, 60 TIMES TO TALK
TO AN INDIVIDUAL BEFORE THEY
ACCEPT HELP. UM I THINK IT'S A
BROADER CONVERSATION, AND IT
GOES INTO CARE COURT LIKE THE
MAYOR MENTIONED. AND IT GOES
INTO A BROADER PERSPECTIVE ABOUT
HOW DO WE DEAL WITH MENTAL
HEALTH IN THIS STATE? HOW DO WE
GET THE RESOURCES TO THESE
PEOPLE WHO HAVE FALLEN INTO
HOMELESSNESS. AND ARE NOT
WILLING TO ACCEPT CARE ARE NOT
WILLING TO RECEIVED TREATMENT
THAT IS DESPERATELY NEEDED OR
THEY'RE UNABLE TO. I MEAN, THERE
ARE A LOT OF IT IS IF YOU'RE
THAT SEVERELY MENTALLY ILL OR A
DICTATOR OR BOTH. I DON'T
BELIEVE YOU. YOU'RE GOING TO
MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS MOST
TIMES, AND THIS IS ONE
CONVERSATION WE'VE HAD AT THE
COUNTY LEVEL, WHICH I THINK IS
VERY RELEVANT IS PREVENTION. HOW
DO WE PREVENT MORE PEOPLE FROM
FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS? THERE
WAS A RECENT CALM MATTERS
ARTICLE, WHICH IS QUITE
INTERESTING ON BASICALLY SAYING
THAT CALIFORNIA SENIORS ARE THE
MOST VULNERABLE POPULATION
MOVING INTO HOMELESSNESS. COUNTY
LEVEL. WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IS
HOW DO WE IDENTIFY THESE
INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE RIGHT ON THE
EDGE? AND IT GOES TO HOUSING
COSTS, BUT IT ALSO GOES TO
WHAT'S WHAT'S THEIR FAMILY
SITUATION WHEN WE TRY TO PLACE A
HOMELESS INDIVIDUAL AND PUT THEM
IN HOUSING. WE OFTEN REACH OUT
TO THEIR FAMILIES, BECAUSE
THAT'S THEIR SUPPORT NETWORK.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT THEY
MIGHT LISTEN TO, THEY MIGHT
TRUST AND RELY ON WHO CAN HELP
GUIDE THEM THROUGH A VERY
COMPLICATED ADMINISTRATIVE
PROCESS. TO HELP STABILIZE THEM
, AND THAT'S ONE THING THAT I
THINK AS A BROADER POLICY
CONVERSATION IS FOCUSING ON
PREVENTION AND WORKING MORE WITH
FAMILIES TO PREVENT PEOPLE FROM
FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS WHEN
WE TALK ABOUT MORE PEOPLE
BECOMING HOMELESS, THAT WE CAN
HOUSE IN A REASONABLE SPAN OF
TIME. THAT IS SOMETHING WE'VE
GOT TO REALLY, REALLY ADDRESS.
AND A COUNTY LEVEL. WE'RE TRYING
TO DO THAT THROUGH OUR
DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND ADULT
SERVICES ARE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSITIONAL ASSISTANCE, BUT
IT'S NOT EASY TO DO. WE DO HAVE
PEOPLE THAT ARE IN OUR SYSTEM,
BUT OUR OWN DEPARTMENTS OFTEN
STRUGGLED TO TALK TO ONE
ANOTHER. I WANT TO JUST DIVE
INTO THIS CONSERVATORSHIP
ISSUES. SO YOU KNOW I HAVEN'T
READ THIS BILL, SO I'LL HAVE TO
READ IT. UM BUT WHAT WOULD BE
THE IDEA THAT YOU WOULD GO TO
COURT AND HAVE A PARTICULAR
PERSON DECLARED A CONSERVATOR OF
THE COUNTY? SENATOR EDMONDS BILL
WOULD ADJUST THE THRESHOLD FOR
CONSERVATORSHIP TO INCLUDE
THINGS LIKE YOUR ABILITY TO CARE
FOR YOUR OWN HEALTH AND WELL
BEING SO BEYOND THE THREAT TO
YOURSELF OR TO OTHERS, BUT TO
ALSO INCLUDE ARE YOU ABLE TO,
YOU KNOW, FOLLOW MEDICAL
DIRECTION. ARE YOU ABLE TO
PROVIDE FOR THE RIGHT PRICE FOR
SHELTER PROVIDE FOR THE BASIC
NECESSITIES? BUT WHO'S GOING TO
TAKE ON THAT RESPONSIBILITY? I
GUESS IS MY QUESTION IS, IS IT
IS IT THE COUNTY IS THAT THE
CITY IS THAT THE STATE? IT'S A
VERY VERY ONEROUS TO HAVE TO.
ONCE YOU DECLARE A
CONSERVATORSHIP. YOU'RE
RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT PERSON'S
WELL BEING IS THAT IS TRUE. I
MEAN, HER BILL DOESN'T CHANGE
DOES NOT CHANGE THE STRUCTURE.
IT CHANGES THE LEGAL THRESHOLD,
SO IT WOULD BE THE COUNTIES.
CORRECT BUT MAY I SAY TO YOUR
PREVIOUS QUESTION? THIS IS VERY
EXPENSIVE. CURRENTLY WE HAVE
PEOPLE IN MY CITY WHO CALLED 911
DAILY. ILLICIT 911 RESPONSE,
ROLLING UNITS PERSONNEL THAT
WILL COST TREMENDOUS AMOUNTS OF
MONEY AND TO THE EXTENT THAT
THOSE FOLKS WERE ABLE TO GET THE
CARE. THEY NEED THE HOUSING
STABILITY AND NOT CALL ME EVERY
DAY. I MEAN, WE'LL SAVE SOME
MONEY, AND WE'D PROBABLY ABLE
WILLING TO PUT SOME MONEY IN
TOWARDS HOUSING INTERVENTIONS,
UM, TO ACTUALLY HELP KEEP THAT
PERSON STABILIZED, BUT THE POINT
OF THE MATTER IS RIGHT NOW, IF
THEY DECLINE THOSE SERVICES,
THEY'RE STILL WITHIN THEIR LEGAL
RIGHT. TO DO THAT, AND WE HAVE
THEM ON THE STREET CORNER
STREAMING. SO, MR RADU, DO YOU
ALSO SUPPORT COMPELLING THAT
ELEMENT OF THE HOMELESS INTO
CARE WHEN THEY REFUSED
CHRONICALLY? I RESPECT FOR YOU
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S, UM, NOT IN A
POSITION TO SORT OF MAKE THOSE
AS A STAFF MEMBER. I APPRECIATE
THE QUESTION. UM I THINK WHAT I
CAN SAY IS, UM WE'VE TALKED A
LOT TODAY ABOUT HOW HOMELESSNESS
IS FUNDAMENTALLY A HOUSING
PROBLEM, AND I THINK THE DATA
BEAR THAT OUT. IT'S TRUE. BUT
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S MCCARTY'S
POINT. THERE'S ALSO THE CHAOS ON
THE STREETS THAT WE HAVE TO
CONTEND WITH. AND I THINK FOR
THE ENCAMPMENTS THAT WE'RE
SEEING IN BERKELEY, PEOPLE'S
PARKING CAME IN THAT WE
RESOLVED. THERE IS A LOT OF
MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE
ABUSE PROBLEMS. I MEAN, I'LL
GIVE YOU SOME STATISTICS FROM
PEOPLE'S PARK. 82% OF THOSE
FOLKS HAD MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS
. 68% HAD SUBSTANCE ABUSE
DISORDER PROBLEMS. 51% PHYSICAL
HEALTH. WE'RE APPLYING TO YOUR F
AROUND TWO TO RESOLVE AN
ENCAMPMENT IN WHICH 85% OF THE
PEOPLE HAVE MENTAL HEALTH
PROBLEMS. 80% SUBSTANCE ABUSE.
SO THIS IS VERY SERIOUS. SO
THERE'S A SUBSET OF THE
POPULATION AND PREDOMINANTLY,
THEY'RE LIVING IN THESE, LIKE
REALLY CHAOTIC, VERY DIFFICULT
TO RESOLVE ENCAMPMENTS FOR WHOM
IT IS TRUE THAT WE DEFINITELY
NEED MORE DEEP SUBSIDY AND MORE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BUT WE ALSO
NEED A SYSTEM OF CARE THAT
BRINGS THE SUPPORTS TO MAKE SURE
THAT THEY SUCCEED IN THAT
HOUSING AND RIGHT NOW AT THE AT
THE STATE LEVEL. THERE IS NO
MANDATE THAT THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE
SYSTEM PRIORITIZE REFERRALS,
ADAMANT ENCAMPMENT THAT A LOCAL
JURISDICTION HAS IDENTIFIED AS
DANGEROUS. THERE'S NO MANDATE
THAT THE MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM
AND NOW I WANT TO RECOGNIZE THE
COMPLEXITY OF THAT STATEMENT,
RIGHT WHEN YOU REORGANIZE HOW
YOU PRIORITIZE, YOU CREATE NEW
WINNERS AND LOSERS. AND SO IT'S
AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEM. IT'S
A POLITICAL PROBLEM, BUT I CAN
SAY AS A MATTER OF FACT, UNTIL
WE CONTEND WITH THAT REALITY, I
THINK IT'S GONNA BE VERY
DIFFICULT FOR US. TO CREATE
PATHWAYS TO STABILITY AT THE
LOCAL LEVEL, BECAUSE THE WELFARE
STATE AND CALIFORNIA'S
ADMINISTERED AT THE COUNTY LEVEL
, AND YET, PREDOMINANTLY, IT'S
BIG CITIES AND CITIES THAT ARE
RESPONDING TO ENCAMPMENTS. I
THINK, UH, MR MAYOR, THE BIG
CITY MAYORS FROM 2021 FLOATED A
STATISTIC THAT I FOUND TO BE
VERY COMPELLING. UM WHEN YOU
LOOK AT THE 2019 POINT ACCOUNT
POINT IN TIME, COUNT DATA 59% OF
THE STATES ON SHELTER POPULATION
RESOLVE IN THE BIG 13 RESIDE IN
THE BIG 13 CITIES, BUT ONLY 28%
OF THE GENERAL POPULATION THAT'S
MORE THAN TWICE THE SHARE. DO
YOU AGREE WITH SOME OF THE
EARLIER SPEAKER? IS THAT ALL OF
THESE ARE RESIDENTS OF YOUR
CITY, OR DO YOU BELIEVE THAT ANY
OF THEM ARE BEING BROUGHT IN
FROM OTHER LOCATIONS OR THAT
THEY'RE COMING HERE FROM OTHER
LOCATIONS? I THINK THE MAJORITY
AND OUR DATA ACTUALLY FROM THE
POINT IN TIME COUNT SUGGESTS
THAT ABOUT 70% OF FOLKS WERE
LAST REASON LAST RESIDED IN
ALAMEDA COUNTY. WE DON'T HAVE
CITY SPECIFIC DATA, AND IT'S
SOMETHING THAT I'M PUSHING THAT
WE WORK TO SORT OF
THINK THAT WE DO SEE SOME FOLKS
MIGRATING INTO BERKELEY TO
RECEIVE SERVICES, BUT THEY'RE
NOT COMING FROM MILWAUKEE.
THEY'RE NOT COMING FROM DETROIT
. THEY'RE COMING, MAYBE FROM EL
CERRITO OR FROM RICHMOND OR FROM
CITIES THAT ARE NEARBY TO COME,
AND ALSO NOTABLY WITHIN ALAMEDA
COUNTY WERE PAID BY THE COUNTY
TO BE A REGIONAL HUB. FOURTH FOR
SO WE SEE FOLKS COMING FROM OUR
NEIGHBORING CITIES LIKE ALBANY
AND EMERYVILLE, WHICH WAS MUCH
SMALLER COMING TO BERKELEY, AND
SOME OF THAT IS BY DESIGN. YEAH
I MEAN, I JUST I THINK, MR CHAIR
THAT'S A BIG ISSUE TO THIS. THIS
HAS TO BE LOOKED AT STATEWIDE
BECAUSE UM, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE
THE PARTICULAR PEOPLE ARE COMING
FROM, AND WE'RE ASKING
PARTICULAR JURISDICTIONS TO, UM
FOR THE WHOLE COST FOR IT. UM
AND SO I JUST I THINK A FEW
MEMBERS HAVE SAID IT. I MEAN,
WE'RE KIND OF OUT OF MONEY FROM
THE STATE, SO I MEAN, WE'D LOVE
TO JUST HAVE UNLIMITED MONEY. SO
I'M INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT
SOMEBODY'S POLICY ISSUES.
WHETHER IT'S THE CONSERVATORSHIP
ISSUE WHERE OR HOW MONEY IS
ALLOCATED THAT ALREADY EXIST.
AND TO DOING IT SMARTER AND
BETTER AND WORKING WITH THE
LOCALS. I THINK YOU GUYS HAVE A
BETTER HANDLE ON THE ISSUE, THEN
MAYBE SOME OF THE OTHER POLICY
PEOPLE, SO I JUST APPRECIATE YOU
BEING HERE AND THE OPPORTUNITY
TO ENGAGE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR ISRAELI 11 QUESTION FOR MR
REDO AND JUST OPEN UP MY PHONE
TO GET THE QUESTION. SO YOU HAD
MENTIONED THE STATE REFERRAL
FROM THE ER F PROGRAM TO
PERMANENT HOUSING. WHAT IS? WHAT
DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT WHAT I
MENTIONED MR CHAIR WAS THAT WE
ARE STRUGGLING TO FIND PERMANENT
EXITS FOR PEOPLE THAT ARE IN OUR
E. R F FUNDED PROJECT BECAUSE,
WELL, WHAT WE DID BUDGET AND
RECEIVED ER FUNDING SUPPORT FOR
SOME FLEXIBLE DOLLARS ON THE
ORDER OF BETWEEN 7000 TO $8000
PER PERSON WE DON'T HAVE RIGHT
NOW. DEEP HOUSING SUBSIDIES OR
HOUSING UNITS ON THE BACK END TO
WHICH WE CAN REFER PEOPLE, AND I
THOUGHT IT WAS IRONIC THAT WE
HAD 42 ROOM MASTER. THE EAST
HOTEL. THROUGH ER F AND 42 ROOM
, UH, MOTEL THAT WE PURCHASE
WITH HOME KEY ON THE SAME
TIMELINE, AND WE COULDN'T
ACTUALLY CREATE A DIRECT
PIPELINE FOR THAT FOR THAT
COHORT. SO ANY FLEXIBILITY THAT
ALLOWS US TO PUT YOUR F FUNDED
PROJECTS FIRST IN LINE, I THINK
, OF COURSE, THEY HAVE TO MEET
THE PERMANENT, SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING OUT ELIGIBILITY
GUIDELINES AND ALL THOSE THINGS,
BUT BUT ALL THINGS EQUAL IF WE
IF WE GAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO
HEAR US, I THINK WE COULD SEE A
BETTER PIPELINE OUT OF
ENCAMPMENTS AND ENTREPRENEUR.
PERMANENT HOUSING. MORE
SUGGESTIONS TO GET TO GENEVIEVE
AS WE'RE DOING THAT I THINK THIS
THIS IS YOU KNOW, WE'VE YOU
KNOW, WE'VE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF
LONGSTANDING PROGRAMS. WE HAVE
SOME OF THESE NEWER PROGRAMS,
AND IT'S JUST CONNECTING THEM.
MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE THEY'RE
LINKED PROPERLY OR THAT THEY'RE
ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER PROPERLY.
I THINK THAT'S BEEN THE PART
PART OF THE CHALLENGE THAT WE'RE
JUST STARTING TO SEE. SO I THINK
THAT FEEDBACK IS EXTRAORDINARILY
HELPFUL WHEN I JUST WANT TO SAY,
RESPECTFULLY, MR CHAIR THAT THAT
DOESN'T CREATE MORE RESOURCES,
RIGHT? IT JUST REALLOCATES THE
DECK CHAIRS AND SO IF A GOAL OF
THE STATE IF ONE OF MANY GOALS
OF THE STATE IS TO HELP LOCALS
RESPOND TO THE MOST CHAOTIC,
MOST PROBLEMATIC ENCAMPMENTS. I
DO BELIEVE THAT THAT WOULD HELP.
UM BUT OF COURSE IT'S GONNA, UM
IT'S NOT GOING TO CREATE MORE
RESOURCES. IT'S JUST GOING TO
REALLOCATE THE DECKCHAIRS
UNDERSTAND. AND THEN IN TERMS OF
CALTRANS HOUSE CALTRANS BEEN TO
WORK WITH BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S
A BEEN AN ISSUE. UM WE'VE
ACTUALLY HAD, UM A COUPLE OF
INSTANCES IN THE LAST TWO YEARS
IN WHICH WE'VE PARTNERED VERY
CLOSELY WITH CALTRANS TO RESOLVE
ENCAMPMENTS ON THE I 80
CORRIDOR. UM AND MORE RECENTLY
THAT I 80 GILMAN INTERCHANGE,
WHICH IS A ONE OF THE WORST IN
THE STATE. UM BUT BUT SOME OF
THAT CONSTRUCTION IS IMPACTING
CITY, WRITE A WAYS IN WHICH WE
HAD SOME OF OUR MOST ENTRENCHED
INCUMBENTS. IN FACT, THE ONE
THAT WE'RE PROPOSING ER F TWO
FUNDING FOR UM AND WE PARTNER
VERY CLOSELY WITH CALTRANS TO
MAKE SURE THAT THE ENCAMPMENT
RESOLUTION TIMELINE COINCIDED
WITH THE CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE
AND VICE VERSA. SO OUR
PARTNERSHIP WITH CALTRANS HAS
BEEN ON ON THOSE BIG ENCAMPMENTS
HAS HAS NOT BEEN BAD AT ALL. I
THINK, UM ONE THING THAT, UH ONE
OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO IMPROVE
COORDINATION WITH CALTRANS IS ON
SOME OF THE SMALLER ENCAMPMENTS.
UM OFTENTIMES WE'LL GET MAYBE,
LIKE ONE OR TWO DAYS NOTICE. UH
WHEN YOU KNOW THEY INTEND TO
RESOLVE AND CAMDEN AND THEY
ASKED US TO DO OUTREACH WERE
OFTEN SCHEDULED OUR OUTREACH
TEAMS BECAUSE OF OUR BAC3 WEEKS,
AND SO THERE'S YOU KNOW, THAT
JUST KIND OF PUSHES THE PROBLEM
FROM STATE RIGHT AWAY ONTO THE
CITY RIGHT AWAY. ON THAT POINT.
IF I CAN JUST SAY I WE'VE BEEN
ABLE TO USE HAVE FUNDING TO
CONTRACT WITH AN OUTFIT CALLED
CITY NET, AND WE COORDINATE WITH
CALTRANS. NOW WAS THEY DO THE
CLEANUPS, THE RIGHTFUL REMOVAL
OF LITTER AND OTHER PROPERTY BUT
TO HAVE WORKERS THERE TO
ACTUALLY HELP GET THE
INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY BE LIVING IR
AGAINST SHELTERS THAT ARE FUNDED
WITH HALF FUNDING. IT'S THE KIND
OF COORDINATION I THINK YOU ALL
WOULD BE PROUD OF GOVERNOR
NEWSOM CAME AND PERSONALLY
HIGHLIGHTED THAT PARTICULAR
PROGRAM. I'M NOT SAYING OUR
FREEWAYS ARE CLEAR OF
ENCAMPMENTS. CLEARLY, IT'S A BIT
OF A WHACK A MOLE SITUATION AS
WAS MENTIONED, BUT THERE'S A
QUANTIFIABLE IMPROVEMENT BECAUSE
OF THE CDC GUIDANCE COMING BACK
AND ALLOW US TO DO THAT WORK
AGAIN. CALTRANS BUT THEN
COORDINATING IT, SO THE EXIT
ISN'T FROM ONE FREEWAY OFF RAMP
TO ANOTHER, BUT FROM WHERE WE
ARE OFFERING TO HOUSING AGAIN,
THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL
HELPED TO DO. AND I THINK YOU
SHOULD RIGHTLY TAKE CREDIT FOR
HELPING MAKE IT POSSIBLE. AND IF
WE CAN HELP WITH MORE OF THAT,
PLEASE, PLEASE LET US KNOW
BECAUSE WE KNOW THEY CALTRANS IS
FRUSTRATED AS YOU ALL ARE
BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T IT WAS LIKE
THEY WELCOME PEOPLE TO THE
FREEWAY OFFERINGS, BUT THAT'S
WHERE THEY HAVE CONGREGATED. SO,
UM MR MAYOR. WE DEFINITELY HEARD
YOUR POINT ABOUT FLEXIBILITY. I
THINK WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE
SURE THAT THERE'S FLEXIBILITY,
BUT THERE'S ALSO PERFORMANCE
MEASURES KIND OF WHAT DR KUSHELL
SAID. SO AS YOU CAN APPRECIATE
YOUR TWO MEASUREMENTS ABOUT
REDUCING UNSHELTERED,
HOMELESSNESS AND PERMANENT
HOUSING, BUT A FEW OTHER
THOUGHTS ON WHAT THOSE ARE GOING
TO BE TAKING A LOOK AT THAT
THROUGH THIS THROUGH THIS, UH
DURING THESE BUDGET HEARINGS.
UM, AND THEN TO YOU KNOW, OUR
COLLEAGUE FROM SAN BERNARDINO,
YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S OTHER WAYS
THAT WE CAN HELP DIRECT YOU,
THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER
SOPHISTICATED NONPROFITS,
WHETHER IN L A OR SAN FRANCISCO
. I'M SURE SAN DIEGO, PLEASE,
PLEASE LET US KNOW. I THINK
THERE'S A LOT OF FOLKS WHO HAVE
BEEN DOING THIS WORK FOR QUITE A
WHILE THAT I THINK WOULD BE
WILLING TO ASSIST AND WILLING TO
WORK WITH YOUR FOLKS ON THE
GROUND. UM WITH THAT I'M GOING
TO SEE REALLY APPRECIATE ALL
THREE OF YOU FOR BEING HERE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR STAYING AT
THIS VERY, VERY LATE HOUR. NO
YOUR SCHEDULES ARE TIGHT, BUT WE
REALLY DO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME
AND AGAIN AS WE GO THROUGH OUR
DELIBERATIONS AND OUR FEEDBACK,
REALLY YOUR FEEDBACK ON THE
PROGRAMS THAT AS THEIR EXISTING
AND WHAT YOU RECOMMEND TO
IMPROVE THEM IS REALLY VERY,
VERY CRITICAL. SO PLEASE GET ANY
OF THOSE ITEMS TO GENEVIEVE.
VERY, VERY HELPFUL. I'M GONNA
MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS. SEE IF
THERE'S ANY PUBLIC SO THANK YOU.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING
TODAY. ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS IN
THE ROOM? WE HAVE PUBLIC
COMMENT. THANK YOU FOR YES.
THANK YOU. KIM LEWIS,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
COALITION FOR YEARS AND ALWAYS
APPRECIATE THE LEGISLATURE'S
ATTENTION TO OUR YOUNG PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS
BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE DIFFERENT
NEEDS THAT ARE CHRONICALLY
HOMELESS POPULATION. SO WHEN
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT
ACCOUNTABILITY AND OUTCOMES, WE
NEED TO HAVE DIFFERENT OUTCOMES
FOR YOUNG PEO THINKING ABOUT EXS
TO SAFE AND STABLE HOUSING
BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT THEM
GROWING UP IN OUR HOUSING FOR
THE NEXT 55 YEARS, SO WE WANT TO
MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT ALL THESE MEASURES
THAT WE'RE DOING WHAT MAKES
SENSE FOR OUR YOUNG PEOPLE AS
WELL. ALSO THINK ABOUT
INCREASING OUR ONGOING FUNDING
WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE THAT
INCREASINGLY SET ASIDE FOR YOUTH
AND SOME OF THOSE ALLOCATIONS
THAT'S LIKE $30,000, AND WHEN
PEOPLE USE THAT AS THE CEILING
RATHER THAN THE FLOOR, YOU'RE
NOT REALLY DOING MUCH TO FUND A
PROGRAM AT THAT DOLLAR AMOUNT,
SO REALLY ENCOURAGE IT AND
REALLY APPRECIATE THIS
CONVERSATION WILL SEND YOU SOME
SUGGESTIONS ON THE TRAILER BILL
ADMINISTRATION HIS LANGUAGE TO
MAKE BETTER IMPROVEMENTS. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. JUSTIN BARRETT
WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE
ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES
REPRESENTING ALL 58 COUNTIES IN
CALIFORNIA, CSX TOP ADVOCACY
PARTY THIS YEAR IS TO MEET THE
HOMELESSNESS CRISIS HEAD ON
COUNTIES ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE
RECENT STATE INVESTMENTS THAT
HAVE HELPED US REALLY INNOVATE
AND MAKE SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS.
HOWEVER WE BELIEVE THAT
MEANINGFUL PROGRESS ON
HOMELESSNESS CAN ONLY BE
ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE CREATION
OF A COMPREHENSIVE HOMELESSNESS
SYSTEM WITH ACCOUNTABILITY,
CLEAR LINES OF RESPONSIBILITY
FOR ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.
AND SUSTAINABLE FUNDING SACKS,
ENGAGING IN ASSOCIATION WIDE
EFFORT TO MAP OUT THE EXISTING
SYSTEM. WHAT ARE THE GAPS AND
BARRIERS AND WHAT TOOLS AND
RESOURCES ARE NEEDED TO MAKE
FURTHER PROGRESS? SO WE LOOK
FORWARD TO GETTING CLOSE TO BE
ABLE TO DEVELOP OUR
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SHARING
THAT WITH YOU WILL INCLUDE
COMMENDATIONS RELATED TO
PREVENTION TO HOUSING TO THE
UNSHELTERED RESPONSE SYSTEM,
WORKFORCE DATA AND SUSTAINABLE
FUNDING. SO WE'RE APPRECIATIVE
OF THE ATTENTION ON THIS ISSUE,
EXCITED TO PARTNER THIS YEAR
WITH THE LEGISLATURE OF THE
ADMINISTRATION, CITIES AND OTHER
KEY PARTNERS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU. HI I'M MARI CASTALDI. I'M
THE SENIOR LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATE
ON HOMELESSNESS AND HOUSING,
CALIFORNIA SOMEONE WHO WORKS
WITH SERVICE PROVIDERS, LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS, PEOPLE
EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS ALL
ACROSS THE STATE. I HEAR
CONSTANTLY ABOUT HOW IMPACTFUL
THE STATE'S INVESTMENTS HAVE
BEEN, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE
YOUR FRAMING OF COMMENTS AROUND
BALANCING FLEXIBILITY AND
BALANCE SYSTEMS WITH REALLY
STRONG LONG TERM OUTCOMES AND
HOUSING OUTCOMES. WHAT WE KNOW
IS THAT HOUSING WITH SUPPORT
SERVICES IS THE MOST EFFECTIVE
WAY PARTICULARLY FOR FOLKS
EXPERIENCING CHRONIC
HOMELESSNESS TO NOT ONLY END
THEIR HOMELESSNESS BUT IMPROVE
THEIR HEALTH OUTCOMES, THEIR
INCOME ALL THOSE OTHER WELL
BEING TRAITS WE WANT TO SEE AND
REALLY LONG TERM SOLUTIONS. THAT
SCALE REQUIRE LONG TERM FUNDING
AT SCALE, SO WE'RE SUPER
SUPPORTIVE OF ONGOING FUNDING,
INCLUDING POTENTIALLY EXPLORING
REVENUE SOURCES THAT CAN BRING
FUNDING TO SCALE AND A
DEPENDABLE WAY AT THE STATE
LEVEL THAT WOULD HELP US ADDRESS
SOME OF OUR BUDGET SHORTCOMINGS
AS WELL. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR THIS HEARING. AND FOR YOUR
TIME. THANK YOU APPRECIATE IT.
THANK YOU FOR STICKING AROUND.
ALSO OPERATOR. I APOLOGIZE. I
DIDN'T ANNOUNCE THE NUMBER, BUT
HOPEFULLY IT'S BEEN ON THE
WEBSITE ANYBODY ON THE PHONE FOR
PUBLIC COMMENT. YES LINE 21 HERE
LINE IS OPEN. REPORTING WITH THE
CORPORATION FOR SUPPORTIVE
HOUSING. THANK YOU FOR HOLDING
THIS HEARING TODAY WE CANNOT
MAKE HEADWAY IN REDUCING
HOMELESSNESS AND TROUBLE. STATE
TAKES THE NEXT LOGICAL STEPS IN
PURSUING THAT COMMITMENT, WHICH
REQUIRES ONGOING FUNDING
INVESTED PRIMARILY IN PERMANENT
HOUSING. ONLY ONGOING SUNNY AND
PERMANENT HOUSING REDUCES
HOMELESSNESS. THE MORE HOUSING
WE HAVE THE FEWER SHELTER BEDS
WE NEED. WE HAVE A BOTTLENECK
AND SHELTERS RIGHT NOW BECAUSE
WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH
HOUSING FOR PEOPLE, THE EXIT
AVAILABLE HOUSING ABOUT THEIR
SHELTER BEDS, THE TURNOVER,
MAKING THEM MORE EFFECTIVE.
ALMOST THIS IS SOLVABLE WITH
ONGOING CONSISTENT FUNDING AND
WHAT WORKS. WE CAN BUILD ENOUGH
HOUSING AND PAY FOR ENOUGH
RENTAL SUBSIDIES TO HELP
CALIFORNIANS EXIT HOMELESSNESS
FOR GOOD. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
. IN FACT, WE DO THOMASES AMONG
VETERANS BY 55% THROUGH ONGOING
SPENDING FOR RENTAL SUBSIDIES
COMBINED WITH SERVICES. AND A
RECENT REPORT SHOWED IT WOULD
TAKE ABOUT 2.7% OF OUR STATE
BUDGET OVER THE NEXT 12 YEARS TO
SOLVE HOMELESSNESS. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO
SOLVING THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU.
NEXT CALLER. AND WE HAVE NO
OTHER QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME.
THANK YOU OPERATOR, SAYING NO
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE
ROOM. WE WILL ADJOURN. THANK
YOU.