Why does Sacramento County want to spend more than $19M on just 82 beds for homeless? | Opinion
Exactly two years ago, when I was but a young pup of a columnist and the California budget resembled nothing so much as Scrooge McDuck’s gold coin-filled swimming pool, I mused on the $25 million deal between the state and the County of Sacramento “to address the concerns of (the) unpermitted homeless population on the American River Parkway.”
“Though they don’t deserve this additional funding, maybe the supervisors will use it wisely this time,” I wrote back in September of 2022.
Youthful hope springs eternal.
The fact that it’s taken two years to even get a plan for this money in front of the supervisors, is yet more proof of Sacramento County’s tediously slow efforts to address the growing homeless population along the parkway. It is the No. 1 issue for voters in our area, it frustrates local cities and daily places homeless lives in danger.
Yet, in response to all of that, the county seems set to use the money in a way that would benefit very few of the people who are actually living along the parkway.
County wants $19.4 million for 82 beds
The county’s proposed plan for the money, which will be heard at 10:45 a.m. this morning at the Board of Supervisors meeting, is to spend $19.4 million of the $25 million to fund three projects and a little more than 80 beds for a population that Sacramento County admits can number anywhere from 500 to 1,000 people nightly along the parkway.
At a cost of approximately $13.5 million for 82 beds, each will cost the county approximately $164,600, including supportive services anywhere from three to 10 years.
An old Residence Inn will be renovated and 32 units will be reserved for people making at or less than 30% of the “Area Median Income” — that works out to about $25,000 per year for a single householder or $35,000 for a family of four.
The other 142 units (80%) will go to residents who are making no more than 80% of the Area Median Income, which works out to roughly $66,050 annually for single residents and $94,300 annually for a family of four. The county is hoping the few people who get one of the units at 30% will eventually “graduate” into the 80% units.
“These units would target those with lower acuity, who need on-going rental subsidy, but who can be successful with field-based supportive services,” according to the county’s proposal to the supervisors.
But that’s not exactly the same class of Sacramentans who were living on the river. (Ironically, I would almost qualify for that housing as a single woman, with what I make as a full-time columnist at The Bee.)
Sacramento City councilwoman for District 3, Karina Talamantes, said she asked the county many times over the last two years to come to the table with her and discuss their plans for the $25 million project. She also sits on the city and county “4x2” and the project was never discussed there. Talamantes said she confirmed the county never discussed the money or proposal with the Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency, and she had no idea the project was moving forward with a county vote until everyone got a memo last Thursday about it.
“There’s a lot of things … that I feel could have been vetted more,” Talamantes said. “I just think it’s too much money for too little promises.”
Where the money is going
There’s $25 million available, but the county has a proposal for just $19.4 million. Of that, $8 million will go toward buying 32 units — 20% — of an old Residence Inn at 1530 Howe Ave., near the intersection at Arden Way.
Another $5.5 million will fund 50 beds of “interim housing” on scattered sites around the county for up to three years, making up the rest (and bulk) of the proposed beds. Finally, $5.9 million will be used as a rental subsidy for 32 “eligible tenants” for the next 10 years, and include supportive services for the same period.
The 176-unit property near Howe and Arden will be bought by Sutter Capital Group, which has never worked with the county before, but said it operates similar sites in South Sacramento. The county got three responses to their request for proposal for the money, but Halcon said none of them were right for the county’s budget and time frame.
Talamantes said she would like to publicly see the county’s reasoning for dismissing those offers, especially since some of them came in under the Sutter Group’s budget. On Tuesday morning, Sacramento City Mayor Darrell Steinberg announced on X that he urged the Board of Supervisors to approve the staff recommendation, with one addition: To invest the remaining $5.6 million directly to Talamantes’ District 3 and Shoun Thao’s District 2, both of which feel a pinch each time the parkway is swept of encampments.
City asked for emergency meeting
Talamantes said she asked for an emergency meeting with McCarty, Halcon, County Supervisor Rich Desmond and other county officials on homelessness to discuss the proposal and perhaps delay the vote until various stakeholders could better understand what the money would go to. Halcon told me on Monday afternoon that, as far as she understood, the vote was set to go forward regardless of the outcome of that meeting.
“I strongly believe that the county could have been a partner to the city of Sacramento and the $25 million that was allocated,” Talamantes told me afterward. “I really hope that tomorrow at the Board of Supervisors meeting, there’s a commitment from the supervisors … that the money can be used for what it was intended for.”
It’s no small wonder people gravitate toward the bushy privacy of the riverbanks, seeking some respite from constant encampment sweeps by the city and county of Sacramento when they have no other place to go. Moreover, the county’s lack of communication with the city, the Housing and Redevelopment Agency and other stakeholders in the region is unacceptable.
“When I first got this, I thought to myself, ‘This is ridiculous,’” McCarty said. “But the county memo was really poorly-written, so it doesn’t clarify that, no, none of this money is going for populations that are non-homeless.”
A poorly written proposal after two long years of waiting is as worthless as the paper it’s written on. All this does is allow Sacramento County to continue paddling in circles—spending millions of dollars to add a handful of beds here and there and then crying foul when anyone asks what progress has been made on the issue.
County needs to share
The county is not the only stakeholder in the issue of homelessness on the American River Parkway—when they sweep the parkway, those people mostly wind up in the neighborhoods of the city of Sacramento. Steinberg’s plan to invest the remaining millions seems like a practical solution to placate the city councilors who were upset, but it doesn’t address the problem that there’s still too much money being spent on too few units.
“I had hope that this (money) would provide the neighborhoods that I represent with a level of relief. And fast forward now to September of 2024 and we get a plan on Thursday about how the $25 million is going to be allocated? I don’t think it does enough, and I am disappointed in the proposed plan,” Talamantes said.
“I hope that the supervisors vote down the staff recommendation and go back to the drawing board, because I believe that Sacramento, including the neighborhoods that I represent, deserve better.”
It’s regrettable to suggest another delay, but with the state of this proposal, the supervisors must postpone their vote today until representatives from the city of Sacramento and the state have at least been brought in on the conversation. Even if those stakeholders aren’t given final approval, then their voices must least be heard.
This story was originally published September 10, 2024 at 9:45 AM.
