City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: City Manager
Meeting Date: August 17, 2026
Report #:2607-6566
TITLE
Approve Expansion of the City’s Overnight Warming/Cooling Location Program, Approve an Operating Framework for Emergency Inclement Weather Response; CEQA status.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the expansion of the City’s Overnight Warming/Cooling Location (“OWL”) program for the upcoming season to include operation during County of Santa Clara Inclement Weather Alert activations and up to ten additional City- directed activation nights, and approve the OWL operating framework, substantially in the form attached as Exhibit A. Funding for the expanded OWL program is already earmarked in the Human Services budget, and no additional appropriation is requested at this time.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends continuing and modestly expanding the City’s Overnight Warming Location (“OWL”) program following the pilot seasons as a temporary emergency response to provide overnight indoor refuge for unhoused individuals during severe weather conditions. Based on staff’s review, the program functioned as intended as a limited life-saving intervention and addressed a local gap in emergency overnight weather response.1 The program was initially established and described as the City’s Overnight Warming Location Program. Staff recommends broadening the terminology to “Overnight Warming/Cooling Location” to reflect the broader range of weather and environmental conditions that may create health and safety risks for unsheltered residents, including cold, rain, heat, smoke, and poor air quality.2 The proposed framework would retain operation during County of Santa Clara Inclement Weather Alert activations as the base activation level, while authorizing up to ten additional 1 The OWL program is one component of the City’s broader homelessness response ecosystem, which has included homeless outreach, Hotel de Zink, Heart and Home Collaborative, Homekey interim shelter, safe parking, affordable housing investments, and coordination with the County Office of Supportive Housing. 2 The program was initially established and described as the City’s Overnight Warming Location Program. Staff recommends broadening the terminology to “Overnight Warming/Cooling Location” to reflect the broader range of weather and environmental conditions that may create health and safety risks for unsheltered residents.
operator-directed activation nights when warranted. Operations would continue as a service provider–staffed model for Overnight Warming/Cooling Location (“OWL”) operations offers practical safety, operational, and cost benefits. Staff recommend transitioning to use of security personnel to be on an as needed basis, enabling greater support from train service provider personnel at a reduced cost.
The Upon Council approval of the recommended framework, staff would proceed with the appropriate procurement process consistent with City requirements. The approved framework would guide that process by establishing the core program parameters, including activation criteria, the availability of up to ten operator-directed activation nights with City approval, facility options, staffing expectations, reporting requirements, and the preference for a provider-led operating model.
BACKGROUND
On December 18, 2023, the City Council approved use of available funding to support a pilot Overnight Warming Location program. As described in the March 11, 2024, staff report5, the pilot was designed as a temporary emergency measure to provide overnight indoor refuge during County of Santa Clara Inclement Weather Alert activations.6 During the pilot season, the City operated the program at the Downtown Library in partnership with a local homeless services provider and a contracted security firm. The site accommodated up to 10 adults overnight on a first-come, first-served basis. Guests checked in in the evening and departed the following morning, after which the space was cleaned and restored for daytime public use.
At the time the pilot was authorized, staff indicated that the program would be evaluated after the season and that recommendations would be brought forward through the budget process.
This report presents staff’s recommendation for the next phase of the program.
ANALYSIS
Pilot Program Assessment
Staff review indicates that the Overnight Warming Location Program pilot met its intended purpose as a limited emergency life-safety intervention. The program provided overnight indoor refuge during periods of elevated weather-related risk and established an emergency response option for unsheltered residents when conditions warranted.
During the prior season, the pilot generated the following results:
5 City Council, March 11, 2024, Agenda Item #17, SR #2402-2694 https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=13513 6 The County of Santa Clara manages severe storms and cold snaps through AlertSCC, its official emergency notification system. During inclement weather alerts, the county activates temporary warming locations, coordinates sandbag distributions, and broadcasts localized safety warnings via text, email, and phone Measure Pilot Result
Total activation nights 16 nights
Unduplicated participants served 33 unique participants Total bed-nights9 201 bed-nights
Average nightly occupancy Approximately 12.6 participants per night Average occupancy rate 97%
The pilot operated over a 2.5-week holiday period in December 2025 and provided 201 overnight indoor bed-nights for 33 unique participants. Participant demographics reflected the vulnerability of the population served: approximately one in four participants were women, one in three reported a disability, and the average participant age was approximately 50.
Based on pilot operations, staff believes the program demonstrated value in several ways, including reducing overnight exposure to severe weather conditions for unsheltered residents; creating a defined emergency response option in North County when alternatives are limited; supporting engagement by trained provider staff; providing vital services such as food and dry clothing; and demonstrating that overnight weather activation can be operated in a controlled and manageable manner.
The pilot also demonstrated that demand exceeded available capacity on multiple nights. In addition to the 201 bed-nights provided indoors, staff and the provider observed an average of approximately 2.8 additional individuals per night who could not be accommodated due to capacity limits, representing roughly 45 overflow instances over the 16-night activation period.
Overall, the pilot demonstrated that a relatively modest City investment can provide targeted emergency overnight capacity during periods of elevated weather-related risk, while also identifying the need to consider capacity, overflow protocols, and service connection tracking in any future program design.
Recommended Program Framework
Staff recommends continuing the program under a more flexible and cost-conscious operating framework for the upcoming season, using funding already earmarked in the Human Services budget.
First, staff recommends broadening the program framing from “Overnight Warming Location” to “Overnight Warming/Cooling Location.” This terminology better reflects the range of conditions that may create health and safety risks for unsheltered residents, including cold, rain, wind, heat, smoke, and poor air quality.
9 “Bed-nights” refers to the total number of overnight shelter stays provided. One person staying one night equals one bed-night; for example, 10 people staying for 3 nights equals 30 bed-nights.
Second, staff recommends preserving program operation during County of Santa Clara Inclement Weather Alert activations while authorizing up to 10 additional operator-directed activation nights during the contract term, subject to available funding. This added discretion is recommended because County activations may not always capture localized North County conditions or conditions that continue between formal County activations. City-directed activation nights would supplement, not replace, County-triggered activations.
During the prior season, for example, there were nights between County activations when conditions remained cold and wet, although it was not actively raining at the time. In some instances, rain occurred on the nights immediately before and after, meaning unsheltered residents may have remained exposed to cold conditions without a reasonable opportunity to get dry. The proposed City-directed activation authority would allow staff to evaluate similar situations and approve additional nights when warranted by local weather conditions, public health or safety concerns, service gaps, or other City-identified needs.
Third, staff recommends allowing respondents to propose one or both of the following facility arrangements:
Option A – City-Provided Facility. The City would provide OWL space, or access to a City- controlled facility, and the operator would be responsible for staffing, operations, setup, close- down, supplies, participant oversight, and restoration of the space to required condition.
Option B – Provider-Provided Facility. The operator would identify and secure a site suitable for overnight use, subject to City review for safety, accessibility, capacity, readiness on short notice, and operational practicality. This option recognizes that service providers may have established relationships with community-based, faith-based, nonprofit, or other partner facilities that may be better suited for this type of short-term emergency shelter operation.
Allowing provider-identified sites would increase siting flexibility, reduce reliance on City- controlled facilities, and may improve the City’s ability to activate the program quickly when conditions warrant.
This flexibility would reduce dependence on a single City site and improve the City’s ability to maintain operations if City facilities are unavailable or operationally constrained.
Fourth, staff recommends a provider-led operating model with two awake provider staff on site, with security personnel provided only on an as needed basis. This differs from the current reduced provider staffing model supplemented by dedicated security by default. Staff believes this is the better operational approach for the following reasons:
Issue
Recommended Provider-Led
Model
Reduced Staffing + Dedicated Security
by Default
Core overnight
function
Two awake provider staff on site One provider staff plus one security guard
Best fit for
participant
support
Stronger alignment with
trauma-informed service
delivery and participant support
More limited-service capacity during
routine operations
De-escalation
and participant
engagement
Led by trained provider staff
familiar with vulnerable
populations
Security may assist with site safety but is
not a substitute for service engagement
or trauma-informed de-escalation
Operational
flexibility
Security or additional support
can be added if conditions
warrant
Security cost is built into every
activation, regardless of need
Cost impact Lower estimated cost Higher estimated cost
A provider-led model is recommended because routine OWL operations primarily require participant engagement, supervision, support, verbal de-escalation, and immediate operational response—functions that align more closely with trained service providers than dedicated security staff.
Trained provider staff are better suited to the overnight shelter setting because they can use trauma-informed engagement, support participant stabilization, respond quickly to behavioral or interpersonal issues, and help maintain site safety and stability. While security may be appropriate in specific circumstances or at particular sites, staff does not recommend dedicated security as the default staffing model for every activation night.
This recommendation is informed by the pilot program, where dedicated security provided mixed operational value and was not always fully integrated into site operations or responsive to overnight program needs. Although some performance issues could be addressed through stronger contract management and clearer expectations, a security-based model would still require additional oversight, cost more, and would not provide key program functions such as participant support, service connection, and provider-led de-escalation.
For these reasons, staff recommends using security as a targeted tool when site conditions, risk assessment, or City direction warrant it, rather than building dedicated security into every activation by default. The provider-led model better aligns routine OWL operations with the City’s broader service-centered homelessness response framework, even though measurable housing exits are not the primary goal of the program.
The proposed framework would also establish clearer monthly reporting for each activated month, including activation dates, County-triggered versus City-directed nights, cumulative City-directed nights, site used, staffing pattern, participant counts, turn-aways, and aggregated incident summaries.
Finally, the proposed framework would establish clearer reporting expectations. The operator would provide monthly reporting for each month in which the OWL is activated, including activation dates; County-triggered nights versus City-directed nights; cumulative use of City- directed nights; site used; staffing pattern; participant counts; turn-aways; and aggregated incident summaries.
Cost Comparison and Fiscal Rationale
Staff evaluated two preliminary staffing approaches for the upcoming season:
Provider-led model: one coordinator, two overnight staff, on-call support, and laundry; and
Reduced staffing plus security model: one coordinator, one overnight staff, on-call support, laundry, and a dedicated security guard.
Although the second model reduces provider staffing, it adds the cost of a dedicated security guard on every activation night. Based on current estimates, that model is more expensive at every activation level reviewed.
Cost Scenario 15 Nights 20 Nights 25 Nights 30 Nights
Provider-led model: 1 coordinator +
2 overnight staff + on-call + laundry
$25,800 $32,900 $40,000 $47,100
Reduced staffing + dedicated
security by default
$27,111 $34,648 $42,185 $49,722
Savings under recommended model $1,311 $1,748 $2,185 $2,622 Staff recommends the provider-led model as both the lower-cost and more operationally appropriate approach. Based on current estimates, replacing a dedicated security guard shift estimated at $467.40 with a trained service provider shift estimated at $382.98 produces an estimated savings of $84.42 per shift. In addition to reducing costs, the provider-led model better aligns with routine OWL operations, which primarily require participant engagement, supervision, support, verbal de-escalation, and immediate operational response. Security would remain available as a targeted resource when site conditions, risk assessment, or City direction warrant it, rather than serving as the default staffing model for every activation night.
In light of current fiscal conditions, staff has intentionally limited the recommendation to a seasonal, capped emergency-response program funded within existing Human Services resources and recommends the lower-cost provider-staffing approach as the most efficient way to preserve this life-safety function.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Funding for the upcoming season’s OWL program is earmarked in the Human Services budget in the amount of $50,000. The recommended framework is designed to operate within the available $50,000 allocation, which is estimated to support up to approximately 30 activation nights under the provider-led model, actual number of activation nights would depend on final provider costs, activation frequency, site conditions, and operational needs.
If Council approves the recommendation, staff would proceed with procurement and contracting consistent with City requirements and return to Council as needed for any additional agreement.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
During the pilot period, the City shared weather-event and OWL activation information through City communications channels11 and coordinated with relevant City departments to support implementation. If Council authorizes continuation of the program, staff will continue coordination with internal departments, service partners, and, as needed, site representatives to support implementation. If a provider-provided site is pursued, staff anticipates additional site-specific stakeholder communication and operational coordination as part of implementation.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Approval of the proposed operating framework and related appropriation does not constitute approval of a specific site improvement project or physical change to the environment. Staff will determine the appropriate California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) determination, if any, when a specific operator and site arrangement are identified, if required.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Overnight Warming/Cooling Location Program Scope of Work and Operating Framework
APPROVED BY:
Ed Shikada, City Manager
11 The City has provided public OWL and storm-related updates through City communication channels, including storm update webpages and public event notices. These communications have included site locations, operating hours, safety reminders, and information about County warming centers and related resources. (paloalto.gov)