City of Sacramento
City Council - 5PM Report
915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814
www.cityofsacramento.org
File ID: 2026-00337 1/13/2026
Sacramento Homeless and Housing System Partnership Structure Update File ID: 2026-00337
Location: Citywide
Recommendation: Review, comment, and provide direction on an updated proposed Sacramento Homeless and Housing System Partnership Structure.
Contact: Ya-yin Isle, City Housing Manager, (916) 808-1869, [email protected], City Manager’s Office of Innovation & Economic Development; Brian Pedro, Director, (916) 808-7816, [email protected], Department of Community Response Presenters: Ya-yin Isle, City Housing Manager, (916) 808-1869, [email protected], City Manager’s Office of Innovation & Economic Development; Darby Kernan, [email protected]; Matt Cate, [email protected]; Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy Attachments:
1-Description/Analysis
2-Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Report and Recommendations
3-Options for Partnership Approach
Description/Analysis
Issue Detail: On October 14, 2025, the City Council received a presentation on a proposed County partnership structure for housing and homelessness in Sacramento County and was asked to contemplate and provide input and direction on key considerations in the areas of authority and governing body, accountability and transparency, funding and project approvals, and roles and responsibilities. The County proposal at that time recommended creation of a new body, the Sacramento Homeless and Housing Board (SHHB), that would consist primarily of elected officials and serve as the Continuum of Care (CoC) Board, with subcommittees consisting of community members providing input to the SHHB on key policy areas. The recommendation was informed by input that the current CoC should be more integrated into broader community work on homelessness and a desire for elected officials to play a larger role, due to their public accountability.
While Council did not focus on a single particular model that was shared, some of the
File ID: 2026-00337 1/13/2026
Councilmembers highlighted the benefits of a formal Joint Powers Authority (JPA) where resources and decision making would be shared, while others felt there should be a reconstitution of the City and County Partnership Agreement. Overall, the City Council agreed on the need for a new approach for collaboration on housing and homelessness amongst the jurisdictions in Sacramento County.
On October 28, 2025, a joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors, Sacramento City Council and mayors/councilmembers of five of the six surrounding cities was held. As part of that meeting, Mosaic Solutions and Advocacy facilitated a discussion with the elected officials that centered on partnership approaches. While input varied, for the five surrounding cities (Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova, Citrus Heights, Folsom and Galt), consistent themes were shared:
· The surrounding cities want to retain local control over land use decisions and funding allocations for projects in their cities.
· The surrounding cities recognize that the number of people experiencing homelessness in their jurisdiction is relatively small compared to the City of Sacramento and the County, and they all have taken steps to address these needs and impacts locally. They do not want to lose the ability to develop more localized responses that address the unique situations and needs in their cities.
· While some of the surrounding cities have dedicated staff for housing and homeless efforts, they do not have large departments and worry about their ability to participate in a new structure and worry they will be asked to provide administrative support (either staffing or funding).
A summary of the October 28 meeting and Mosaic’s findings and recommendations are included as Attachment 2. Following the October 28 joint meeting, City staff have been meeting with Mosaic, County, and Sacramento Steps Forward (SSF) - currently the administrative entity to the CoC - to revisit the partnership structure previously presented to the Board and Councils, incorporate input provided by the elected officials from the discussions at the joint meeting, and consider Mosaic’s recommendations as follows:
1. Recommended Option - Recommend the CoC Board is reconstituted to include a majority of elected officials but also include seats for decision making community leaders in sectors impacting homeless and housing efforts. This recommendation brings together leadership and policy direction under one Board, ensuring more direct involvement of elected officials, and having one board as the primary driver of policy and coordination.
2. Alternative Option - Alternatively, should the CoC Board not wish to reconstitute their board, Sacramento City and County should move forward with the creation of a new board, the SHHB, as a body of only elected officials, driving policy and coordination for programs administered in the cities and County. In this scenario, there would be two
File ID: 2026-00337 1/13/2026
convening spaces - the CoC Board and the SHHB, and the CoC would continue to maintain the federally mandated functions of a CoC. There could be some overlap of participation, but there is no formal relationship.
3. In addition to the changes to the structure, Sacramento City and County should enter into a new or updated agreement that builds on the success of the 2022 Partnership Agreement while expanding its scope to address the changing landscape.
4. The County should work with the other surrounding cities to develop individual agreements that define roles, responsibilities and share goals.
At the Board of Supervisors meeting on December 9, 2025, Mosaic’s report and County recommendations were presented, with the discussion focused on the partnership model recommendation. The Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a motion to direct County staff to pursue the Recommended Option to reconstitute the CoC Board with a majority of elected officials if the other cities and CoC are amenable. However, if the cities and the CoC Board are not interested in the recommended model, the Board of Supervisors gave County staff authority to work with the other cities on the Alternative Option to establish the SHHB, but the Supervisors had doubts as to the efficacy of the Alternative Option that would have two separate bodies.
The CoC Board has also been having discussions around the partnership model. The CoC Board chair presented an option to the CoC Board at their December 10, 2025 meeting similar to the Alternative Option that ultimately did not pass. Since that time, the CoC Board chair, vice-chair, and SSF staff have been engaging with City and County staff on developing an option with enough details to address the concerns of CoC Board members and be approved by the CoC Board. Those conversations are on-going and the CoC Board anticipates taking the item back to the CoC Board for consideration in February 2026.
Attachment 3 is a visual that shows the Recommended Option, Alternative Option, the current model where the CoC is independent of the local elected bodies, and a Joint Powers Authority model. City staff recommends moving forward with the Recommended Option to reconstitute the CoC Board with a majority of elected officials and continuing discussions with the County, SSF, the CoC Board, and surrounding cities to work through details and next steps on the implementation of a reconstituted CoC Board, with the authority to pivot to the creation of the SHHB if an agreement cannot be reached on the Recommended Option. City staff believe the Recommended Option is closer to meeting the Five Requirements for City and County Housing and Homelessness Response related to SB 802 than the Alternative Option in that it brings leadership and policy direction under one governance entity.
Policy Considerations: The consideration of a shared partnership approach overseeing housing and homelessness in Sacramento are consistent with the City’s Housing Element programH13.
File ID: 2026-00337 1/13/2026
Homeless Plan which states that the City shall work with the Continuum of Care, its members, service providers, and jurisdictions, on a coordinated response plan that is updated regularly.
Economic Impacts: Not applicable.
Environmental Considerations:
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): This report seeking input and direction on a proposed homeless and housing partnership structure is an administrative activity and is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), per CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5).
Sustainability: Not applicable.
Commission/Committee Action: Not applicable.
Rationale for Recommendation: A coordinated and regional response to homelessness and housing has been contemplated many times in the past. The Recommended Option aligns leadership, direction and work by the County, cities, and CoC on housing and homelessness across the County. Council input on the options and key elements of a shared partnership approach will help guide City staff in working with partner jurisdictions on moving forward with a proposed model.
Financial Considerations: None.
Local Business Enterprise (LBE): Not applicable.
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
Overview
On October 28, 2025, the Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit (Summit) was held at the Library Galleria in downtown Sacramento. This historic meeting brought together the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, Sacramento City Council, and representatives from suburban cities including Elk Grove, Citrus Heights, Folsom, Rancho Cordova, and Galt to discuss collaborative approaches to addressing homelessness. A complete list of attendees can be found in the appendix of this report. The meeting featured presentations on federal and state funding impacts, progress and possibilities in addressing homelessness within Sacramento, behavioral health services, and legal pathways to get individuals into mental health and substance use treatment. Participants expressed strong support for continued collaboration, with overwhelming agreement to pursue a multi-jurisdictional approach. Major challenges identified included lack of housing, funding shortfalls, inconsistent coordination across jurisdictions, frustration over silos with housing and homelessness partners and impending federal cuts. Solutions discussed included shared or new governance structures, better data sharing, prevention focus, and selecting a new structure that could be established quickly.
Across the count, there were examples of collaboration and solutions that are beginning to make progress in turning the tide of Sacramento County’s overall number of people experiencing homelessness. The Sacramento County 2024 Point-in-Time count saw a 28.7 percent reduction in individuals experiencing homelessness since 2022. This could be attributed to the 2023 Sacramento City and County Agreement, as well as the efforts of the City of Sacramento, the suburban cities, and the County of Sacramento in outreach and engagement, increased shelter capacity, temporary housing, and integrated services.
Attachment 2
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
2 THEMES
Survey Results and Stakeholder Priorities
As part of the pre-work conducted prior to the Summit, a survey was sent out to all elected officials participating in the meeting. There were twenty surveys completed by elected officials, key county and city staff, Sacramento Steps Forward (SSF), and some members of the Continuum of Care (CoC). The survey results from the participants prior to the meeting and questions asked during the meeting clearly showed homelessness is a very important priority, with the Board of Supervisors, Sacramento City Council, and the homeless population ranking as the most vital stakeholders. Not surprisingly, the City and County of Sacramento ranked highest as the jurisdictions facing the most difficult homelessness challenge. For a majority of elected officials, the most meaningful challenges identified included lack of housing, funding for programs and services, handling of homeless encampments, program efficacy, and lack of consistency across jurisdictions. Top priorities for improvement included programs and services, city and county coordination, funding policies, community awareness, and shared governance.
Elected Officials' Desired Engagement Level
Officials expressed a strong desire for more direct involvement in the homelessness response. Key themes included the need for faster response times for constituent services, formal forums for regular coordination meetings, direct involvement in resource allocation decisions and service delivery implementation. Multiple officials emphasized the need to get services to people more quickly. A majority of elected officials mentioned wanting a direct role in governance and accepting the accountability that comes with it. During the summit and in previous interviews, elected officials expressed that they need more regular access to critical information from existing structures like Sacramento Steps Forward (SSF), the Continuum of Care (CoC), and Sacramento Housing Redevelopment Agency (SHRA) to effectively serve their constituents and make informed policy decisions.
Regional Coordination and Information Sharing
Strong consensus emerged for a formal forum that would meet monthly or quarterly where elected officials from all jurisdictions could coordinate efforts, share information about programs, establish similar strategies, and avoid displacing problems to neighboring areas, deeming the current ad hoc approach insufficient. A need was identified for real-time information sharing, including which programs are working, how cities can access county services, federal policy changes affecting funding, and data-driven decision making.
Multiple participants noted opportunities for SSF and the CoC to take a stronger leadership role in facilitating information sharing and regional coordination. Participants wanted to Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
3 move beyond individual presentations to collaborative dialogue where officials can build on each other's ideas and make joint decisions including involvement from first responders and law enforcement.
Prevention vs Response Strategy
Multiple participants emphasized the need to shift focus toward prevention rather than just responding to current problems on the streets. Currently, approximately 1% of the $418 million spent on addressing homelessness goes to prevention, according to statistics cited at the Summit. Prevention receives insufficient resources despite being more cost- effective in the long run. Some officials stressed that the county region cannot 'build its way out' of homelessness through sheltering alone – it must prevent people at risk from becoming homeless. Prevention programs include affordable housing development, rental assistance programs, early intervention services, and access to substance use and mental health treatment services.
Data-Driven Decision Making and Accountability
Several officials placed a strong emphasis on the need for a mission-driven, vision-based approach supported by data analytics. They want to see evidence of program effectiveness across different districts and jurisdictions. Many identified the need for real-time data sharing, performance metrics, and the ability to redirect resources when programs aren't working. Others stressed the importance of measuring outcomes and managing what gets measured.
Suburban Cities Participation
During the discussion, the group addressed the role of smaller jurisdictions in a countywide collaboration. While acknowledging that most of the homeless population is concentrated in the City of Sacramento and the unincorporated County, there was also recognition that all cities are affected by the transient nature of this population and the need for regional solutions. Smaller cities shared that they contribute through prevention efforts, sharing best practices, and joint advocacy at state/federal levels. Some also expressed concern about governance structures and potential loss of local control in land use decisions and local funding. However, there was general agreement that a countywide approach strengthens the collective voice for funding and policy advocacy.
Staff and Partner Roles
The officials expressed a strong appreciation for city and county staff expertise and collaborative relationships. They also acknowledged that they are not subject matter Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
4 experts and benefit from the input of professionals and leaders in the community such as first responders, law enforcement, nonprofit partners, hospital systems, and people with lived experience. Officials also acknowledged the importance of staff in the process of implementing decisions, but concerns were raised about staff burnout from competing priorities and need for clarity on goals and priorities. Some stressed the importance of including community health workers, healthcare providers, and frontline service providers in the planning processes.
Funding Challenges and Federal Impacts
One of the major concerns raised was the impending federal funding cuts affecting HUD programs, permanent supportive housing, and social safety net services. After the October 28th Summit, HUD released its new policies and funding proposals which will change what needs to be prioritized for federal funding. The state budget situation is also constraining and may result in reduced allocations in homelessness funding. Local jurisdictions will also be facing deficits which may impact their ability to make local contributions to existing homeless and housing programs. There was general recognition that more must be done with less resources, requiring better coordination and economies of scale. Participants identified the need for joint advocacy to state and federal levels to protect existing funding and secure new resources. They emphasized that if the incorporated cities and County of Sacramento could work together more closely, they could improve opportunities for regional grants from state and federal sources.
Current Partnership Agreement Evaluation
The Officials discussed the existing Sacramento City-County Partnership Agreement that was signed in December 2022 with implementation beginning in 2023. There was agreement that this has been largely successful in meeting deliverables and better coordination with City and County. The Officials favored building on a proven foundation rather than creating an entirely new agreement. This included an emphasis on avoiding additional bureaucracy while improving coordination and outcomes. Transparency in developing a new agreement was also raised as a critical issue.
Organizational Structure Options
During the meeting, an important discussion arose regarding whether the need for improved collaboration should be addressed through a new structure, including a Joint Powers Authority (JPA), Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), or other multi-party agreements. There was also discussion on whether this goal might more easily be achieved through the development of shared goals, updating the current working agreements and informal coordination via additional county-wide meetings. Past Grand Jury reports were Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
5 mentioned, that recommended a formal governance structure and emphasized the need for a formal document to ensure consistency beyond the tenure of current elected officials and to provide an accountability framework. Some Officials pointed out that coordination does not require new organization but can be accomplished more efficiently with better utilization of existing structures. This touches on existing structures like SSF, CoC, and SHRA. Overall, there was shared support for whatever structure enables shared decision- making and resource coordination while maintaining appropriate roles for different sized jurisdictions. There was a recognition of the importance of detailing the roles and responsibilities of the County and the cities if any new or updated shared governance arrangement is created. The need for expediency was raised, regardless of which system is created to improve coordination among the incorporated cities and the County of Sacramento.
Public Comment Themes
Community speakers emphasized the importance of prevention, permanent housing solutions, and including people with lived experience in planning the future. Many addressed trust issues between government and community, while others focused on human dignity, and the urgency of the crisis with winter approaching. Specific concerns were also raised about jail release procedures, SHRA performance, the CoC and SSF performance and responsibilities, along with the need for more flexible service approaches, affordable housing development and the environmental impacts of encampments. Most speakers expressed strong support for regional collaboration approach of some kind.
Recommendation
When reviewing the perspectives shared in the meeting and during one-on-one interviews that occurred before and after the Summit, two themes consistently emerged: first, the need for the elected city and county representatives to become more directly involved in leading the homelessness efforts in the Sacramento region; and second, the need to strengthen the existing system to make it more collaborative and effective. All officials present at the October 28th Summit expressed a commitment to working together to confront the complexities of homelessness across the cities and in the County. While new ideas—such as establishing a new Sacramento Housing and Homelessness Board or creating a new JPA—may appear promising (and ultimately may be needed) they largely function as workarounds, intended to address the elected officials’ frustration with the effectiveness of the current system.
Under the current system, the Sacramento CoC serves as the federally designated decision-making body that is responsible for coordinating and overseeing grants, Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
6 strategies and programs to address homelessness. These grants support community-wide planning, resource coordination, data collection, and the operation of programs that help people experiencing homelessness move into housing.
Sacramento’s CoC is part of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s national CoC Program and is governed by a Board of over 30 community members, utilizing 10 standing committees. As discussed below, we believe that this diluted leadership structure has contributed to the CoC’s perceived lack of effectiveness.
With regard to SSF, it presently serves as the lead agency for the CoC, helping with the coordination of funding through HUD and assisting in the CoC’s mission of providing oversight and monitoring of projects receiving CoC funding. SSF is a non-profit and is governed by its own Board of Directors, independent of the CoC.
The day-to-day relationship between SSF and the CoC is complex. Based on our interviews, it is unclear to many stakeholders whether the CoC is setting policy that SSF executes, or whether SSF is effectively guiding the CoC’s development of Sacramento’s homeless priorities. This ambiguity has contributed to a lack of clear leadership and accountability across the system. For example, members of the CoC reported that their board had not received financial reports from SSF in the last several years. In this light, it is important to note that while several city and county staff serve on the CoC, currently no elected officials serve on the board of either SSF or the CoC.
Many officials that were interviewed agreed that SSF has an important policy-setting role and employs many capable staff members who are diligently working to coordinate homelessness systems across the cities and the County. However, there was also strong consensus among elected officials that the information, data, and reporting generated by SSF and the CoC are not consistently or effectively communicated from SSF leadership to the officials who rely on this information to govern. As a result, many elected officials believe that communication, leadership and accountability in the current system could be significantly improved through a new, more direct leadership structure at both SSF and the CoC.
As noted above, for many years the role of the CoC was straight-forward, it served as the lead agency for seeking and distributing federal funding, along with coordinating Sacramento’s homelessness response. But since 2015, with the introduction of new state, county, and local funding streams, the CoC’s federal funding now contributes only about 10 percent of the overall resources addressing homelessness in Sacramento. This shift to a more diversified funding stream has complicated the roles of the CoC and SSF, requiring a greater level of collaboration between these groups and the elected leaders in the region.
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
7 Both the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors and the Sacramento City Council have discussed various strategies to address communication gaps between the CoC, SSF, and elected officials and many of the recommendations in this report build upon concepts that have been raised in prior discussions.
Recommendation #1
To ensure more direct involvement of elected officials and a countywide focus on addressing homelessness that breaks down silos and increases accountability, our first recommendation is to reconstitute the leadership of the CoC. While the CoC must continue to meet federal guidelines, we recommend that the CoC change its leadership structure, so that a majority of voting members are elected officials from the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, the City of Sacramento, along with an elected official from the suburban cities in Sacramento County. While those elected officials can then decide whether to attend themselves or send a representative, in either case, they will have a direct line of authority, communication, and responsibility for improving the region’s homelessness response.
In addition, the CoC membership should include community leaders with decision making authority from Sacramento hospital systems, first responders, law enforcement, business community, and school districts, while maintaining some of the existing members from community-based organizations and individuals with lived experience.
The reconstituted CoC would then, under the leadership of elected officials and diverse stakeholders, become the primary driver of homelessness policy and coordination in Sacramento County. The CoC would have the authority and responsibility to determine its relationship with SSF, including whether SSF would maintain its role as the CoC’s lead agency in Sacramento and under what terms.
Under this model, the CoC would have the power and accountability to implement a vision driven by elected leadership from throughout the County. This change would break down existing silos and align Sacramento’s governance structure similarly to other successful models of CoCs that are more directly connected to local government.
As the region faces significant HUD funding cuts, changes to the CoC mission, possible reductions in state funding, and constrained local budgets, it is critical that Sacramento has in place a direct and effective structure, allowing the cities and the County the authority and accountability needed to achieve rapid, comprehensive improvement in managing these challenges. In our view, a revised CoC leadership structure is the best approach to meet these challenges.
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
8 Recommendation #2
To ensure the timeliness of these structural changes, the County Board of Supervisors and the Sacramento City Council should work collaboratively with the CoC to establish a reasonable implementation timeline. This transition will require good-faith efforts from all parties. However, if the CoC is unable or unwilling to work with the City and County of Sacramento to reconstitute its structure so that elected officials from the County and incorporated cities hold a majority of seats, the Sacramento City and County should be prepared to move forward with the creation of a new Board or Commission to assume the policy-making and coordination functions currently performed by the CoC/SSF, while maintaining only those federally mandated functions at the CoC.
Under this scenario, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors and the Sacramento City Council would redirect county and city funding to support the new Board or Commission, focusing local resources where elected officials have direct accountability. While reconstituting the existing CoC remains the preferred approach due to its established infrastructure and relationships, creating a new governance structure may become necessary if the current system cannot adapt to meet the region's evolving needs.
Recommendation #3
In addition to a leadership structure, the County of Sacramento and the City of Sacramento should enter into a new or updated MOU that builds on the success of the 2022 partnership agreement while expanding its scope to address the changing landscape. While county and city staff and officials are already working collaboratively under the current framework, formalizing an enhanced agreement that clearly lays out expanded roles, shared performance metrics, and joint governance goals will help sustain this partnership through changes in staffing, elected leadership, and fiscal conditions.
Recommendation #4
The County of Sacramento should work with the County’s suburban cities to develop individual MOUs or agreements that clearly define roles, responsibilities, and shared goals. Although many suburban cities are taking proactive steps to address homelessness and their populations are smaller and more manageable, this progress is at risk. Without formal agreements or partnerships, gains could be lost as funding diminishes and attention shifts to other emerging priorities.
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
9 The October 28th Countywide Homelessness Summit marked an important first step in bringing Sacramento County and all incorporated cities together to discuss homelessness in a more coordinated way. This effort comes at a critical moment, as these cities prepare for potentially significant federal and state funding changes.
Conclusion:
The October 28th Countywide Homelessness Summit demonstrated that Sacramento is ready to move beyond fragmented efforts and toward a unified, accountable, and data- driven approach to addressing homelessness. Despite meaningful progress in recent years, elected officials, staff, service partners, and community members all emphasized that the current system lacks the cohesion, transparency, and leadership necessary to sustain and accelerate this momentum.
The recommendations in this report are designed to build on existing strengths while addressing long-standing structural challenges. By reconstituting the CoC to focus leadership with local elected officials, establishing clear lines of authority and communication, formalizing intergovernmental partnerships, and aligning City and County responsibilities, we will create a governance model capable of navigating shrinking budgets, shifting state and federal priorities, and increasing community expectations.
These reforms can be implemented rapidly, without creating unnecessary bureaucracy, and they position the region to compete more effectively for future funding.
Sacramento has what is needed to transform its response to homelessness proactively before significant changes begin impacting the fiscal situation in California. But success will depend on decisive action, unified leadership, and a sustained commitment to collaboration at every level of government. By adopting these recommendations and working collectively across jurisdictions, Sacramento County and its cities can build a more efficient, responsive, and equitable system.
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit on October 28, 2025 Report and Recommendations
by Mosaic Solutions & Advocacy
10 Appendix
Sacramento Countywide Homelessness Summit October 28, 2025 Elected Official Participants
Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
Supervisor Phil Serna (Chair) Supervisor Pat Hume
Supervisor Rich Desmond Supervisor Patrick Kennedy
Supervisor Rosario Rodriguez
Sacramento City Council
Councilmember Kevin McCarty (Mayor) Councilmember Karina Talamantes Councilmember Phil Pluckebaum Councilmember Lisa Kaplan Councilmember Eric Guerra Councilmember Caity Maple
Councilmember Rick Jennings Councilmember Mai Vang
Councilmember Roger Dickinson
Citrus Heights
Mayor Jayna Karpinski-Costa
Elk Grove
Mayor Bobbie Singh-Allen
Folsom
Mayor Sarah Aquino
Galt
Mayor Shawn Farmer
Rancho Cordova
Councilmember Linda Budge
CoC Program
Administration
Community-wide Strategy,
Priorities and Goals
Jurisdictional Program
Administration
• managing and monitoring CoC
funding
• managing HMIS
• operating CAS
• facilitating bi-ennial PIT
• convening CoC board
• system performance targets
• integration with other systems
(criminal justice, health care,
education, public housing, etc.)
• priorities for new funding
• managing and monitoring local
funding
• land use decisions
• street management practices
• response to constituent concerns
CurrentRecommended
Option
Alternative
OptionJPA Option
CoC Board
City Councils
CoC Board
Re-constituted to include majority elected officials
and decision making community leaders
Board of Supervisors
advisory
CoC Board
Structure compliant with
HUD only
Sacramento Homeless
& Housing Board
(SHHB)
new board consisting of
elected officials
advisory
Board of
Supervisors
City Councils
Board of
Supervisors
City Councils
New JPA Board
Consolidates policy making, funding decisions and program operations from CoC and local jurisdictions to a new JPA, with independent staffing. Jurisdictions retain land use decisions.
Attachment 3