Although Sonoma County Board Supervisor Chris Coursey admitted he was uncomfortable with how the plan came forward to relocate the current homeless encampment occupants from the Joe Rodota Trail to the newly designated emergency homeless shelter sites, referring to the “lack of transparency,” the Board voted unanimously (5/5) in favor of adopting the proposed resolution with a few added amendments.
One of the amendments included exploring an additional site at the end of Russell Avenue in Santa Rosa. The site is a mixture of paved and unpaved areas at the end of a culdesac, surrounded mainly by commercial and government buildings and a few residential homes. The paved area is a parking lot for government vehicles.
Supervisor David Rabbitt was the strongest advocate for the veteran community and the neighborhood surrounding the Santa Rosa Veterans Memorial Building, stating he was surprised to hear about the two chosen sites (Santa Rosa Veterans Memorial Building and the Sonoma County Administration Center) and urged officials to look for the right areas, such as the end of Russell Avenue.
“Location matters, Rabbitt said. Why the Vet’s building?”
Various officials ambiguously answered Rabbitt’s question.
Sonoma County’s new health services director Tina Rivera (appointed March 1, 2022, for a 3-year term), answered Rabbitt’s question, “…they were the only two locations that we were immediately aware of…and for which we could take immediate action.” Rivera kept repeating the urgency of the situation, remarking the longer the County waited, the more expensive the problem would become.
Maria Christina Rivera (named new County Assistant Administrator on January 10, 2023) stated, “…they were looking at immediate solutions without involving too many other parties. The fairgrounds would take longer to assess…and they didn’t feel comfortable using the fairgrounds.”
Feeling “uncomfortable” with using the fairgrounds is a strange statement.
Why would the County Health Services Director and the staff making these recommendations to the Board feel “uncomfortable” with using the fairgrounds?
It is also interesting to point out that the staff making these recommendations to the Board chose these two sites because they said they wouldn’t have to involve too many other parties.
To be frank, their plan did not include involving or even considering the concerns of the surrounding neighborhood or the users of the Santa Rosa Veterans Building.
Related Story: New homeless emergency shelter location proposed for Santa Rosa Veterans Memorial Building
Unsurprisingly, the haste to decide on a resolution without considering all the stakeholders has contributed to people’s heightened fears and concerns.
Coursey said, “we didn’t have it all planned out until Friday.” Even though he said his office informed the veterans on Thursday, who he told is unclear since most veterans were unaware of the special Tuesday meeting until the release of The Press Democrat story on Monday.
The news also surprised neighbors who received very little lead time to prepare for the Tuesday Board meeting.
Supervisor Susan Gorin acknowledged the fast-pace the County was taking and relayed that when her constituents had concerns over the Los Guilicos Village near Oakmont, she held a large meeting with stakeholders to iron out concerns.
Gorin asked, “What is the timeline?”
Staff said their timeline planned to begin moving JRT encampment occupants by March 1, 2023.
Gorin to Coursey, “Is this enough time to organize community meetings? Is there time to meet with other stakeholders?”
Coursey replied that two weeks was enough time for his staff to reach out to all the stakeholders, which includes the surrounding neighborhood, veteran organizations, and the users of the Vet’s buildings, to arrange community meetings.
Residents of the neighborhood speak several languages, so Coursey’s office must arrange for translators.
Generally speaking, each supervisor, in varying degrees, acknowledged people’s fears and concerns over having an emergency homeless shelter on the Veterans Memorial Building property. However, each claimed that the fears were unfounded and referred to previous communities with similar concerns but were ultimately not impacted.
“Oakmont has embraced the Los Guilicos Village,” Gorin commented. “The urgency forces us to respond quickly.”
The problem with comparing Oakmont residents’ response to the Los Guilicos Village with the neighborhood next to the Santa Rosa Veterans Memorial Building property is like comparing apples to oranges.
First, the Los Guilicos village is on the other side of Highway 12 from Oakmont, near the St. Francis Winery, nestled between farmland and near commercial and government structures such as the Sonoma County Juvenile Justice Commission. There is quite a distance between the Los Guilicos Village and Oakmont.
For the residents who live near the Veterans’ building, no greenbelt or highway is separating them from the property, and some residents’ property borders the Veterans’ parking lot. Their fences abut the parking lot.
Gorin did stress the importance of being responsive and supportive of community concerns.
Coursey repeated he was committed to having conversations with veterans and the neighborhood and promised to be better about posting things on his Facebook page.
Supervisors and some public commentors tried to empathize and sympathize with the communities that the emergency homeless shelter on the Veterans Memorial Building property would impact. However, right after emoting buzzwords and tones of compassion began to use shaming and guilt.
“It’s hard to hear people’s pain..” one person commented, “but…, but…., but….. not in my backyard.”
There was a range of public comments, some more empathetic and sympathetic than others, and none who failed the litmus test for superficiality when it came to truly understanding the genuine concerns of the stakeholders who live near or use the Vet’s building property.
Obviously, the supporters of Vet’s building stakeholders got it. The stakeholders of the fast-moving train rushing to establish an emergency homeless shelter on the Vet’s building property did not get it. The attempt to walk in another person’s shoes failed.
Related Story
The Press Democrat story by Paulina Pineda titled "Vets building, county government campus eyed for managed homeless camps to clear trail," makes national news in Stars and Stripes.
Overall the recommendation was a success since there was very little criticism of the plan itself, just the location of where to execute it.
Supervisor Lynda Hopkins acknowledged that it is “…unfair to pit two groups against each other…” but said almost in the same breath, “every somewhere is next to someone.”
Empathetic language will only carry County officials so far because words without action are meaningless.
Assuaging fears and concerns with a capacity to listen and using correct language might be a good start to rebuilding trust with the stakeholders the County never considered in their plans, but it’s not enough.
The following two weeks are critical for everyone. It appears the County will move forward without conducting an impact assessment because, as they all said, sanctioned encampments work. And whatever fears you may have about a homeless shelter in your neighborhood will be dismissed with facts and figures.
The stakeholders who were never considered are living on hope and a prayer that the County finds the Russell Avenue site or some other site a better option than the Santa Rosa Veterans Memorial Building because two weeks is not enough time to notify all stakeholders, conduct community meetings and to construct a plan.