Although the City of Santa Rosa did not cite the Santa Rosa Homeless Collective in the staff report or at the City Council there is a clear link to the Santa Rosa Homeless Collective Accountability Committee – Final Report March 29, 2017 Recommendation #3.
The report cites a business survey of 80 businesses. No methodology or references are provided in the report.
More importantly no data over time for the number of infractions is given as to the basis of the Collective recommendation or the Staff Report for the Council.
The lack of linkage and citation may be the belief that members of the City Council do not want the Collective to be cited because there is no Brown Act nexus, hence recommendations provided have a different standard for consideration. If, however, the Council members did in fact use the report they should at least have discussed it openly.
The Santa Rosa Homeless Collective is also sponsored OrgCode Trainings in Sonoma County, Summit on Homeless Solutions and follow up trainings.
The Santa Rosa Homeless Collective includes the following people: (included based on the web site and appearing in meeting notes or correspondence. Several of these people are no longer in these roles.)
Jenny Abramson, Community Development Commission, Sonoma County
Amy Appleton, SHARE Sonoma County
Lea Barron- Thomas, West End Neighborhood Association
Dick Carlile, Carlile-Macy
Susan Castillo, Behavioral Health Department, Sonoma County
Caitlyn Childs, Social Advocates for Youth
Lee Dibble, Santa Rosa Together
Michelle Edwards, Boys & Girls Clubs, Central Sonoma County
Robert Etherington, Santa Rosa Junior College
Willow Farey, American Medical Response,
David Guhin, City of Santa Rosa
David Gouin, City of Santa Rosa, Planning and Economic Development
Danial Hage, consultant
Kris Hoyer, Probation Department, Sonoma County
Jennielynn Holmes, Catholic Charities
Chris Keys, Redwood Gospel Mission
Akash Kalia, owner, Palms Inn
Jenni Klose, Santa Rosa City Schools
Mark Krug, consultant
Laurie McFadden, American Medical Response
Ray Navarro, Captain, Police Department, Santa Rosa
Ernesto Olivares, Santa Rosa City Council
Kathleen Pozzi, Public Defender’s Office, Sonoma County
Heidi Prottas, Sonoma County Task Force on the Homeless,
Railroad Square Business Owner
Tom Robertson, business owner
Janet Rogers, Santa Rosa Metro Chamber
John Sawyer, Santa Rosa City Council
Tom Schwedhelm, Santa Rosa City Council
Hannah Scott, Burbank Housing
Sonoma County Chiefs of Police Association
Brian Staebell, Sonoma County District Attorney’s office
Steve Suter, Fire Department, Santa Rosa
Steve Thomas, Tickler & Thomas, former SRPD
Katrina Thurman, Social Advocates for Youth
Holly Trujillo, Community Development Commission, Sonoma County
Jeff Weaver, Police Department, Sebastopol
Karen Weeks, Design Review Board, appointed by John Sawyer, Urban Community Partnership worked for the city of Santa Rosa as a housing specialist in the Economic Development and Housing Department developing the Neighborhood Revitalization Program, homeless programs and affordable housing projects
Liana Whisler, jail sergeant, Sheriff’s Office, Sonoma County
Shirley Zane, Board of Supervisors, Sonoma County
On May 2, 2017 the Santa Rosa City Council conducted a study session
3.1 QUALITY OF LIFE ORDINANCES – ENFORCEMENT OPTIONS
This Study Session will provide the City Council with an overview of the City’s existing ordinances regarding quality of life in the City, and of past, current and proposed practices to enforce those ordinances.
The staff report is here:
The video of May 2 QOL session is here:
On August 8 the Santa Rosa City Council approved going forward with reinstating a policy of allowing law enforcement officers to issue misdemeanors rather than just infractions for what are called Quality of Life Infractions (QOL).
The staff report is notable in that it is little changed from the May report. It is here:
Gerry La Londe-Berg testimony 08/08/17 [Over 3 minute version]
“The City of Santa Rosa should not change its laws considering people who are homeless until it has done everything it can possibly do to mitigate the situation. Increasing penalties penalizes many people for no good reason. The law as suggested for change today does not serve the people who we are trying to get off the streets and make it to productive citizenship. With acknowledgment of what is being planned, increasing the instruments of control are not the best step. To be fair the data must first indicate this is the proper step.
Please identify on the City’s web site all the public bathrooms open during the day and which are open at night.
These particular changes to the city regulations were developed by the Santa Rosa Homeless Collective. Transparency is what is needed. It is unclear to me the genesis of who thought this would be a good idea. I would like to have a conversation with them. Better yet, I would like them to have a conversation which is documented with people who are homeless and who are suffering and who are standing by while you make such a decision as you consider tonight.
Homelessness in Santa Rosa will not be solved by increasing costs at the jail and increasing costs to the individuals who have no money and are therefore living homeless on the streets of Santa Rosa and Sonoma County.
Exactly what do you hope to accomplish with this law?
The 25 or 28 goals you have spelled out or not prominent enough everywhere. You have not achieved a level of transparency which would tell me the Catholic Charities is doing a good job; I know personally from close observation that Catholic Charities is doing good job and has done so since 1985.
If any Community can solve homelessness, the lack of housing for people who need housing, Santa Rosa and Sonoma County can do it they can set the example for everyone everywhere at least in the United States.
I call upon the city council and the alumni of leadership Santa Rosa and the advocates who are both living on the streets and helping to support the people who are living on the streets we must all come together to find out the 98% that we can agree on.”
Here’s the video of Tuesday’s 08/08/17 hearing:
Presentation begins at 1:22:18
Council Questions begins at 1:31:30
Public Comment begins at 1:52:44
Council Discussion begins at 3:01:40 – 3:36:23
As of 170816 Homeless Action! Has signatures opposed to this move of 818 people on an on-line petition and 97 who signed personally.
Perhaps we should all study the extensive actions under the Homeless Emergency and not artificially separate QOL issues from Homelessness,
RESOLUTION – EXTENSION OF PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL HOMELESS EMERGENCY RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended by the Housing and Community Services Department that the Council, by resolution, approve an extension of Resolution No. 28839 which formally proclaimed a local homeless emergency within Santa Rosa. Regular Meeting Agenda and Summary Report City of Santa Rosa Page 6 of 11 City Council AUGUST 15, 2017 Staff Report Resolution Presentation Attachments
Staff Report on Homeless Emergency 08/15/17It is impressive what has been done.
The next step, according to the Sean McGuin, City Manager, is to return to council with an MOU (memorandum of understanding) with the Sonoma County District Attorney’s office and a request for money that is not in the budget.
Notes after the August 8, 2017 meeting:
The final outcome was that they will go ahead with the change. They were not scheduled to vote, they were just reviewing a policy renewal which they are now billing as simply a return to practice prior to 2012 as they said at the May 2nd meeting. The large number of Advocates was not only diverse and well-spoken but they covered a lot of territory. It seems to me now there was a major misunderstanding and miscommunication because the city staff is presenting things in a rather broad brush manner. So they lump together weed abatement and urinating in public. Most of the council members including Chris Rogers and Jack Tibbetts we’re supportive of the change and stated their concerns.
The staff report from 08/08/17 is almost exactly the same as the staff report from May 2nd with no changes and in particular there is no data of any kind presented. Somewhat surprisingly Ernesto Olivares even did a long statement concerning the need for data which would give us accountability. Their basic position is that this is a tool to be used which will only be used in problematic recurrent situations.
Without Baseline transparent data there is no way to judge success. The City of Santa Rosa has this capacity but fails to use it in circumstances where it is not convenient – even though is is already collected in various data systems.
See: Tackling Homelessness with Data: The City of Santa Rosa, California
Another somewhat false hope that was brought up by most of them was the idea that restorative justice practices could be used in the Misdemeanor Court cases of people. From my opinion if they can’t have subtlety and accuracy in the ordinances that they have, they’re not giving the judges the tools that they need to understand the intent of the laws. Judges have no recollection, or even consideration, of compassionate statements of intent made during City Council meetings.
So basically, the City of Santa Rosa is talking out of both ends of the spectrum and they think that they’re trying to do something useful while they add a level of threat. Without accurate transparent baseline data there really is no way to measure success.
And because you read to the end you found the photos.
What Homeless Hill looked like before the organized encampment – Note the dates
The recent encampment – From Greg Fearon