HousingAlternativesAdHocCCmtg12-16-24(klk)
CITY OF SIMI VALLEY
MEMORANDUM
D
ecember 16, 2024
T
O: City Council
F
ROM: Department of Environmental Services
S
UBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF FORMING AN AD HOC COMMITTEE FOCUSED ON SERVING THE CITY’S UNHOUSED POPULATION
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
S
taff requests direction on forming a Housing Solutions Ad Hoc Committee focused on serving the City’s Unhoused Population.
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW
A
t the November 4, 2024, City Council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Rhodes requested that staff bring back a discussion item regarding the potential formation of a n Ad Hoc Committee focused on serving the City’s unhoused population. An Ad Hoc Committee could consider item s such as the creation of an emergency shelter , a comprehensive approach to housing solutions such as ongoing funding requirements, zoning considerations, building codes, compatibility of H ousing First (if federal and state funds are used), and additional community partnerships for long-term sustainability.
FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES
T
he 2024 Ventura County Homeless Point in Time (PIT) Count identified 2,358 homeless individuals countywide, of which 160 were located in Simi Valley. The PIT identifies both sheltered (i.e. motels paid for by providers, winter warming shelters, year-round shelters) and unsheltered residents. The County’s services and state/federal funding is coordinated through the Ventura County Continuum of Care. Government funding utilizes expenditure timelines and additional regulations to ensure taxpayer funds are expended timely and other governmental priorities are met, including prevailing wage requirements. These regulations can create a complex regulatory environment that may present challenges and barriers for inexperienced agencies. Therefore, funding is awarded based on the performance data of applying organizations related to federal, state, and regional priorities. It should be noted that federal and state funding has shifted priorities from shelter to homeless prevention and supportive housing production, which limits available resources to construct new emergency shelters and provide ongoing funding for operations.
W
hile the City has access to funding that could be used for emergency shelter , and the County of Ventura has offered a 50% match for homeless shelters, the funding would not be sufficient to construct a shelter nor provide ongoing operating costs . The City would need to identify additional resources through federal and/or state grants, triggering additional requirements, including Housing First , which can pose incompatibility issues AGENDA ITEM NO.
9A
HousingAlternativesAdHocCCmtg12-16-24(klk)
with siting options. Furthermore, emergency shelters are limited to 180- day occupancy by law, which poses challenges when there is not sufficient housing placement opportunities. This has contributed to the shift in funding focus toward transitional and permanent housing solutions.
S
helter/Housing Types
T
here are a variety of housing types that could enhance the City’s response to homelessness and provide greater stability to its unhoused population. Each type will have its own zoning and building code constraints, eligibility for funding, and most importantly, require some level of services to improve residents’ long- term housing stability. The following summarizes each type within this context.
E
mergency Shelter is defined as a temporary shelter that provides short -term housing and support services for people who are homeless or experiencing unsheltered homelessness and is limited to occupancy of 180 days. E mergency shelter often has limited services associated with it; however, the current best practice for standalone emergency shelters is to be co-located with a housing navigation center to provide case management support and services to secure permanent housing. The navigation center model increases the services and support traditionally provided. Emergency shelters are allowed in multiple zones throughout the City with a Conditional Use Permit. Some jurisdictions have allowed the construction of emergency shelters, at times referred to as tiny homes. It should be noted that the majority of this style of shelter utilizes emergency building codes to allow for structures not intended for long- term habitation and do not count as dwelling units under state law.
A
dditionally, emergency shelter can also be provided through motel vouchers but would heavily rely on supportive services to identify transitional and/or permanent housing options. Individuals in any type of emergency shelter are classified as sheltered homeless and not considered housed.
Transitional Housing provides temporary housing and supportive services to assist individuals move from homeless ness into permanent housing. The length of stay in transitional housing varies by program and under state law ranges from six to 24 months.
Federal transitional housing programs provide up to 24 months with supportive services as allowable operational costs. Transitional housing could be provided through apartments or single -family homes and are considered traditional housing units.
Individuals not paying rent would be counted as sheltered homeless in the annual PIT Count. Transitional housing is allowed in residential zones consistent with the respective zoning standards.
Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) provides long- term rental or leasing assistance and supportive services to people who are chronically homeless. Unlike transitional housing, there is no time limit on the stay. Permanent supportive housing is intended for homeless individuals with a disability, chronic medical conditions, and/or behavioral health conditions. PSH offers voluntary services to help people build independent living skills and connect them with community resources consistent with the Housing First approach. These services can include intensive case management, health care, treatment, and employment services. Due to the needs of the population and indefinite 2 HousingAlternativesAdHocCCmtg12-16-24(klk)
stay, PSH is one of the most costly housing types for homeless individuals , although residents contribute 30% of their household income toward rent costs. PSH is typically funded through federal and state grant programs for long- term housing subsidies to support those with disabilities. PSH units are traditional housing units and are allowed in residential zones consistent with the respective zoning standards.
M
aster Leasing provides additional housing options to those who otherwise would have difficulty securing a lease for themselves. Master leasing allows a third party to be the responsible financial party and sublease the property during the lease while the owner retains the legal title. In this case, a service provider would be the lessee, allowing them to sublease the property to its clients. People experiencing homelessness and those with low-income are often discriminated against for not having reliable income, for having a housing voucher, or for having previous evictions on their records. Allowing a homeless service agency to master lease units can eliminate discrimination barriers and significantly increase access to affordable housing.
B
y capitalizing on the existing stock of multi-bedroom housing units, housemates can be matched for shared housing arrangements , lowering the cost of living and having a positive impact by creating social connectedness and support for formerly homeless tenants. Master leasing under existing conditions could provide emergency shelter, transitional housing , and/or permanent supportive housing. Currently, several service providers own homes and provide emergency/transitional shelter services for specific populations, similar to a master lease situation. Group homes of up to six residents, not specifically regulated by the state, are allowed in any residential zone.
Zoni
ng and Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)
A
s briefly discussed above, each housing solution has its own considerations related to zoning and whether it would be classified as a housing unit to further assist in meeting the City’s RHNA goals. For existing housing units repurposed through master leasing, if state or federal funding is allocated for specific Area Median Income (AMI) levels, it may be possible to include those units in the City’s RHNA reporting.
A
crucial component of identifying viable housing solutions is assessing either existing housing units and/or land available for the development of new housing units with Planning Division staff. This would allow for a robust understanding of development issues at the forefront of the process and provide insight to estimating project costs.
C
ommunity Partnership Opportunities
P
roviding assistance to the most vulnerable community members requires extensive resources and collaboration, and providing housing solutions is no different. The financing involved in developing new housing units or even emergency shelter or navigation centers can be complex. The funding is largely provided by state and federal grants requiring specific performance criteria and demonstrated outcomes to be eligible for future years’ funding. A collaborative approach between developers and service providers often yields the most success in securing funding due to each partner leveraging the experience and performance of the others to be as competitive as possible. State and federal funding is usually targeted toward shovel-ready projects to ensure expenditure deadlines can be 3 HousingAlternativesAdHocCCmtg12-16-24(klk)
met and often limits financial support for services to the first few years, resulting in a highly competitive environment for service funding going forward.
A
dditionally, the County of Ventura’s Continuum of Care (CoC) and County Executive Office (CEO) staff are essential partners in these endeavors. The CoC and CEO have dedicated positions that are subject matter experts in available funding, housing development, and homeless services best practices, each of which is necessary for success.
H
ousing First
H
ousing First, the model that recipients of state and federal funding are required to follow, prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness with little to no barriers. Housing First focuses on the belief that people need basic necessities like food and a place to live before attending to other life responsibilities such as getting a job, budgeting properly, or attending to substance use issues. Additionally, Housing First is based on the understanding that client choice is valuable in housing selection and supportive service participation and that exercising that choice is likely to make a client more successful in remaining housed and improving life outcomes. This is important to understand as Housing First is service intensive but not a condition of receiving housing, which can lead to impacts related to ongoing medical conditions , including behavioral health and addiction. This should be considered when determining the appropriate location for housing and the level of services needed to support newly housed residents, while still prioritizing the pursuit of housing options.
P
urpose and Role of Ad Hoc Committee
It i
s recommended that the City Council define the goals of the proposed Ad Hoc Committee to serve the unhoused population. Staff recommends a high-level framework consisting of identifying housing solution(s) to be pursued, discussion with City staff on viable locations and potential site issues that could impact construction costs , and discussions with CoC and County CEO staff regarding funding and development and services best practices. Once the more prescriptive parts of the process are understood and explored, community partners can be brought in to the process to discuss options, City support, and next steps.
S
taff is seeking direction regarding the formation of a Housing Solutions Ad Hoc Committee focused on serving the City’s unhoused population.
T
he following alternatives are available to the City Council:
1. P
rovide direction to staff regarding the formation of a Housing Solutions Ad Hoc Committee to serve the City’s unhoused population;
2. I
dentify two City Council Members to serve on the proposed Ad Hoc Committee;
3. P
rovide staff with further direction.
4 HousingAlternativesAdHocCCmtg12-16-24(klk)
SUGGESTED CITY COUNCIL MOTION
N
o suggested motion.
SUMMARY
A
t the November 4, 2024, City Council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Rhodes requested that staff bring back information on the potential formation of an A d Hoc Committee focused on serving the City’s unhoused population. Shelter and housing development requires complex funding and significant community collaboration, as well as ongoing financial support. There are a number of factors to consider including shelter/ housing types, available funding, zoning, implications of Housing First, and community partnerships.
Staff requests direction on the formation of a Housing Solutions Ad Hoc Committee. ___
_________________________________
Stratis Perros
Environmental Services Director
P
repared by: Mara Malch, Deputy Environmental Services Director 5