Addressing Homelessness in the
City of Manteca
A legal perspective, efforts, and Navigation Center and Mixed Use Project Conceptual Plan Presentation Overview
• Legal Perspective
• Key Legal Concepts
• “Quality of Life” Laws
• Comprehensive Strategy
• Homelessness Efforts
• Efforts to Date
• Current Efforts
• Navigation Center and Mixed Use Project Conceptual Plan Key Legal
Concepts
8th Amendment
Eighth Amendment
• Imposes substantive limits on what can be a crime
Homelessness is not a crime
• The City cannot punish people based on their status
• Homelessness is a status
Regulation of conduct is permissible
• The City can adopt and enforce ordinances to regulate, prohibit, and punish conduct oGray area: conduct that is involuntary due to status
4th & 14th Amendments
• Fourth Amendment
o Protects against unreasonable seizures
o Government’s interference with a property interest is a seizure • Fourteenth Amendment
o Prohibits deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process o Due process requires notice and an opportunity to be heard • Individuals who are homeless have a protected property interest in their belongings and are entitled to due process
Equal Protection
• Equal Protection Clause
oCalifornia and U.S. Constitutions
oSimilarly situated persons are to receive like treatment • City laws must be enforced equally
oUnequal enforcement may violate equal protection if there is intentional discrimination and no rational basis for disparate treatment “Quality of Life”
Laws
“Quality of Life” Laws
Local “quality of life” laws are intended to protect the well-being of residents and preserve the quality of public spaces
• Also called “anti-homeless” laws
oHomeless more vulnerable to violations because they often inhabit public spaces • Common examples
o Prohibitions on sleeping/camping in public spaces
o Prohibitions on storing possessions on public property Evolving legal landscape
Temporary Shelter Only a Temporary Solution
• Based on the fact the current shelter is temporary in nature, it cannot be relied upon as a long term, permanent solution
• Studies/data has demonstrated that we need more than just shelter alone • While this provisional solution allows the City meet our obligations under Martin v. Boise, it is not a long term legal solution
Camping
• Typical camping ordinance
• Makes it unlawful to camp, occupy camp facilities, or use camp paraphernalia on public property
o “Camp” = to pitch a tent, sleep in, cook in, or occupy camp facilities for the purpose of temporary or permanent human habitation
• Some also prohibit camping on private property
• Enforceable? Maybe…
• Martin v. City of Boise: Citing a homeless person who has “no other option” but to sleep outside in public violates the 8th Amendment
o Conduct involuntary due to the status of being homeless & lack of available beds at local homeless shelters
Food Distribution in Parks
• Food sharing ordinances
oPolitical and religious groups have challenged food-sharing ordinances oVery few cases
oOrdinance should be tailored to protect public health and safety and ensure that city residents enjoy benefits of city parks.
A Few Relevant State Laws
Cal. Penal Code § 374.4: prohibits littering
Cal. Penal Code § 647(f): prohibits public intoxication Cal. Penal Code § 602: prohibits trespassing
Comprehensive
Strategy
Developing a comprehensive homelessness strategy
Focus on law enforcement alone insufficient
Reducing number of unsheltered homeless will take multi-pronged approach Must balance needs and rights of homeless persons and larger community Developing a comprehensive homelessness strategy
Agreements with the County & CalTrans
Homeless Navigation Center
Regional Partnerships
Laura’s Law
Laura’s Law
• In April 2021, the City Council had a presentation from RWG and Kern County officials regarding “Laura’s Law”, also known as Assisted Outpatient Treatment (AOT) • AOT is a sustained and intensive court-ordered outpatient treatment for individuals with mental illness who may be at risk of grave disability, deterioration in life skills and functioning, self-harm, and/or violence towards others. AOT is not an alternative to voluntary treatment; instead, it is a way to get services to those County/City residents in need who refuse voluntary treatment. • Under AOT individuals who meet specific criteria will have a petition filed with the court, recommending that the individual be ordered to participate in mental health services. The individual is represented in court by a public defender; the County is represented by an attorney from the County Counsel’s Office, with the client being BHS.
Laura’s Law Continued
• AOT services must include, but are not limited to, the following:
1) Community-based, mobile, multidisciplinary, highly trained mental health teams that use high staff-to-client ratios of no more than 10:1.
2) A service planning and delivery process that includes plan and design of mental health services, including provision for services for physically-disabled individuals, older adults, and consultation with family members.
3) Each client shall have a clearly designated mental health personal services coordinator.
4) Individual services plans shall ensure that persons receive age-appropriate, genderappropriate, and culturally appropriate services. 5) The individual personal services plan must describe the service array.
Laura’s Law Continued
A county that operates an AOT program must report certain data to the State Department of Health Care Services, including an evaluation of the effectiveness of the strategies employed by each program in reducing homelessness and hospitalization of persons in the program and in reducing involvement with local law enforcement by persons in the program. (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 5348, subd. (d).)
Laura’s Law results in coordination between the county and local jurisdictions to collaborate on getting assistance to higher risk individuals with a mandated focus on homelessness.
The City previously expressed support that the County opt-in to the program Efforts to Date
Efforts to Date
• Joined forces with the cities of Tracy and Lodi to seek regional support and funding opportunities and received a $2 million funding commitment from San Joaquin County for the purpose of acquisition of 682 S. Main St. • Participate in the Manteca Homeless Services & Response Collaborative to support efforts of local non-profits, religious organizations, and community members to assist homeless individuals.
Efforts to Date
• Collaborated with local and county organizations on
various initiatives to assist homeless individuals, including development of tiny home communities and potential
Homekey projects.
• Established regular meeting schedule with County Mental Health.
• Increased enforcement in the area of the current
Unsheltered Emergency Center.
• Working with Inner City Action to adjust operations to decrease foot traffic in the Industrial Park area. • Expanded Inner City Action’s services to include city-wide cleanup (Downtown Action Team and brought back AWP
program)
Efforts to Date
• Researched and toured various navigation center structure options and operational models in: Long Beach, Bakersfield, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Buena Park, and Fresno.
• City staff trained with the City of Anaheim staff on homelessness liaison services.
Current Efforts
Current Efforts
• Meeting with San Joaquin County District Attorney to request additional services in Manteca.
• Pursuing funding: Federal, State, County and grant
opportunities.
• Working with City Council ad hoc on a Homeless Strategic Plan.
• Have set up regular meetings with Caltrans to tackle
homelessness issues in Caltrans areas that surround the city. • Working with the police department to schedule detailed maximum enforcement operations to tackle camping,
shopping carts and quality of life concerns.
Current Efforts
• FY 2022-2023 budget requesting a Homelessness and Housing Manager Position.
• Staff is developing an internal Quality of Life Committee with individuals from the City’s various department to discuss how we can further our efforts to create and preserve a desirable community for all residents. • July 16, 2022 Homelessness Retreat with local churches.
Navigation Center and
Mixed Use Project
Conceptual Plan
Location Selection Process
• December 17, 2019
• Shelter/Service types
• Eight site options
• Directed staff to analyze 555 Industrial Park Drive (Qualex) • November 10, 2020
• Provided update on 555 Industrial Park Drive
• Directed staff to return with potential alternative sites for a Navigation Center • December 15, 2020
• Five site options
• Directed staff to pursue 682 S. Main Street as the permanent location for a Navigation Center and mixed-use project.
Housing Type Terminology
• Intermediate step
between Navigation
Center and permanent
housing.
• Provides a bed,
restrooms, food, and
select resources.
• Time-limit, typically 6-12
months.
• Permanent housing for
low-income persons.
• Typically is an
independent
apartment.
• No time limit.
• Permanent housing for
persons who require
special support.
• Provides support
services for people with
needs related to
physical or mental
health, developmental
disabilities, or substance
abuse.
• No time limit.
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING Navigation Center
• Low-barrier, high-service
• Permanent housing focused
• Services include (but not limited to):
• Temporary shelter
• Intensive case management
• Housing navigation
• Employment services
• Meals
• Medical care
• Showers
• Laundry facilities
Navigation Center
Navigation Center and Mixed-Use Project
Conceptual Plan
• April 19, 2021 – approved an agreement with LPA for a Conceptual Site Design and Analysis for a Homeless Navigation Center and Mixed-Use Project at 682 S. Main St.
• Three community meetings were conducted:
• July 13, 2021 – Stakeholders Workshop
• August 10, 2021 – Community Workshop #1
• August 24, 20221 – Community Workshop #2
Community Workshop #1
Plan #1 “Rethink the
dog park”
“Have a
separate
entrance
from Main
Street”
“Parking in
middle very
good”
Community Workshop #1
Plan #2
“No site entry
on Main”
“Gets my
vote!”
“Very good!
Living – Parking
– Dorms –
Family Tiny
House”
Community Workshop #1
Plan #3
“Shaded park
is good”
“Affordable
housing is
good”
“Sidewalks?
North and
South side”
“Transitional
Housing benefits
the community of
homeless in
Manteca”
“Don’t like this
design – too
much parking
facing the
street”
Navigation Center and Mixed-Use Project
Conceptual Plan Affordabl
e Housing
Supportive
Housing / Mixed
Use
Open Space
Parking
Community
Services
Bldg
Navigation
Center
Right-in/Right-out
Access
Main Entry
Masonry Wall
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 2
4 4
4 5
4 6
7 8
7 1
1 3
3 9
9 3
10 11
Carn
egie
Ct.
S Main St.
0 30 60
FINAL
CONCEPTUAL
PLAN*
*Subject to change
Navigation Center and Mixed-Use Project
Conceptual Plan
TOTAL PARCEL AREA: 8.06 AC
MAX ALLOWABLE DENSITY:
25 DU/AC
TOTAL ALLOWABLE UNITS:
201 UNITS
PLANNED RESIDENTIAL UNITS:
196 DU
PLANNED DENSITY:
24.5 DU/AC
(IF RESTRICTED TO KEEP THE UNIT ONLY TO THE
ALLOWABLE 4.88 PARCEL = 122)
S Main St.
COMMERCIAL /
MIXED-USE
NAVIGATION CENTER
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AREA: 4.88 AC
PARKING COUNT: 203 STALLS
PARKING RATIO: 1.05 STALLS/UNIT
NAV. CTR. AREA: 3.18 AC
PARKING COUNT: 70 STALLS
Carn
egie
Ct.
Mixed-Use Program*
*Estimated, subject to change
AFFORDABLE + SUPPORTIVE HOUSING UNITS
Studio +/- 72
One Bedroom +/- 72
Two Bedroom 48
SUBTOTAL 192
COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE SUBTOTAL SF
Flexible First Floor Build-to-Suit
(Office/Commercial/Live-Work Studios) 15,000 SF
SUBTOTAL 15,000 SF
Navigation Center Program*
*Estimated, subject to change
NAVIGATION CENTER BED QTY
Men’s Dorm 50
Women’s Dorm 30
Family Dorm 20
Couple’s Dorm 10
Transitional Housing 16
SUBTOTAL 126
COMMUNITY SERVICES QTY
Common Room/Dining/TV 1
Kitchen & Food Service (full service) 1
Intake & Admin 1
Offices (City/Operator)
Offices (Shared Outside Services)
2 3
Classroom/Multi-Purpose Room/Activity Room 1
Restrooms & Showers 2
Navigation Center and Mixed-Use Project
Conceptual Plan
NAVIGATION CENTER
CONCEPTUAL RENDERING
Navigation Center and Mixed-Use Project
Conceptual Plan
AFFORDABLE HOUSING/MIXED-USE
CONCEPTUAL RENDERING
126 Bed Facility
Dorm Facility 12,000 SF
Community Building 7,300 SF
Sprung Structures $ 9 million
Pre-engineered Modular Buildings $ 12 million
Permanent Wood Framed Buildings $ 14.3 million
299 Bed Facility
Dorm Facility 24,000 SF
Community Building 8,500 SF
Sprung Structures $ 11.7 million
Pre-engineered Modular Buildings $ 16.4 million
Permanent Wood Famed Buildings $19.9 million
Navigation Center Costs
Funding to Date
Source Amount
San Joaquin County (General Fund) $ 2,000,000
Community Development Block Grant – County $ 500,000
Community Development Block Grant – City $ 664,664
TOTAL $ 3,164,664
Next Steps
• Property Acquisition
• County MOU
• Oversight Board
• Navigation Center Design
• Affordable Housing RFQ/RFP
• Continue to secure funding
• Continue current Unsheltered Emergency Center operations and City-wide cleanup efforts
Questions?