Public Comment
Budget referral homeless services: an open letter to the Berkeley City Council and the Mayor
I find myself writing today concerning the upcoming budget discussions, specifically that of allocations for Homeless Services.
It is of great concern to me and all Citizens of Berkeley that despite spending $3 million dollars in the last fiscal year the homeless population has mushroomed by 53%. What is completely befuddling is that no one has publicly stated why this has occurred. One thing is obvious. That continuing to allocate funds in the same manner will conclude in the same results. This is a situation that I'm sure none of us wish to see happen.
Recently I sent you a note asking for your input into a town hall meeting about Homelessness that I and other members of the community are organizing. To date I have not heard back from Council. I certainly hope you would at least considering sharing your opinion on this important matter.
What follows here is a set of specific recommendations where money could be better spent. It is my sincere hope you will take a few minutes out of your busy schedule to review each item. Additionally I believe it is a judicious use of Council time to refer and discuss each item. I hope that at least one or more of you will make that referral.
The issue of homelessness seems huge and overwhelming. Hundreds of people sleeping in doorways, millions of dollars spent with no end in sight.
In order to grasp a better understanding of the problem we must first define who are the homeless. Many have tried but have only done so from a purely theoretical standpoint. Thus the conclusions they arrive at have little basis in fact. In turn the solutions they devise based on their faulty conclusions will never generate a positive result.
From a practical and very real perspective the homeless community can be broken into four main categories
1.) Tweakers/Alcoholics: people with substance abuse problems
2.) Bums/ Hobos: Tramps people who choose to be live off the grid do odd jobs etc to survive
3) Wingnuts: people who are battling mental health issues. They were turned out into the street and left to fend for themselves by government policy
4) Homeless: people who are victims of an economic system which places profit before the needs of people. 40 % are senior citizen on a fixed income who don't have the necessary resources to pay rent. Another 20% are veterans. The rest are the working poor, unemployed, students, youth with few sell-able job skills.
The current system is broken. We know this to be true in that there is a 53% increase in the un-sheltered homeless population. Currently the system lacks any strategic plan and addresses the ever increasing population either by criminlalization or charity. Silly solutions abound like that proposed by one Council member . He believes homeless people just need to get in touch with themselves and everything is going to be all right. Which is fine if he were paying the bills but he isn't. The whole homeless task force report is quite frankly a joke.
Before considering spending another dollar Council needs to first off all define what exactly it is trying to accomplish. Are you providing services as a charitable christian thing or to provide a hand up and not a hand out? While I appreciate a sandwich and a mat on a floor quite frankly me and mine if left alone can provide that for ourselves. Probably at a level that drastically improves our quality of life.
Next the city must prioritize who gets first bite at the very small resource pie. The previously mentioned categories is a perfect starting point. Prioritized for services is category 4. The other three categories must have some type of services applied to them which are not replicated over different agencies.
By the Numbers
The City spent $3 million in direct services last year and nobody really knows how much on indirect, the reason being is that there is no line item budget or accountability. This must be corrected in the interests of fiscal responsibility
Over the next year any contract awarded must have performance benchmarks The program either does what it says it's going to do or gives the city back its money.
The budget must reflect prioritization and embrace the concept of providing a hand up and not a hand out.
Youth – YEAH year around shelter
Services related to youth represent 49% of the budget. This is based on information received by Council member Capitelli. Maintaining this level of funding cannot be justified by any stretch of the imagination. It's nice that the City currently pays another organization to have people sitting around painting pretty pictures but it reminds me of the phrase starving artist.
YEAH - $60,000
This amount is above their main contract to provide year long shelter to youth. This additional funding is restricted to developing an employment assistance program.
It will include a mechanism for finding temporary work through the creation of a labor hall
It will include job development including but not limited to job placement
It will provide all job development services including but not limited to writing resumes, developing interview skills.
It will provide 60 total referrals per month to either temporary or permanent employment opportunities.
Seniors – year around shelter
Homeless senior citizens are probably the most underserved segment of the homeless population. The Streets of Berkeley have become the new retirement home.
Due to age this population is very vulnerable to life threatening sickness. Something as minor as a cold could lead to a painful and slow death.
Many inhabit Berkeley’s doorways due solely to the fact there is no housing available at a price they can afford. Obviously Council does not presently have the resources to house the entire population immediately. On the flip side of the coin neither can Council afford not to provide some type of shelter.
West Berkeley senior center is largely unused due to the fact financial resources are not available to maintain its operation as originally intended. The unused shelter should be converted to a year around shelter for 100 Senior citizens. During inclement weather it can double as an emergency shelter at a minimal additional cost.
Liabilities
Staff:
Two full time positions $60,000 (2 positions x $30,000 year = $60,000)
One part time position $30,000
Maintenance supplies $30,000
Total liabilities:
$120,000 per year
$10,000 per month
$335.00 per day (Rounded up. based on $10,000 per month divided by 30 days in month)
$3.35 per resident per day ( based on 100 residents )
In order to keep operation costs at a minimum residents are responsible for all maintenance chores. This is a system employed by Seattle Housing And Resource Effort
( http://www.sharewheel.org/indoor-shelter-f-a-q-s)
All potential residents will be screened by the HUB. The Hub will maintain a day to day roster.
Residents are required to develop a plan of action and work with available case managers with the specific goal of attaining alternative housing.
In lieu of program participation resident may choose to pay one third of their monthly income.
Rules of conduct are very simple
No Drugs,alcohol or drug paraphernalia. If you show up intoxicated you will not be allowed into shelter.
Disruptive behavior will not be tolerated. On site monitors will issue one warning and one warning only. Next incident means you leave for the night.
Residents are allowed two nights out per month. Absence on a third night will be interpreted as resident no longer needing space and it will be assigned to next person on waiting list.
This forms the basis of operation. Final needs to be developed by either staff or homeless commission with the focus on encouraging self – reliance and self – governance
Working Poor – Bunkhouse
The working poor are people who spend 27 weeks or more in a year “in the labor force” either working or looking for work but whose incomes fall below the poverty level. ( https://obamacare.net/2016-federal-poverty-level/ ). By referring to the HUD Income Guidelines ( http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/BHA/Home/Payment_Standards,_Income_Limits,_and_Utility_Allowance.aspx ) we discover a more specific definition
Unfortunately the Point in Time count does not provide a definitive answer to how many working poor populate our streets. Common sense though leads us to conclude the population does exist. While this proposal deals specifically how we address homelessness among the working poor in the future we must also examine displacement prevention stratifies.
Liabilities
Staff:
Two full time positions $60,000 (2 positions x $30,000 year = $60,000)
One part time position $30,000
Maintenance supplies $30,000
Total cost
$120,000 per year
$10,000 per month
$335.00 per day (Rounded up. based on $10,000 per month divided by 30 days in month)
$3.35 per resident per day ( based on 100 residents )
Assets:
Rent payment – per month individual $400.00
This assumes individual paycheck is $15.00 per hour multiplied by 40 per week total per week Total income equals $600.00.
Rent payment calculated assumes income of $2,400 per month. Rent of $400.00 per month equals 15% (approx) of monthly income. One third of monthly income ($2,400.00) equals $800.00. Half of this is $400.00.
Rent payment – per month total resident population of 100 multiplied by $400,00 individual payment is $40,000.00
Rent payment – per year total resident population of 100 multiplied by $40,000.00 total population payment per month is $480,000.00
Equity
The following schedule assumes that Bunkhouse will be located at existing city property. In the event it is not please see exception schedule
Liability per month - $10,000.00
Assets per month - $40,000.00
Equity per month - $30,000.00
Liability per year - $120,000.00
Assets per year - $480,000.00
Equity per year - $360,000.00
Exceptions
Assuming that no suitable site can be found that is presently controlled by the city it becomes necessary to lease space. A reasonable expectation that the City should pay is $5.00 per square foot.
For the sake of simplicity feasibility is determined by taking year equity as determined previously, subtracting potential rent payment with the result being adjusted equity.
Exception #1
Equity per year - $360,000.00
Rent payment per year - $180,000.00
3,000 square feet @ $5.00 square foot.
Adjusted equity - $180,000.00
Exception #2
Equity per year - $360,000.00
Rent payment per year - $300,000.00
5,000 square feet @ $5.00 square foot.
Adjusted equity - $60,000.00
NOTE: Further cost reduction can be realized by purchasing space i.e. a warehouse
In order to keep operation costs at a minimum residents are responsible for all maintenance chores. This is a system employed by Seattle Housing And Resource Effort
( http://www.sharewheel.org/indoor-shelter-f-a-q-s)
All potential residents will be screened by the HUB. The Hub will maintain a day to day roster.
Residents are required to develop a plan of action and work with available case managers with the specific goal of attaining alternative housing.
All potential residents will be screened by the HUB. The Hub will maintain a day to day roster.
Residents are required to develop a plan of action and work with available case managers with the specific goal of attaining alternative housing.
In lieu of program participation resident may choose to pay one third of their monthly income.
Rules of conduct are very simple
No Drugs,alcohol or drug paraphernalia. If you show up intoxicated you will not be allowed into shelter.
Disruptive behavior will not be tolerated. On site monitors will issue one warning and one warning only. Next incident means you leave for the night.
Residents are allowed two nights out per month. Absence on a third night will be interpreted as resident no longer needing space and it will be assigned to next person on waiting list.
This forms the basis of operation. Final needs to be developed by either staff or homeless commission with the focus on encouraging self – reliance and self – governance
Detox Facility – - $250,000
Currently the City does not have a dedicated detox facility where inebriated people can be placed. Thus they are either left on the street to terrorize the community or taken to jail. From a moral standpoint this is totally unacceptable. When we transcend the moral and realize the economic disruption this situation causes we realize that this situation mandates a solution. How long can we afford to have people sleeping in Starbucks or on the sidewalks before we realize that revenue is potentially lost because of such behavior. Because of the potential impact on revenue generated I urge the council to immediately craft and issue a RFP.
Mental Health - $250.00
Currently there is inadequate mental health services such as a peer respite program. This must be immediately corrected in order to address this significant growing sub -population
To conclude I would like to point out that the total expenditure if all items are put into play is no more then $620,000.00. The City's return on this investment is that you have a the start of a strategic plan. A by product is that you provided direct services to every aspect of the homeless community.
By adopting this proposal the Council is sending a clear message that it will only fund those programs which provide a hand up and not a hand out. In short if you want money for your clients to sit around and paint pretty pictures GO AWAY.
I want to thank you very much for taking the time to read this proposal and in advance for your help.
As always if there any questions need for more information please do not hesitate to contact me immediately.
Respectfully submitted;
Mike Lee
Candidate for Mayor: www.oldbumformayor.org
Click here to Reply, Reply to all, or Forward
