Homekey+, Behavioral Health Transformed, Proposition One

Watch the webinar, review the slide presentation, and contact us with your questions, or to sign up for housing development.

The Application Portal is now open for the Bond BHCIP Round 1 funding, within the Proposition One rollout. Learning about the many components of this comprehensive state effort is not easy, but necessary. HEAPA board members serve on many of the policy and funding resources here in Sonoma County, and we will be working to coordinate and distribute any materials we an find. We will also be placing on our many agendas opportunities to allow intererested applicants to ask questions and gain insights.

Santa Rosa Surplus Properties

Always in the pursuit of developing low income housing, I’ve stumbled upon a way to doing it using surplus city and county land, a new version of a successful state homeless housing program (Homekey+), and the skills and resources of small nonprofits and volunteers.

First, California counties and cities must gain approval of the California Housing and Community Development Department if they want to rid themselves of small parcels of unnecessary properties. Here’s a link to the 2,500 parcels which cities and counties have asked permission to declare surplus. Here is a link to a video the State Produced to explain the Housing and Local Government Local Land Development Opportunities Map.

Here is a link to the Santa Rosa webpage describing the City-owned Surplus Property and Process.

In Sonoma County, the list contains several parcels, mostly small ones purchased by government in order to build a road, or other public infrastructure, which were not needed once the project was finished. Government doesn’t want to have to maintain these parcels, and they are now trying to get rid of ownership.

Currently, larger nonprofit housing developers are using this list to find the larger pieces of developable land. It takes a lot of money to do so, but fortunately there are smaller parcels on this list which the nonprofit housing developers don’t want to bother acquiring. It just doesn’t pencil out to them unless there are 50-100 units being built. However, smaller service nonprofits are having some success build less than ten units on a parcel. This list contains 2,500 parcels all around the state.

If your nonprofit has any members who are skilled builders who have built anything from a granny unit to a couple of four-plexes on up to a half-acre property, you can be in the business of acquiring and building housing for your clients soon. Check out the applications the state has received from its government agencies, and go after the exempt surplus in your area. Download the communications between your city and the state, and sign up to have the properties transferred to you. Here are some examples of properties I am pursuing.

Among the properties that may be used for affordable housing are three parcels that stand out. One is in northern Cloverdale which I’m calling Cloverdale Commons. Another is near the Sonoma County Airport (Airport Commons). Finally, there is a site where several small parcels should be combined (Montecito Commons).

Brown Act Violations

Greetings!

About three weeks ago, I raised with your staff member (Michael Gause) my belief that the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board had violated the California Brown Act.  My email to him is below.

Greetings!

The meeting of the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition yesterday violated the California Brown Act by:

  1. Introducing, discussing, and taking action on an item not legally agendized.
  2. Coalition members and staff had received and were discussing a letter at the center of the discussion not made available to the public.
  3. Coalition leadership directed staff to conduct an investigation into the performance of a subcontractor charged in the letter, and report back to the Coalition.

As the Lead Agency to the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition (Continuum of Care), you are responsible for advising the Coalition during any meeting of their variance from the meeting requirements contained in the California Brown Act.  I believe that it was apparent to anyone trained in the Act that the Coalition began to violate the Act requirements toward the end of the meeting when the Chair asked members to discuss a letter they had all received from a member of the public.  I believe that you should have advised them that their actions were beginning to violate the provisions of the Brown Act.   Such actions seriously jeopardize the SCHC’s standing as a recipient of State funding directed to CoCs in good standing, and your use of the administrative cost reimbursements.  In addition, while I am aware that a MOU has still not been signed between the Department and the Coalition, I would assume that continued funding from California HCD to the Department and its subcontractors is dependent on its successful approval.

I have notified the County Executive of my concerns, and asked her to engage the County Counsel to review the meeting video to confirm or deny my conclusions.  I ask you to review all your and Coalition actions at the meeting, and be prepared to respond to the County Executive and County Counsel’s questions.  Also, please consider what actions may be necessary to move forward to remedy the violations.

Gregory Fearon

Michael replied to two of my assertions (below).

Hi Gregory,

I am also including Jennielynn and Una here.  To address your concerns:

  • This was brought up during the “Board Member Questions and Comments” Item on the agenda as a comment from the Board Member, Jackie Elward, thus it was on an agenda item that is reserved for specific comments and questions.  
  • No action was taken, no vote was take that gave direction to staff.

My best,

Michael 

Michael Gause

Ending Homelessness Program Manager

Sonoma County Department of Health Services – Homelessness Services Division

1450 Neotomas Avenue, Suite 115

Santa Rosa, CA 95405

(707) 791-8140 Michael.Gause@sonoma-county.org

The following is being supplied tomorrow to the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board in the monthly staff report (Follow up on SHARE Sonoma County Questions):

5. Follow up on SHARE Sonoma County Questions: The Coalition Board requested clarity on issues related to SHARE Sonoma County at the June Board meeting.  As there is no formal process for an investigation by the Coalition Board in this matter, an investigation is currently underway by the Department of Health Services Compliance Unit for contract and program compliance as the Department of Health Services has an obligation to the Funding Sources and the County of Sonoma. We will report out as appropriate and applicable per Counsel to the Coalition Board as the Department of Health Services serves as the Lead Agency for the Coalition Board. 

I repeat my belief that, as a result of the three independent violations cited in my first email, the discussion in the last part of the June 26th Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board meeting violated the California Brown Act.  I reject your staff member’s assertion that the conversation in the “Board Members Questions and Comments” agenda item meets the test of the public’s perception of that description.  The topic brought up was not discussed in any way prior to the beginning of the agenda item.

Second, and not addressed by your staff member, the letter being discussed was distributed to the Board, but not distributed to the public prior to the discussion.

Finally, this month’s staff followup report confirms that direction was given to staff, and indicates the actions that have been taken (see above text).

I request that the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition Board acknowledge their violations, and takes immediate actions to “cure or correct the challenged actions”.  I will be communicating this challenged behavior officially to the Board at tomorrow’s Board meeting.   As I believe that Board has thirty days to cure or correct the challenged actions, should the Board choose not to, I will be authorized to file suit (alternate writ of mandamus in Sonoma County Superior Court) to void the actions (54960.1).

Gregory Fearon

Why is a HEAPA being started?

The Homeless Emergency Aid Program Association is following in the footsteps of successful groups of activists who recognized that working together at moments of confusion proved crucial to policy and program implementation.  Taking the time to share our thoughts and questions, and exploring our similarities and differences, has always made us stronger.  Whatever our role in the movement to address California’s homeless housing crisis, we must make time to reach out across the state.  

An important need voiced frequently in Sonoma County is for a website to collect the service contracts and quarterly performance reports between the County of Sonoma and community-based nonprofits. Here are the contracts from the Human Services Department. Here are the contracts from the Sonoma County Homeless Coalition. Finally, the FY 24-25 Sonoma County Community Development Contracts forwarded to the Board. On June 4, 2024, the Board of Supervisors received a report from the Human Services Department on the progress of $39 million in ARPA grants made in December of 2022.

Here are those shelter contracts and reports from the County Health Services Department. They were supplied upon our request, along with the current homeless shelter standards, so that a performance report could be developed for an Oct 8th presentation to the Board of Supervisors.

On June 10, 2024, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors adopted its “Boards and Commissions Plan and Community Engagement Tools”. The attachments to the Agenda Item #10 on that day are contained in a folder on the HEAPA G Drive.

And for those of you who really want to get to know what the County is planning on doing with its staff and grants next year, here is the Entire County Budget document for next year.