2 18-2251 Subject: Homeless Encampment Management Report
From: Councilmember Bas
Recommendation: Receive An Informational Report From The City Administrator On Progress Towards Implementing The Homeless Encampment Management Program Recommendations Approved By City Council On July 9, 2019
John Sander, Wood Street Community Action Group - Lead
over 4 years ago
The solutions the City provides are band aids to an enormous problem that’s growing exponentially. Providing services at rogue encampments provides no incentive for the transient dwellers to go anywhere else. Wood Street and vicinity has become a destination for many who prefer to live “off the grid” yet at the same time demand the City provide services.
We applaud the City creating an encampment management program (EMP). But so much more needs to be done to vet the “residents” and to stop the Wood Street corridor from being a homeless destination.
The EMP should include requirements that "residents" have a direct connection to the local neighborhood to be allowed to camp and to receive City services. That may sound harsh, but the Wood Street corridor has been the literal dumping ground of Oakland for a long time, and as tax paying homeowners we've had enough and have been extremely accommodating to allowing and supporting temporary and permanent solutions in our neighborhood.
Report tries to re-frame many City [EMP] actions that are actually violence against unsheltered:
Self-Governance: waiting to define "self-governed" is a stalling tactic b/c the City Administrator's Office is unwilling to recognize the capability of unsheltered residents to form communities & organize among themselves, despite what they are ALREADY doing: w/in encampments & @ resistance demonstrations like Housing Justice Village, 11/24. Is City actively working w/HAWG to define? Where is the sense of urgency?
Employment: including 'readiness training & job placement' in Community Cabins is $1.5 million that goes back to City, not to unsheltered residents. This is NOT the same as hiring unsheltered residents.
Enforcement/Fire: sanction enough land so that City doesn't have to waste previous $ on enforcing closures; invest $ in fire-safe temporary shelters for self-governed encampments; City wants to increase OPD citations despite Devries saying the City does NOT cite for homelessness
Utah and Ohio found the Housing First models to be successful with case management to help people navigate addiction, health, employment, etc.
More taxes is not a solution, vote for creative out of the box solutions. Reallocate funds to be used to get people immediately housed. It’s a win-win.
Community Cabins and Shelters are bandages, but it doesn’t get people directly into housing. We can’t keep throwing money at bandages and the problem is still there and growing!
At this point even subsidizing market rate rental places is an option, make a deal with the developers that have empty units and/or empty buildings! Doesn’t benefit the developer or the city to have empty units sitting around.
For every 1 unit available you can house 2-4 people at a cost of 30-60M a year if it’s fully subsidized. If a person has some income or is employed the cost can quickly go down.
MONEY can be spent talking about how to get people housed or MONEY can be spent getting them directly housed!
I second Scott E & Marcus J. West Oakland (WO) can no longer be ignored. If you update the consensus you will notice an entirely new population of tax paying constituents. One townhome community alone has over 200 units & 300+ new thriving family members to the neighborhood within the last 3yrs. Few hundred more when Ellis at Central Station comes online. These two alone constitutes over 500 new family oriented constituents & +$5m in net new residential property tax to the city directly from WO.
This problem of homelessness in WO is not solely a WO problem. WO has historically been a neglected neighborhood bearing surrounding towns’ issues and now this systemic problem of homelessness. It is the city, county and state’s responsibility and it begins with you the city.
Please turn up the urgency to address the homelessness issues along Wood St in particular. Illegal campers are impeding approved projects from development. Appreciate your time, effort and attention on this matter.
I support the council’s efforts keeping the Homeless a priority.
However, I am disappointed that the discussion has not included more strategies to inspire those unhoused to want to be housed.
Providing the many housing options alone thus far does not inspire.
Currently how are the unhoused inspired to want more when they’re receiving daily curb side service such as food, clothing…and other provisions?
And when will the council develop a mechanism to identify true homeless (unhoused) to provide services? Separating the true homeless from the opportunists.
A recent protest activity in from of City Hall shown protestors dressed in new clothing, probably from Urban Outfitters or Nordstrom Clothing with new tents accusing Oakland isn’t doing enough. Oaklanders are doing more than their fair share.
The 40% homeowners can not continue to sustain homeless solutions by way of fee/measures when there is no strategy to inspire or foreseeable conclusion.
We residents of West Oakland appreciate the efforts to contain disastrous conditions along Wood Street, but the job is far from complete. After a herculean effort, a backsliding has clearly occurred. The roadway is once again filled with beloginings and garbage and the private parcels are far from clean. Campers continue to infiltrate. THIS IS OBLITERATING THE POTENTIAL TO PROVIDE HOUSING! Both city and citizenry are ALIGNED in the goal to add obviously-needed housing in this are and efforts by the city to make this happen are not muscular enough. This will be a disaster of civic trust if City fails to clear path for needed development, including affordable housing. We voters need to see sustained progress; keep it up and make it stronger.
Kimberly King, Agile, adaptable engineer; transformative change agent
over 4 years ago
Ancillary note--not enough room for the following in my previous post…
Most hand wash stations are NOT sanitized before they are replenished with water. This inadequate servicing promulgates pathogen growth. $1500/mo/unit is a gross overcharge, when instead there are opportunities for generating income to offset the cost of commodes/toilets. Seriously, the city is being overcharged.
I would hope by now knowledge has been gleaned about sustainable and best practices from sustainable SquareOne Villages model in Eugene, OR, which has been operating since 2012, and the local HERE/THERE Camp in Berkeley.
Based on your numbers, there are only ~26% shelters and transitional housing available for the un-housed population in Oakland—a pretty low for a success rate. Surely there could be more financial support earmarked for temporary and transitional offerings, while more TRULY affordable housing for low-/no-income residents becomes available.
Kimberly King, Agile, adaptable engineer; transformative change agent
over 4 years ago
I think the approach is all wrong. I think the reasons the conditions continue to deteriorate is because you persist in:
- Failing to perform adequate stakeholder engagement prior to providing services to glean appropriate needs.
- Only engaging in community groups, advocacy organizations and the general public stakeholder and not the actual persons on the street—this is why you are falling far short at successful execution. [pp 9.PUBLIC OUTREACH/INTEREST]
- Giving services to these encampments instead of instituting a rubric for fomenting empowerment.
Why do you insisting in advocating to place houseless/curbside folks in mostly unkempt, unsanitary, unsafe shelters? Perhaps you should earmark funds to support shelters that provide unsatisfactory and unsanitary conditions the ability to ameliorate and fix their inhumane, uncomfortable settings, so folks will actually want to stay there.
The solutions the City provides are band aids to an enormous problem that’s growing exponentially. Providing services at rogue encampments provides no incentive for the transient dwellers to go anywhere else. Wood Street and vicinity has become a destination for many who prefer to live “off the grid” yet at the same time demand the City provide services.
We applaud the City creating an encampment management program (EMP). But so much more needs to be done to vet the “residents” and to stop the Wood Street corridor from being a homeless destination.
The EMP should include requirements that "residents" have a direct connection to the local neighborhood to be allowed to camp and to receive City services. That may sound harsh, but the Wood Street corridor has been the literal dumping ground of Oakland for a long time, and as tax paying homeowners we've had enough and have been extremely accommodating to allowing and supporting temporary and permanent solutions in our neighborhood.
Report tries to re-frame many City [EMP] actions that are actually violence against unsheltered:
Self-Governance: waiting to define "self-governed" is a stalling tactic b/c the City Administrator's Office is unwilling to recognize the capability of unsheltered residents to form communities & organize among themselves, despite what they are ALREADY doing: w/in encampments & @ resistance demonstrations like Housing Justice Village, 11/24. Is City actively working w/HAWG to define? Where is the sense of urgency?
Employment: including 'readiness training & job placement' in Community Cabins is $1.5 million that goes back to City, not to unsheltered residents. This is NOT the same as hiring unsheltered residents.
Enforcement/Fire: sanction enough land so that City doesn't have to waste previous $ on enforcing closures; invest $ in fire-safe temporary shelters for self-governed encampments; City wants to increase OPD citations despite Devries saying the City does NOT cite for homelessness
Utah and Ohio found the Housing First models to be successful with case management to help people navigate addiction, health, employment, etc.
More taxes is not a solution, vote for creative out of the box solutions. Reallocate funds to be used to get people immediately housed. It’s a win-win.
Community Cabins and Shelters are bandages, but it doesn’t get people directly into housing. We can’t keep throwing money at bandages and the problem is still there and growing!
At this point even subsidizing market rate rental places is an option, make a deal with the developers that have empty units and/or empty buildings! Doesn’t benefit the developer or the city to have empty units sitting around.
For every 1 unit available you can house 2-4 people at a cost of 30-60M a year if it’s fully subsidized. If a person has some income or is employed the cost can quickly go down.
MONEY can be spent talking about how to get people housed or MONEY can be spent getting them directly housed!
I second Scott E & Marcus J. West Oakland (WO) can no longer be ignored. If you update the consensus you will notice an entirely new population of tax paying constituents. One townhome community alone has over 200 units & 300+ new thriving family members to the neighborhood within the last 3yrs. Few hundred more when Ellis at Central Station comes online. These two alone constitutes over 500 new family oriented constituents & +$5m in net new residential property tax to the city directly from WO.
This problem of homelessness in WO is not solely a WO problem. WO has historically been a neglected neighborhood bearing surrounding towns’ issues and now this systemic problem of homelessness. It is the city, county and state’s responsibility and it begins with you the city.
Please turn up the urgency to address the homelessness issues along Wood St in particular. Illegal campers are impeding approved projects from development. Appreciate your time, effort and attention on this matter.
I support the council’s efforts keeping the Homeless a priority.
However, I am disappointed that the discussion has not included more strategies to inspire those unhoused to want to be housed.
Providing the many housing options alone thus far does not inspire.
Currently how are the unhoused inspired to want more when they’re receiving daily curb side service such as food, clothing…and other provisions?
And when will the council develop a mechanism to identify true homeless (unhoused) to provide services? Separating the true homeless from the opportunists.
A recent protest activity in from of City Hall shown protestors dressed in new clothing, probably from Urban Outfitters or Nordstrom Clothing with new tents accusing Oakland isn’t doing enough. Oaklanders are doing more than their fair share.
The 40% homeowners can not continue to sustain homeless solutions by way of fee/measures when there is no strategy to inspire or foreseeable conclusion.
We residents of West Oakland appreciate the efforts to contain disastrous conditions along Wood Street, but the job is far from complete. After a herculean effort, a backsliding has clearly occurred. The roadway is once again filled with beloginings and garbage and the private parcels are far from clean. Campers continue to infiltrate. THIS IS OBLITERATING THE POTENTIAL TO PROVIDE HOUSING! Both city and citizenry are ALIGNED in the goal to add obviously-needed housing in this are and efforts by the city to make this happen are not muscular enough. This will be a disaster of civic trust if City fails to clear path for needed development, including affordable housing. We voters need to see sustained progress; keep it up and make it stronger.
Ancillary note--not enough room for the following in my previous post…
Most hand wash stations are NOT sanitized before they are replenished with water. This inadequate servicing promulgates pathogen growth. $1500/mo/unit is a gross overcharge, when instead there are opportunities for generating income to offset the cost of commodes/toilets. Seriously, the city is being overcharged.
I would hope by now knowledge has been gleaned about sustainable and best practices from sustainable SquareOne Villages model in Eugene, OR, which has been operating since 2012, and the local HERE/THERE Camp in Berkeley.
Based on your numbers, there are only ~26% shelters and transitional housing available for the un-housed population in Oakland—a pretty low for a success rate. Surely there could be more financial support earmarked for temporary and transitional offerings, while more TRULY affordable housing for low-/no-income residents becomes available.
I think the approach is all wrong. I think the reasons the conditions continue to deteriorate is because you persist in:
- Failing to perform adequate stakeholder engagement prior to providing services to glean appropriate needs.
- Only engaging in community groups, advocacy organizations and the general public stakeholder and not the actual persons on the street—this is why you are falling far short at successful execution. [pp 9.PUBLIC OUTREACH/INTEREST]
- Giving services to these encampments instead of instituting a rubric for fomenting empowerment.
Why do you insisting in advocating to place houseless/curbside folks in mostly unkempt, unsanitary, unsafe shelters? Perhaps you should earmark funds to support shelters that provide unsatisfactory and unsanitary conditions the ability to ameliorate and fix their inhumane, uncomfortable settings, so folks will actually want to stay there.