City Council
City Council
Wed, May 13, 2026
Agenda items
Vote records
Discussion summary
Transcript
Meeting summaryAI-generated
Charlottesville City Council Special Work Session — May 13, 2026
This was a two-hour special work session focused entirely on homelessness in Charlottesville — no votes were taken and no formal decisions were made. The session was convened at City Manager Vincent Jones's initiative, following an earlier May 4th state-of-homelessness briefing that ran out of time. Vice Mayor Natalie Oschrin participated remotely from Minneapolis; council voted unanimously to allow her remote participation. The Continuum of Care (CoC) — represented by BRAC (Blue Ridge Area Coalition for the Homeless), the Haven, and POSHM — joined city staff for structured discussion around four topics: CoC-city communication, the 2000 Holiday Drive shelter project, encampments, and CoC organizational structure (the last item was not reached due to time).
Background: Scale of the Problem
City Manager Jones opened with a brief data framing. Charlottesville currently has approximately 200 people in need of emergency shelter. During the past season, 246 people accessed POSHM shelter and 433 unique guests were served at the Haven. Most starkly, the By Name List — a registry of people experiencing homelessness — grew from 498 individuals in 2023 to 703 today. Jones emphasized that the affordable housing shortage, rising rents leading to evictions, and behavioral health gaps are the structural drivers of homelessness locally.
CoC–City Communication Structure
CoC staff raised a core concern: after the March 25th presentation of the Holiday Drive vision to council, there were no structured follow-up touchpoints for roughly six weeks, resulting in confusion and a loss of momentum. The CoC requested twice-monthly meetings between CoC representatives, a designated city staff decision-maker (appointed by the city manager), and one council member. Councilor Fleisher volunteered to serve as the council liaison. She committed to sharing post-meeting updates with the full council via email. Meetings would be held over Zoom, recorded, and shared. City Manager Jones confirmed that meeting notes would be distributed to all five councilors as a matter of course.
Direction given: Establish bi-weekly CoC–city touchpoint meetings; Councilor Fleisher as council representative; Zoom format with recorded notes shared broadly.
2000 Holiday Drive Low-Barrier Shelter Project
This was the most detailed discussion of the evening. The city purchased the 27,000-square-foot building at 2000 Holiday Drive for $6.2 million, but the broader vision — presented by the CoC in March — included a building addition and total costs estimated between $6 and $9 million above the purchase price, which has proven difficult to fundraise given simultaneous needs (the Salvation Army Center of Hope is also running a capital campaign, and the state budget remains unresolved, with Senator Deeds indicating nothing should be expected before late June).
CoC staff outlined several things they need from the city:
A council vote on a design option (or new design parameters). The prior presentation offered three options; the most recent included a small addition to the building housing a medical clinic and, on the floor above, additional shelter beds (approximately 8–10 beds). City Manager Jones indicated the city's effective position is to work within the existing 27,000-square-foot footprint — no addition — and asked the CoC's architect to quickly revise the design to show what is lost without the addition. UVA has offered a mobile clinic as an alternative to the brick-and-mortar clinic, which could shave meaningful cost if logistically feasible, though the specific UVA partner group involved is separate from the mobile unit and would need to reconcile that option.
A city-designated project manager for the Holiday Drive project specifically, to drive procurement and architecture engagement forward.
Building code official review of interim use of the building (for BRAC office space and potentially programming). The city manager noted this requires near-final design clarity before the building official — who is going on leave soon — can meaningfully weigh in.
Business engagement along Holiday Drive. The city manager confirmed he had already engaged those businesses when the purchase was made and intends to return with an update. The CoC offered to co-lead that outreach.
A meeting between Haven leadership and city staff to share the Haven board's formal resolution outlining conditions that must be met before the Haven commits to relocating to Holiday Drive (conditions relate to transportation and other feasibility concerns raised in their earlier study).
The CoC was also asked to produce an operational plan with budget — showing what each organization would contribute and what they are asking the city to fund — within approximately three months (target: August 31). City Manager Jones noted that the March presentation appeared to show each organization's existing operating budget rather than the incremental cost of co-locating at Holiday Drive, and that clarity on the city's financial ask is essential before fundraising commitments can be made to philanthropic partners or UVA.
The CoC confirmed the three organizations — BRAC, the Haven, and POSHM — are now holding monthly tri-board executive director meetings and are aligned on a housing-first methodology, though they offer different service types (day shelter, night shelter, coordination). There is no fundamental programmatic disagreement blocking co-location.
Direction given: CoC to quickly revise design (removing addition, assessing impact); operational plan with budget by August 31; city to designate project manager; building code review to follow design revision; business engagement plan to be developed jointly.
Encampments (Free Bridge and Zero East High Street)
This section carried the most urgency. As of the work session, approximately 80 people are residing at two encampments: one at Free Bridge (in the river floodway — the most dangerous location, subject to rapidly moving floodwater) and one at Zero East High Street (city-owned property, roughly half a mile south). Business owners report the population may have quadrupled since January.
A fire occurred at the Free Bridge encampment over the weekend. Fire Chief Joe Phillips, participating remotely, confirmed the fire was extinguished in about eight minutes but noted that the photos taken before crews arrived showed enormous flames. He confirmed that access is adequate near the bridge but becomes very difficult 100 yards upriver. Propane tanks — used for cooking — are widespread, and at least one was venting during the fire. The city manager stated plainly that propane tanks cannot remain on site: "We cannot allow this to continue."
Immediate needs identified:
Additional trash receptacles at both encampments (existing ones are insufficient for the population)
More and more broadly dispersed sharps containers
Porta-potties — the most critical gap. Access to private property near Free Bridge has blocked siting there; the Rivanna Rafting Company offered to contract and manage porta-potties at Zero East High Street (city-owned), which has no access barriers. Human waste is currently entering the river daily.
The city manager stated that the Zero East High encampment has no legal barrier to the city placing facilities there immediately.
The city confirmed that Parks and Recreation services the area daily; sharps containers are emptied as needed.
Medium and longer-term response:
BRAC presented a proposal from Clutch Consulting (partnered with national nonprofit Community Solutions) for a direct-to-housing initiative: an 18-month program to rehouse 50 individuals at a cost of $1.775 million — roughly $35,500 per person, of which approximately $25,000 is rental subsidies and deposits. BRAC's board paused this proposal due to cost and the low local rental vacancy rate. The CoC noted that the encampment population includes couples, people with pets, and others who cannot easily be served by existing single-adult shelter programs — the populations are not identical to those Holiday Drive would serve.
The CoC proposed Holiday Drive itself as an alternative encampment location (the property is not in the floodplain, is accessible, and is city-owned) as a medium-term option while the building is prepared for full shelter operations. The CoC estimated three to five months to prepare an alternative site; Councilor Oschrin asked whether city resources could compress that timeline, and CoC staff acknowledged a project manager would be the rate-limiting factor.
The CoC requested city funding for one full-time project manager (estimated ~$80,000 with benefits) dedicated to coordinating the encampment response — including setting up an alternative site, restarting the Clutch Consulting process, and managing outreach capacity. BRAC currently has one outreach worker (Sal Mensah) serving 80–100 people, which all parties agreed is inadequate.
The city manager was direct: "What we are allowing to happen out there today is unacceptable." He indicated that the city will need to establish rules for the encampment — including prohibiting propane tanks — and that movement away from the floodway will need to be initiated, with the expectation that all parties support relocation to a safer area. He acknowledged that the city has not yet determined where an alternative site would be and that this remains an unresolved, complicated decision.
Councilor Fleisher pushed for indoor solutions (hotels, transitional housing) as the priority over outdoor alternative sites, noting that hurricane season and extreme heat are weeks away. The CoC confirmed Clutch Consulting could work with hotel placements as an interim step toward market-rate housing. No hotel has been identified or funded.
Councilor Payne asked the council to consider funding the project manager position; City Manager Jones captured the question without committing.
The Rivanna River Company's representative (Gabe Silver) spoke during the session, urging the city to move immediately on porta-potties regardless of maintenance risks, given the daily volume of human waste entering the river.
Direction given: City to move quickly on porta-potties at Zero East High Street; Parks to assess additional trash and sharps capacity at both sites; city to establish rules/restrictions at encampments (no propane tanks); CoC to prepare an encampment response plan for the city as quickly as possible; question of funding a CoC project manager position left open for council consideration; council requested a standing two-minute encampment update at every Monday council meeting (City Manager Jones agreed).
COC Organizational Structure
This agenda item (Item 6) was not reached due to time. The city manager noted it should become part of the ongoing bi-weekly exchange between the CoC and the city.
Key Takeaways
The homelessness crisis is worsening rapidly: the By Name List grew 41% in two years (498 to 703 people), and encampment populations may have quadrupled since January, with serious fire, flood, and public health risks that the city manager called unacceptable and potentially approaching gross negligence if unaddressed.
Holiday Drive is moving, but slowly: the city's firm position is to work within the existing 27,000-square-foot building footprint; the CoC's architect will revise the design accordingly, an operational plan with budget is due by August 31, and the city will designate a project manager — but funding gaps and organizational planning mean a two-to-three year timeline to full operation remains possible.
Immediate encampment action is needed: porta-potties, additional trash and sharps containers, and enforcement of fire safety rules (no propane tanks) are the near-term priorities; the city must also determine an alternative, safer encampment location and begin structured outreach toward relocation.
Coordination is being formalized: bi-weekly CoC–city meetings will begin, with Councilor Fleisher as the council liaison and notes shared with the full council; the March–May communication gap is acknowledged by both sides as a structural failure to fix.
Resources remain the central constraint: the CoC is at capacity with one encampment outreach worker and no project manager; the direct-to-housing initiative costs ~$35,500 per person; the Salvation Army expansion and Holiday Drive are competing for the same philanthropic dollars; and the state budget — which may contain shelter funding — is not expected to resolve until late June at the earliest.
AI-generated summary from voice-to-text transcript. Not the official record. Verify important details with the source documents linked above.
Additional votes recorded in minutes
Authorize Vice Mayor Oschrin to participate electronically
aye 4 · absent 1
Jen Fleisheraye
Juandiego Wadeaye
Lloyd Snookaye
Michael Payneaye
Natalie Oschrinabsent
Adjourn the meeting
aye 5
Jen Fleisheraye
Juandiego Wadeaye
Lloyd Snookaye
Michael Payneaye
Natalie Oschrinaye
Verbatim transcript available
413 transcript segments indexed
I call the May 13th City Council special meeting to order. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Councilor Fletcher? Here. Councilor Oshin? Here. Councilor Payne? Here. Councilor Smith? Here. Mayor Wade?
Here. Today's special session is to discuss the state of homelessness in Charlottesville, the work session. We won't have a public comment for this, but we will have lots of questions and information.
So the attorney will- Approval naturally. Oh, yes. I'm sorry. Yes. Let me see. Confirm our location and reason for... Ms. Oshin, Vice Mayor Oshin, will you please confirm your location and- Yes. I'm in Minneapolis for a conference.
Okay. Thank you. We won't be voting on anything today, but glad you could join us. Is there- I would move that we allow participation remotely. Second. Okay. All in favor, please say yes. Yes. All opposed, please say no.
Right. Welcome, Natalie. And, so do I turn it over to you, Vincent? Yes. Okay. So good evening, mayor, councilors, members of the public. This work session was really a desire by me specifically, as one who has to take action and move on all the different things that are floating around and turning them into what the actions will ultimately be.
Felt it necessary that from our May 4th briefing, that was the actual state of homelessness report from our providers, that conversation, we ran out of time, that there was still what appeared to be questions that we needed to review.
And I believe we're all of the mindset that since that meeting, all the various discussions and touch points that we may have received from the members of the public, there are still questions. And ideally, the intent is that we can use this two-hour block to get through more of those, if not all of those.
That would be my preference. And then we can hopefully walk from this room with an understanding of any specific takeaways and actions that need to be moved on. That would be the desire. I have a few slides that I'm going to walk you through, and I'm not going to complete it, because I also have a request from our providers to speak about a certain set of topics.
So we're going to do that, because ultimately that's what I intended to do, was to open this up for what questions actually exist, so that we can make sure that nothing leaves this room unanswered, if that is the desire for everyone present.
All right, so next slide. I'm framing this conversation today about what have we heard. There's just a couple of items that I want to highlight from what I believe we all agree that we heard, whether it be from the presentation on the 4th, as a part of the vision for Holiday Drive presentation that was also received by council and myself, as well as ongoing conversations that have just been occurring, whether it be with the city, with nonprofits, or just the public at large.
Just wanted to make sure that we, again, set the table with what we all can hopefully agree that we have heard, and then I will ask a different question. Next slide. So we've heard that affordable housing shortage feeds homelessness.
I think we all can agree that we understand that and appreciate what role that plays, that rising rents lead to rising evictions. That is a phenomenon that is not new for any community, but it is a stark issue for us here in this community because it tends to lead to homelessness because the costs are so significant, and moving from one place to a next after an eviction is very, very difficult.
And that behavioral health gaps exist for unhoused, which speaks to a need for continued investment in that space. Next slide. We have 200 people in need of emergency shelter today, and it's based on some of the reporting that we have seen, and we know that those numbers vary.
246 people accessed POSHM shelter this past season, and 433 unique guests were served at the Haven. So that's an indication of what is the scope of the issue that this community faces right now. Next slide.
POSHM offers, and my numbers might be a little bit off because I didn't do a whole lot of verifying because I was just trying to pull some things together, but POSHM offers 50 cold weather shelter beds and I'm going to invite Cameron, Shayla, and Owen to correct me on anything, and the Major as well, but that number is different.
We can confirm that as well. The Center for Hope will expand shelter beds from 55 to 110. I do know that I made that error, and that the Low Barrier Shelter, as presented today, will potentially bring forward 83 new shelter beds.
That's just more or less speaking to our ability from a sheltering capacity. How do we address the scope of problem that we saw on the slide previously? Next slide. And then what is really stark, as something that I think we all need to appreciate, that our issue is clear, it is evident, and it is requiring a response.
If there are 498 individuals on our By Name list in 2023, that number is now at 703. That speaks to a need to do something different, something deeper, something more targeted, something more specific.
And I think that is really what I believe that we have all heard through the indications of where we are, and the questions are: What do we do? What are those things? How do we do them? Who does them, even?
I think that is what's important for us to not lose sight of. And then the last slide. So what's missing? And I think that's the question that I would like to just pose in this particular arena for what are the questions that we still have as it relates to what we've discussed.
I could have added more slides and gone a lot deeper into that, and I didn't want to. I chose not to do that because this is meant to be a conversation. This is not a decision-making engagement. There's no vote.
There is nothing that will be finalized. I can tell you from the city's perspective, there is no announcement tonight, so anyone who came looking for one, that's not what we're doing. The goal is to truly try to make sure that we can identify what questions may still exist and how best we can answer those, if we can today, or that becomes a part of the takeaway.
And that is really what I will shift into note-taking mode, because that's where I am at right now, is to try to capture what are the things that we want to walk away from this evening focused on doing, talking about, researching, and being able to come back for further conversation, as we identify what actionable steps we can implementSo I'm going to stop there.
Remy, if you take that down. And again, I know that we have some specific areas that-- Are you saying you're prepared to talk about these? Is that what you're saying? Okay, great. Mm-hmm. We can go into discussion points about the CoC and the city relationship, Holiday Drive encampments, and just the CoC structure.
That's basically what we have framed out as being able to discuss. So if you want to present anything- Sure, yeah. Do you- Or talk about those things first and then have questions? Yeah. Maybe I'll just lay out the general framework.
So when we gathered questions from councilors in advance, and then questions we received during the work session last Monday, and follow-up conversations since then, we really heard three major concerns, buckets, areas of concern.
These are items four, five, and six. And then from the CoC's perspective, probably one of our biggest concerns is number three. So our proposed framework is that we spend a discrete amount of time tackling each of these topics.
The CoC has come with observations about the state of things. We would love to hear from city councilors and city staff about how y'all are seeing these discrete issues. And then towards the end of each of these times, we want to identify, capture the action items that the city's walking away responsible for, that the CoC is walking away responsible for, and the ones that we're sharing together.
Does that seem like a good framework for our time? Yeah. I just want to make sure you said number three. Were you referring to number three on this list? I'm sorry. Yes. On the- Okay ... agenda. So, these times seem approximately appropriate for the scope of what the city's coming with?
Yeah. Seems reasonable. Okay. And then, Sam, are you willing to capture all the actions, steps, and recaps at the end? You got it. I have all sections ready to go. Great. So right here, I'm going to start writing.
I'm prepared to keep us on time. Yes. And, yeah. Hopefully, we don't need all of the time. That'd be amazing, but unlikely. Okay. Oh, wait. Natalie has a question. I have a question. I don't think I have whatever number sheet you're looking at.
Hmm. So Nina, you don't have a way to send it to her, do you? Is that possible? Electronically? Okay, yeah. I'll send it to you. Awesome. Thank you so much. Yeah, thanks. Okay, great. So I'll kick off number three.
Mm-hmm. And again, this is from the CoC's perspective. I think this is the issue, sort of a structural issue that impacts all of the others, and it's how are the city staff, the CoC agencies, and city council communicating with each other, updating each other on what progress is being made.
In our observation, we were working really closely, really well with the city through phase one of the low barrier shelter design project, through phase two of the low barrier shelter design project, and then we had the presentation on March 25th to you all in this room, and walked away without clear action steps of who was owning what next.
And then there were no touch points for the next month and a half. And I do think that that resulted in a lot of confusion. And so, the first thing that we would love to address is what are the structured touch points that we need between the CoC and city staff, and city council, if city council is able to participate in some of those touch points.
And if city council members are not, what's the best communication on a monthly basis to update city council about those touch points? I guess from the CoC's perspective, we would like to request bi-monthly meetings with one rep from the city, one decision-maker from the city, who city manager appoints as their representative, and we would love to have one city council member as well present for those meetings.
So you're saying touch points on the status of the Lowberry shelter or everything on this list? Everything on this list. And you say a month? I said twice a month. Twice a month. Okay, I'm sorry. What you said was bi-monthly.
I'm sorry, yeah. Which is confusing. Could mean either twice a month. Oh, yeah. Twice a month. I'm sorry. Yeah. So every two weeks sounds even better for me. Mm-hmm. So, because that sounds about right.
Right. Yeah. Okay. Owen, do you mind just for the public to tell them what a CoC is and- Absolutely. Thank you. I'm very sorry. No, you're good. Shelly, you want to do it? Sure. Because the CoC stands for Continuum of Care.
So BRAC, the Blue Ridge Area Coalition for the Homeless, is the Continuum of Care, or CoC lead agency, which means we're the backbone support agency for the direct services providers, represented at the tables of PACHA and The Haven.
A few other service providers in the community. We apply for federal funding through HUD for homeless services. We apply for state funding through DHCD or the Department of Community Housing and Development, on behalf of the direct service providers.
And we do data quality, data management, providing lots of policy and procedure to make sure it's consistent across the board. Thank you. So I kind of made our CoC observations, and then I jumped to the request for the action item, but would love to create space for city staff to give your perspective on what, since March-- If that's accurate, right?
Sure. Were we working closely together through the phase two, and then what from your end, when-- How did we find ourselves in different places? I'll offer that the basis of where we are post the presentation of the vision for Holiday Drive is that-There has been continued work on the city side post that presentation because the requested deliverable was prepare and produce a presentation of a vision.
You did that. Council received that. What was presented is still a very costly operation vision, and there has been considerable engagement with our philanthropic leads, CACF and Bama Works, identifying how we can go about raising those funds, which was shared as a part of this conversation that the city's acquisition of 2000 Holiday Drive for $6.2 million was as far as we could go in the setup of this vision coming to life, and that we would be- Can you say that number one more time?
6.2 million was the purchase. The purchase, okay. The purchase of Holiday Drive. So that was as far as we could go, and our engagement and the conversations that we had was, are we confident that we could raise that money locally?
Whatever the vision cost at that time, we were not sure. That number came in with the three options that were provided by the Low Barrier Shelter Group. I think everyone still felt that those numbers were high.
Not that you did anything wrong in that they were just high. And the question was because we also know that the Salvation Army, as of yesterday, announcing officially their capital campaign, but needing to also raise a significant number of dollars to make sure that the expansion could happen, that those two moments happening at the same time were tension.
And the question was whether or not we had confidence that this community would actually rise to that specific occasion. It wasn't that that's an indictment on would we part with the monies that is needed.
It was just a question of could that amount of money for this one issue be dedicated at this time? So there's been a lot of ongoing conversations in that regard. There have been a number of questions and concerns about how do we pay for it alternatively if it's not only philanthropic.
There has been engagement of UVA in addition to what was presented as a part of the vision that was presented by the Low Barrier Shelter Group to see is there interest in their spending dollars on this.
We heard a number of responses, so there's still work to be done in that space. So I can acknowledge that, yes, there hasn't been further engagement, and that was not a knock or slight in any way. That was, we received the vision that was requested, and we now are working that vision.
In addition to that, there have been considerable internal conversations. This team and others that are in the room have all been a part of how do we look at this particular issue as what is our way for operationalizing a city response?
I think I've heard from these five individuals that we can't continue to not be more actively a part of the response. And then the question is, what does that look like? So we have not gotten to a place of being able to say that we know exactly what that looks like at this present time, but she's sitting next to me because she's helping me figure some things out.
So I can honestly acknowledge that that work is ongoing, and we even met this week and have met how many times you've seen me in the past month now. But we are digging into this because I think the acknowledgment is mutual that we need to strengthen the connection, and I think that's really what the focus is.
Two quick questions in response to that. Well, one's an observation, but we have a number of identified touch points that we would love to find places for city staff and COC to work on these discrete projects.
And then on the funding side, I know that the state was interested in funding the Salvation Army Center of Hope project. Has there been any engagement with state senator representatives to forward that?
Always, yes. Okay. Excellent. Confidently yes. Great. But there's no guarantee at this moment with the state budget being stuck. We're not receiving any confidence of what that's going to end up- Got you ...
coming out to be. I have continually inquired about it because I have also wanted to make sure, and I'll say it again publicly, that I wanted to make sure that we express the support for the Salvation Army's capital campaign from the city's perspective because it was also communicated to me publicly that some thought that because we started activating this conversation about the Low Barrier Shelter, that that meant somehow we did not support the Salvation Army's expansion.
It is both things that we are very much in support of because, again, as you look at the slide and the scope of our needs, we know that we need both of those things and then some. So I'll say that again.
This is not all that we have to work on to address this issue. We have to continue to do more than that. So I think we can continue to cross our fingers and hope that out of the budget session we get something that lands and sticks, but there's nothing that I've been given in the way of confidence that we will get anything.
I spoke with Senator Deeds today, and he basically said don't expect anything until the end of June. Yeah. And that's the latest that I've heard is that we should not expect the budget will come together by then.
So that impacts a number of things that we've been monitoring, including this. Thank you. Does city staff have thoughts on the cadence of touch points with the COC and who should be present at those? I think there's conversations that we probably need to have in that I know that we have city staff that are a part of BRAC, and I think we probably need to associate what other meetings need to happen in conjunction with those.
Mm-hmm. I told Misty I wasn't going to continually refer to her, but she's got to help me figure that out. I wonder if we could circle back to that one at the end because, again, we'll be identifying a number of working groups that staff of different levels we'd like to invite in.
Sure. Thank youAny other thoughts on COC city touch points or communications? I guess I would ask the question of council in regards to a councilor participating. What is your take on that as a need and a volunteer?
So, go ahead, Jen. No, I'm just saying I think it's good to be included in those conversations, and again, it can calibrate. Maybe now when it's most acute, you need council support, and then as it gets rolling, you don't.
And I'm willing to volunteer for that if... Yeah. That's it. I'm happy to defer. Yeah. So, yeah. Those bi-weekly meetings that we have every two weeks. Yeah. So if you could let us know when it is. It sounds like Jen would be happy to represent council on that, because this is an issue, not just an encampment, just the housing affordability issue in general is something that we get a lot of emails on, on a daily basis, starting first thing in the morning and through, like, I don't know, 10 minutes ago.
It's something that the public, because it's so visible, it's so evident. And I'm glad that we have the capacity, hopefully, to address it. So, that's what I tell the public, that it's difficult, but we're working at it, so...
Then I guess one more follow-up question. It's awesome, Jen, that's an incredible commitment to be part of the group. As far as sharing the info that you have with the rest of the councilors, so that you have the most up-to-date information, so that when someone is asking you, "What is the response?" You can have a full informed data response.
How does that update work? Generally speaking, we can do that via email, post the meeting, and just make sure that my report outmatches the minutes, or have that be reviewed in some way. But that might be, I'm spitballing, but that might be the most efficient.
We don't have an official mechanism for that. Sure. But that might be the easiest way for us to keep on track with that. Sounds great. Yeah. We're very engaged council, and so if we need to know something, we may ask Sam, but Sam always responds to-- I may ask a question, but he responds to all five of us type of thing.
So, I've never felt like I don't know what the H is going on. This is just a really small community, but it's very connected and although Michael informed us something, because I was out of town this weekend, I didn't realize that there was a fire at one of the encampments.
I didn't know that. I just got back in town. But usually, I'd usually know what's going on, so... I'll say that there should be no concern about making sure that council receives any notes from any conversations that are had, because they will be shared.
That is part of the process. When I reference operationalizing this from a city perspective, that will be one of the deliverables. And then, are you envisioning a group where there's secretary that's taking meeting minutes that are reported out afterwards?
Or in the past we've done work groups that were recorded and accessible at least over Zoom. I don't know what kind of plan you're thinking is. I'm thinking Zoom, because the AI note-taking has been pretty decent, and it can be reported for review.
So, we can do both those functions. If that's in. Yeah. No. I know, I think either way it could work. I know in the past, there was some Zooms where it was not publicly accessible sometimes. I think there was, like, a criminal justice work group where it was public-facing, even though not all councilors were at every meeting.
I don't know if there's any perspective on what the right approach is. I don't have strong opinions either way, but yeah. I propose a Zoom meeting that's recorded and then shared, but if the city has other, wants to do it in a different format, that's...
All right. I think that's number three, and we've almost stayed within our 15 minutes, so thank you. Going to hand off to Shayla for the Holiday Drive portion, because we've got 30 minutes allotted for that.
Thanks. So, as Owen mentioned, after our March 25th presentation to council, we were at a waiting point where we were hoping to get some kind of feedback from city council. And so, there weren't any really clear action steps for either party that were identified, I think, in that meeting.
And so, what we have proposed is that we have some kind of operational plan that we draft on behalf of the COC, so that you all are aware of what we're trying to work with, the programming we hope to operate within Holiday Drive.
And that would also include a budget that's very detailed per agency. But on the city's perspective, we were hoping to have someone be assigned as a project manager on behalf of the city, and maybe this is where Christie Graves comes in, or some other position.
I know there's some other talks about other projects to be tackled. But someone who's devoting a certain number of hours per week to the Holiday Drive project to see that move forward. We were hoping that you all could at least vote on design options that we presented at the March 25th meeting.
We do have updated figures for the phase one option one design, that we've shared with Sam, and we can share with city council as well, if that hasn't been shared with you yet. But if we have those parameters to work with, we have a solid design plan to move forward, then we can talk about what type of programming will be in that design phase.We also were hoping to get building code official review and approval for the interim use of 2000 Holiday Drive.
My organization at least, BRAC, was hoping to move into Holiday Drive and have bigger office space and operate out of that, versus city space, where we're already getting a little cramped. And as you know, we had to review or revise our leasing agreement with you all to expand to four employees.
So we're hoping to get interim use voted on and approved by the building code official. We could also use that space for some temporary interim classes or courses for our clients and guests. Not talking about a designated campground at that point.
That's way down the line, but we could at least use that building for some interim uses for office space. So if we could get those two things voted on or moved forward by council, that would be greatly helpful for us.
So I actually have to have a project and a project leader- Mm-hmm ... vote on desired design and whether you can have interim use. So those three things. So you mean, I'll get you one second, Natalie.
I got you. At a near future council meeting. Yes. Got it. Natalie? Hey there. Thanks, Sheila. You mentioned just now the designated campground space is something not on the table right now, potentially future down the line.
This might be jumping ahead to our encampment section, but, why is it not something that we want to think about sooner? I think that is something we want to talk about when we get to the encampment piece, but we recognize that Holiday Drive might be limited in its capacity right now.
And so that could be an option, but I think for more immediate use, just using it as an office space for now, and then talking through what that would look like for a designated campground. So kind of like low hanging fruit- Absolutely ...
to use it as an office space for you all. It's not that it's down the line, but it's a more complicated conversation. Exactly, yes. Okay, great. Thank you. Another thing we would like to do with the city in collaboration with us is to engage the Holiday Drive businesses.
I don't think there's been much communication, at least not on behalf of the COC. We definitely want to involve them in these conversations because they will be affected in some way by having additional traffic on that road.
And that's something that the COC is happy to take point on if the city prefers or happy to defer to the city on that. That's like a shared action step and- So, thank you. When we voted on this matter back in September, we did get many of the businesses to come out and, the course of my time keeping up with council and really never had them that engaged to come out.
Of course, this would be something to do that. I have been thinking about how we're going to do that. So, I have no thoughts on it. I don't know if other councilors have any thoughts on that. But as you're thinking about that, we also need to think about, and maybe Sam it's a question for you as far as our agenda, how we're going to address the questions of the project leader.
I haven't seen, apparently some new numbers out, haven't seen them yet, and maybe in some emails that I haven't had time to look at yet, which design and voting on the interim use of the space. And so I guess over the next few months or as soon as we can discuss it, get that information together so we can give, if that's something that we as a council want to do.
Mike, I don't know if others want to chime in now. Well, I'm curious just right now, what is the structure of how frequently meetings happen around Holiday Drive, and who's part of that work group or steering committee?
Is there currently staff representation on that or? That's a great question. So, the way that the COC is thinking about it is that at this point, the renovation and that aspect of getting the building ready to move in, we understand is in the city's court.
We're happy to assist in the design however we can. What we're working on is figuring out how our three organizations are going to co-locate there, and so we have begun monthly tri-board ED meetings. The operational plan of Holiday Drive is one topic that we're discussing, but on a higher level, we're discussing the structure of the COC, and that's actually our last sort of discussion item.
So that's really where our heads and our focuses have been since March 25th. And at this point, at least from my perspective, one of, if not the hardest challenges is once it's open as a year-round low-barrier shelter, there'll have to be 24/7 staffing, significant increase in case managers, number of staff.
That will be extremely hard to figure out how to sustainably fund. Is there any sustained conversation around that fundraising challenge or finding new permanent year-round revenue sources? I would say that is a subset of the bigger question.
That we have to figure out what is the structured relationship between the organizations before we can-Go to funders and say, "This is what we're doing." We also need a clear up. So there's an order of operations, and we're not at that fundraising step yet.
Okay. But again, as we said on March 25th, we think that there's great potential in reimagining the CoC, asking this question, what is the most effective structure for our CoC, given the fact that we're trying to level up our response in a significant way.
And we think there is a lot of an interest in the community for solutions. This is a critical piece, the strategic part of what is the CoC structure, critical piece of that narrative. So again, we are looking towards being in a place a year from now where we can articulate a narrative to the community that people will be excited to get on board with as volunteers, as funders, as community partners.
So that's something that really continues to be exciting for the CoC as we work through these sort of structural conversations. And that makes sense, and I think part of it is it's just an inherently very difficult challenge to do something this different and big.
So it's inherently not going to be easy. I guess the final question is just to return to something you said earlier. So you would hope sooner rather than later to get clear direction from city council on what design choice, and then have a staff point person.
Is there anything else that you feel like you're waiting on from city council in terms of direction or decisions? Yes. So just to clarify, so we would love for city council to vote on a design option or set new design parameters if you're finding that the cost is too expensive or some other parameter is out of line, and we're happy to do a third phase of design based on those new parameters.
So that's probably the most critical step for council. The project manager piece, this is sort of an internal city. I guess we had our brainstorming, and again, happy to use this as an opportunity for feedback.
But having a point person for Holiday Drive as a discrete project, either internal city staff or a funded CoC position who's devoting, we're not sure how many hours a week that is, frankly, because we don't know city procurement.
Is this a full-time position? Is this a 10-hour a week position? We just don't know from our vantage point. But we do think that this project would benefit from someone assigned to project manage, pushing forward the A&E design procurement part of this project.
So that's the second request. The third, hopefully the lowest hanging fruit, is the building code- Right ... review. The fourth would be to have an engagement plan. How do y'all want to engage the businesses on Holiday Drive?
City led, CoC led, happy to go either way. Happy to support. But we'd be glad to be part of those conversations as well. There is a fifth identified action that's Haven specific, which is that, the Haven's board passed a resolution shortly before the fifth presentation explaining what conditions-- We are saying we're really excited about Holiday Drive, excited to be a stakeholder in this project.
There are conditions that we need to be met before Holiday Drive is open and operational, before we can move in. So we do need-- Haven leadership needs to meet with city staff to share that board decision and the conditions, and then begin that conversation about how we move that ball forward.
So that- What are those conditions? I can send you the proposal, but it's addressing transportation. They're drawn from the presentation that we gave as far as, what are the areas of concern that we had when we did our feasibility study?
So one question that I can't pinpoint where I got this impression, but I have been under the impression that there was some fundamental agreement that you all, the three of you, need to come to before the design phase gets finalized.
That there was some difference in the way in which certain things might get designed, depending on different decisions that have to be made by you all. And so there's sort of a putting up cart before the horse.
Which one's the cart, which one's the horse? To figure out whether there is-- If you all are in a position to simply say the whatever issues there may be between either differences in the way that you operate or-- I don't remember what it was.
I thought at one point that the area of disagreement dealt with something that would manifest itself in a different way that the space would be configured. Is that not the case? That one's to them. Yeah.
That's not the case. In terms of methodology, we are all housing first, in terms of how it's defined by the National Alliance to End Homelessness. In terms of methodologies and approach, there's a difference because we offer different services versus night shelter versus day shelter.
There's differences in terms of that, but there's nothing impending in terms of this overarching thing that's going to prevent us from being able to work together. As Owen shared earlier, our executive committees and the EDs are meeting collaboratively.
Our next meeting is on May 26th. And that is again, to continue that fine-tuning of when Holiday Drive is open, for this to be a smooth sailing effort. Okay. Good I'll offer that I think the reflection is tied to that that hasn't always been the case.
Mm-hmm. So I think this is movement, and I think that's just the recognition of that because we know that there has been, at times, it hasn't been vast movement. So that's just naming it for what it is.
I'm going to go back through your list as well and just speak to some specifics. The first reference was no clear action steps following the presentation. That is correct because the request was the visioning, that exercise was completed, so there should be no expectation of anything until decision has been made to move forward.
I want to confirm that I hear that you have an operating plan? No, we're going to be working on it. You're working on an operating plan. Okay. You'll see in the final slide that I'll show you when we're done that I tried to predict where this was going to go.
Like to try to make sure I know what I'm doing. So when I put that slide up, you'll see the reference to that. But the operational plan, I would agree, we definitely would like to see that. It's important for us to be able to get our hands on.
An understanding of the budget, I know Cameron has reached out to me specifically wanting to discuss the POTM budget, so we're going to make sure we prioritize that. Because in the presentation, I do believe there was still confusion that remained in that what was presented appeared to be each organization's budget versus what was needed for the operations of Holiday Drive.
So I think that distinction needs to be really highlighted and identified. And there needs to be a touch point of clarity as to and the ask from each organization to the city is what, because that did not ring true in the presentation, a dollar amount of what was being identified, and I think I have heard that from council as well.
Just to clarify the second one. Yes. Sort of the aggregated budget versus-- Because, again, when we made the presentation, the assumption was we are remaining three separate organizations. Exactly. So- What wasn't clear in that is that it appeared as though each individual budget was presented as what it costs to operate today.
The request from the city is for you to co-locate at Holiday Drive. The question is, and what is it that you are asking the city to contribute financially to making that happen? That did not stand out as an answered question.
Sure. Again, this is back to Counselor Payne's observation. It's going to take us a while until we can identify what are the gaps in the fundraising after we do our internal, what are the other places we can raise funds from.
So, it just seems like it is going to be a while before we have a clear sense of what the operational gap is that we need to fill, whether from the city or from other sources. Sure. So. I think that's part of the work.
I think that's the clarity that's needed. Yep. I would venture to say that it's hard to make a commitment that we're going to work with funding agencies to raise $6 to $9 million to produce a space that we don't know if we can afford to fund.
So there has to be some working through of that notion because the assumption has always been when I've pitched this to council as the pursuit of this building would be $6.2 million. I said, "We're not paying for the outfit, but you need to be ready to pay for operations." That was not meant in any way to them as in total.
But the question is, what share of that? It's a fair question for you to even ask is what I'm saying as well. So having the clarity of that is important because as the manager of the budget, I need to know that, too, and to be able to time that, of course, so that it falls in line.
And so Owen, what I understand what you all are saying is that you all are just trying to answer all our questions and deal with this. You really haven't had time with your different organizations to go back and determine.
We don't know with this change how the change is going to impact our fundraising, what we typically do and things. So we don't know how much money we'll be able to bring to the table. Is that what I'm hearing?
Well, I guess just to speak from the Haven's perspective, because again, we all have our budgeting processes, but if we're talking about three years in the future, budgeting- I'd shorten that. Okay. So- That's what I- Again, knowing what is the timeline that we're working on shifts the urgency.
Based on our sort of the information that we've gotten from our sources, we're hearing two to three years, but if there's other information, we absolutely need that. And I guess I would put a pin in the budget conversation and add that to the last item as far as action items coming away for the CoC.
So. That's what I'm highlighting, that's exactly what I'm suggesting is that the operating plan, the budget, yes. Yeah. Those are important matters. Referencing a project manager to be identified, that is part of this ongoing conversation.
I think that is where we have to determine how best to do that. I'm not sure that we will meet equally on what we suggest a project manager to be and do in this moment. That is still to be determined, but I agree that dedicating a connection between the low-barrier shelter group is what I will-- I guess we can maybe stop saying that and just say the CoC.
That probably makes sense. The CoC and the city directly establishing that line is a clear takeaway that we'll need to make sure, clear connection. The desire and a vote of the design options, I think part of that is one additional checkpoint that I would have with council.
I would lean heavily towards the answer to that question is pretty much determined. We bought a 27,000 square foot building. We intend to open a low-barrier shelter in a 27,000 square foot buildingWhat that does to the final version of the vision is a question that we need an answer from you, the Low Barrier Shelter group, on.
Because when we considered this, there was no additional dollars to be identified for touching the building again. It was about we pass over, this is the vision, this is the space. Our friends were going to raise the money, hopefully, and then we would be, in the meantime, preparing an operating plan, a budget, and all the engagement work that you also spoke about.
So, for that then, the question is, are we at a point that you can quickly revise what the vision looks like, if that is the case? And what does that do to the vision, would be helpful to truly appreciate.
And then we think at that moment, we would be ready to engage the building official. At this moment, I can't give the building official speculative work. That's not how he works. So it has to be as close to accurate as to what we imagine happening for him to be able to weigh in, because the time is so critical.
When you say vision, do you mean design? Mm-hmm. You can go back. Yes. One more design phase- Yeah ... to keep the design within the existing footprint. Really more focusing on the idea that if you look at the option that was presented, the final option that was presented to council had the small addition to the building.
Yeah. If that were removed, what is removed, is the question. Yeah. How does that change the vision? Update that statement of vision as quickly as possible, and then we would really have something. So That would be our takeaway at the end.
That sounds good. I guess I'm thinking of-- So this is bringing Aaron, the architect, back in to do another design, shorter design phase, I imagine. But it would be great to get you setting the parameters for her at the beginning of that design process, so that we can give exactly- Sure ...
what you are looking for. I think we can prepare that. Okay. It'll be very plainly, and in association with what I just said- Yeah ... but I think I can go a little bit further for what you're describing.
The question isn't about the direction from us. The question is about what do you lose, and that- Yeah ... within that space. Exactly right. That's really the question. Yep. Okay. So this is not going back to scratch, bringing the architect back in.
To start over. Nope. I'm not endorsing that either. Okay. So we would be moving quickly. For sure. And I guess, the only thing I would name is that from the Haven's perspective, our decision is based on the model that we presented.
That was the best working model that we had. We didn't have council's decision. So if there are programmatic changes, our committee will need to reassess and ensure that it's sufficient for the Haven.
And I'm sure Patrum will need to do the same. It's the same for Patrum. The decision was based on the amount of bids and what we thought we'd be able to realistically manage in terms of a 60% increase.
It's not a no, but I'd have to go back to my board to talk with them about what changes may be, not operating from a deficit, but what solutions could we do to be able to meet the need if the number goes up or if the number goes down.
And this actually reminds me because we're at 23 minutes, we've got seven more in holiday drive, which is nice. When we presented to you all, we heard at least initial interest in getting more beds in the building.
And so this is another possibility is getting more beds in the building and less programming in the building, whether it's less admin space or less day shelter or dining functions. So does this require more conversation on the city side around-- Because parameters are clear as far as within the boundary of the building, but what program is the city willing to lose as part of this project?
And maybe that's one of those initial parameter-setting conversations with Aaron to determine from council and the city manager's office, what is going to go away. Is it clear what's going to be included?
Very clear in the-- Well, I'm sorry. When you say take away, take away from what group? Is there a list that- There are beds that would be lost if we removed the- Right. You say if we increase the number of beds, we have to take away a program.
Because they would move into the same- I assume you have a list of programs that you intend. Yes. Yeah. I haven't seen the list. Maybe I just haven't noticed it and it's come across my screen, but I don't know what you're talking about removing something from.
Got it. Yep. We can send you the list of programming that's within the building currently. Part of the presentation included a pretty comprehensive programming list, and so if it would be helpful for council to review that and prioritize what those- I think the clarity that exists as the building is envisioned at this present time, that you all are the ones who have the best visualization of what is actually programmed.
Because the addition was what you saw as necessary. That was a part of your conversation, not a part of any other conversation. So, I guess the question that would be a fair question from us to you would be, what's in that space?
Because at this moment, that's what we lose initially. Then the question is, and how could we augment what we lose by changing elsewhere in the building to accommodate if we value that more than what we might lose in its place?
I think that's the exercise for re-engaging the architect. Right. But before you do that, to Councilor Snick's point, I think is what's the programming that we lose by not allowing that addition?Because I don't know that.
And let me just say, I remember the presentation in March, but frankly, my takeaway from it was, "Here are a lot of ideas," not, "Here's a plan that we want you to endorse or not." And so I listened to hear a lot of ideas in a very different way from, "Here's a plan that I'm going to be asking you to say yes or no to." And so, maybe, I don't remember at this point whether there was a presentation of some sort.
Of course, we would not likely have gotten that in a format that we could look at later. If there is such a format, I would love to see it, or if there is some- It's probably more the operating plan that you're looking for- Yeah ...
I would imagine, because that's the specifics and that's what they're prepared to do next. Okay. But y'all are the experts, and form follows function. So we need a little guidance as to what you would not suggest dropping because it would set us up for failure.
So I kind of- That's my point for framing it the way that I did. We may not want to lose that. We might be willing to cut something else. That's the reason for me saying that. Yeah, because ideally we don't want you to give us something where you're like, "And this means the Haven's out." We want all the things.
We want everyone to go together, we want someone to manage it, and we want the programming to support the folks who are in it and to be successful. I thought the addition was really just the clinic, but it's sounding like there were actually more things built into that design that I can't remember from the schema.
But, only because if you make sure it's clear to us what's critical and then what's nice to have, and then what we really could get rid of because we could maybe do it in some mobile or other supportive way, that would be helpful.
There's definitely no-- So the original design process was a much bigger footprint. That was all of the things. We trimmed those down to get to where we were, the most recent design. So there is no sort of fat to trim out.
I guess I would maybe say, I think the most effective next step is for you to convene with us and the architect to look at the design and assess what are the things we gain and lose. It is beds, and it is the clinic.
Like I said, those are the primary things that are lost. Just very, very simple. If PASTA needs to keep 80 beds for it to be on board, then that pushes some admin out. So, anyway. Natalie. Oh, I'm sorry.
Hey. So I just wanted to, we're getting theoretical. None of us has the plans in front of our faces. But from my memory, there was a version with just the clinic as the addition, and the inside space had gotten all reworked.
And then I believe we've heard UVA is willing to do a mobile clinic, which would mean we would lose the clinic addition. So how would that affect the rest of the programming space and bed count negatively?
The clinic is on the first floor, and the space that the clinic creates is on the second floor, and that's programmed for shelter beds. So there'd be a small amount of shelter beds on the floor above the clinic that we would potentially lose if we eliminate that small addition?
Somewhere like eight to 10 probably. So bring it from 80 to 70 to 72 beds. Okay, thanks. So it is just for this space, and the group that's going to be provided, because we don't have UVA Medical at the table, I mean, today, but they may be at your table.
They are saying that the mobile clinic can meet the needs that they feel that this center will need. The group that we partner with is separate from the mobile unit. I don't know how UVA Health works, but the group who we have partnered with is not connected to the mobile unit.
So in our conversations with them, their alternative is, well, we will use the dining room or some other sort of space that we can cordon off to make private. Yeah. And if there's conversations that we need to have to align sort of the mobile unit conversation and the- I think that's the identification of the alternatives.
I think your statement there suggests that there's flexibility. I think what we're able to say is that we also have heard that there is flexibility of not needing brick and mortar because we have mobile.
So if the mobile facility can be dedicated on some schedule that meets the needs that we envisioned, would that be satisfactory? I think if it's going to shave a couple of million dollars off the scope of the project, then the posture from this side is, please, we need to try to make that happen.
Because it's already hard enough to imagine how we're going to raise all of the money that is needed for the existing building alone, plus what the Salvation Army is also trying to do at the same time, as previously stated.
We're a little bit over time, but I do want to just also add that the additional component of the addition is the elevator for, um-Like evacuating people in stretchers. That currently needs to happen down a stair with the design.
So that was the other critical need in the addition, was the addition of the elevator. Right. Which is not a huge cost driver, but is the millions in savings the shorter timeline for the project or- It's the ability to- Visible ...
as I appreciate it. Okay. Gotcha. That was my answer, the answer that I received when I asked Aaron that question. One question, recognizing we're over time. Are you looking at phasing at all in terms of there's that undeveloped parcel next to it, in terms of we can open this and maybe five, six years down the line we could expand into that?
For sure. Because I do worry just because services will be centralized there, if it only meets, say, half of demand, it would make it really hard to open 60 beds at a completely different location five years later.
Yes, it is designed for phases going out the east and possibly the north, too, but definitely the east. And I'll just say that, from my perspective and the seat that I have, there's been no expression of any commitment of that kind, because that is a future decision, and I don't make council decisions, so I have not offered that in any way.
I think that is part of further engagement for additional thoughts as to do we see something else? Do we see an expansion of what exists after this is up and running? Do we feel that we want to just make it even bigger because we see that it is working and we just feel that the capacity gains is more important?
I mean, I'm suggesting that the openness of the space by having additional land available is what made it attractive in the first place. It is why it was on a short list of the full consideration while the Cherry Avenue thrift store conversation was live for me actively engaging with the public about it.
I was also holding onto the idea that if somehow this could happen, there's more than just this one facility with consolidated services on site because there is some buildable land. The site that everyone sees today is not entirely buildable.
There is a gigantic easement there that does not allow us to put a building over it, so it's very limited as to how far we can go with an expansion. Is that our easement? It is a water easement or a utility easement, if I'm remembering.
So any attempt to move it is gigantic and hugely disruptive. So there is a limitation on the site, but there absolutely is an opportunity to add to the site, and the question is, what? And that's a future question.
I know Natalie has- Raise your hand both literally and figuratively. Yeah. So I've got two questions. I had one question and then the conversation went a little further, which added a second thought. I'll start with the second thought first.
Which is the potential for a phase two of this project, I think, is important because we don't have the resources. I think we have to be real and recognizing we don't have the resources to make this perfect.
So if we keep fighting for perfect, we get in the way of good enough. And later down the line, hopefully and ideally, there'll be an opportunity for expansion, as we pay off certain debts, as we increase tax revenue, those sorts of things.
We can get that bigger, better, perfect version that we all wish we could pay for and fund now. In the meantime, we can get something that helps. And then for office space and capacity building, this is not a question I need answered at this exact moment, but what about those contractor trailers or trailers that students at large high schools that haven't expanded yet have classrooms in?
What is the ability to put something like that on this property that is structurally sound, has air conditioning, and doesn't involve digging and doing a whole foundation? And is that something that we could use to expand office and programming space for a lower cost?
Just putting that out there as a thought. I don't know if it's been considered yet. I don't know how much those cost, but if that is a way where we can recapture indoor space so we don't lose programming capability or bed space because we can take some of that office, and it's still on site, it's still nearby.
I don't know if that's something that might be a useful thing to consider if we're all brainstorming. I think that results from the conversation about the loss of the addition and the impact or the planning constraints on where else that goes.
Could we recap action steps before we move on from- Yeah ... number four since I think we have got a lot. You have one in mind? Yeah. Oh, me. The production of an operational plan inclusive of a budget for participation in holiday drives separate from point-to-man operations.
And I'd put it, I think reasonably, we might be able to do that in six to nine months based on the other sort of structural strategic work we need to do internally. Well, actually, I'm sorry. I may have spoken out of turn...
operational plan. We actually might be closer to having a proposal for that than six to nine months. Yeah, BRAC is working on its strategic plan right now. We're trying to finalize that. We're working on a COC-wide strategic plan as well.
That might take a little longer because we're engaging external stakeholders. We're working with CACF, the community foundation, to work on an operating plan as well. So, not sure of that timeline, but hopefully within the next- So we can identify a deliverable date.
Yes. Same thing for Posthum as well. Posthum's at several points of restructuring, so I feel confident in terms of getting that done sooner rather than later. Do you want to try to put a date on that?
I'll be honest and just say where I am, and it ain't popular. It needs to be faster. I'll just say that because I can. What does faster look like to you, so we can- Three months ... three months? Just because I think where we are, and our next topic is exactly why.
Can I ask a in the weeds question? Was doing in the weeds questions? Sure. Okay. Could the operational plan have buckets that are TBD in order to expedite that process? So you're restructuring your organizations, it makes it difficult for you to say, "We will do this," and thus put it in a plan.
But if you can leave a box that says, "Someone will do this," unidentified as of yet, but it will have these characteristics, that might help us get a better sense of budget and which hand needs to be raised next.
And if I could just tag onto that, I would say that that's where I am. If we could confirm as much as we could confirm as quickly as we possibly can, that's the request. Because with that information, then this engine can turn as well.
And while we're turning on the parts of the engine that we need to turn, we will produce answers quickly and share in that. It's not the normal way of doing it, I get that, but these aren't normal times.
And I think what will be helpful is to see what we could identify in the approach to operating this facility, what do we know for sure? What are the things that we're just confident of, this is how we would do this, period.
And if we can then highlight, this is where we need to continue to work with our boards on getting some clarity, working with staff to figure out how that approach gets further informed. I think there's some sharing in that, that maybe these conversations happening on this regular schedule could actually inform one another.
And one thought that occurs to me is that I know it is uncomfortable to be asked to do this or to be doing it, but there's a certain amount of building the plane as you're flying it that's got to happen.
I was very familiar with that approach. And- Process ... and we just have to say, "Okay, it's going to have to be that way, and now..." Yep. We can- Having been in that world- ... because you know I was in that world, of nonprofit world, I get that.
So, that's basically what I'm saying. Sounds good. So that's the first action step, operational plan, as soon as we can pull together- Yes ... for the next three months. I will say that we, as on the city side, will be designating the project management component.
I think it's internalizing our structure and then determining how best the linkage goes back and forth. I think you heard the vote on the design, that I think we can further talk about it to your point of helping the architect appreciate what it is that is being said, and then giving that direction to quickly revisit to bring back what is that impact.
But when would you like to schedule that? We can do that as quickly as possible, but in the next week or so. Great. Just a quick point. So three months from now is the 13th of August. Is it fair to ask that we have this done by August 31st in terms of operational plan?
All right. Yes. It is- Okay Hey, you're the one who volunteered to be on the committee. I know. I'm just like, "Let's do a council meeting." We're talking about two more weeks, so I would say yes, that's fine.
Because hopefully there'll be enough that could be known before then. Yeah. August is always a mess, ain't it? But I guess, would it be, and maybe you've agreed on this, and I just missed the agreement.
Do we have a sense of when the decision is going to be made about that fundamental design constraint of how many beds, are we having a clinic in or out? I think that's the reason for pushing to get the architect engaged.
Yeah. That comes sooner rather than later. Yeah. We will know where we stand on that pretty quickly after that. Good. Okay. I mean, and I feel like what we would know is we probably will, and just kind of thinking about what I've heard and what I understand, that we will probably surface conflicts with the impact of that change.
That doesn't stop us from still moving forward with everything else. That just means that needs to be worked on and determine how best to do it. Yeah. The next item is that the building code official is going out on leave soon.
Yeah. So I am extra motivated to ensure that that happens quick enough that I can engage him. I can engage him in an interim capacity at this point, but it's more conversational. I need to get the clarity of that piece being removed, and then having him understand what is being proposed to occur inside the building, and then he can give the feedback on that.
The fire marshal has to be on it in the same manner. And both of them are waiting for me to tell them when we're going to do that. What's the time as far as the lead? How much time do we have with that?
We're probably, I can't remember, a month. Maybe that could be the second- Sure ... meeting that we convene. The first one could be gen present design focused with Aaron, and then building code could be- Yeah ...
the second meeting. Yeah. I feel like I know what pieces I can produce quickly that would initiate conversation so that the meeting is about the report-outs. Okay. I think that would be the approach to take.
That's great. I think the questions of engaging the building in an interim capacity, I would still label those as TBD. Only because I think the next conversation is important to appreciate in association with that.
I would say the engagement of Holiday Drive businesses, I have engaged the Holiday Drive businesses at the start of this conversation. That is why they showed up during the presentation that was made about purchasing the building.
We are having conversations about going back to those businesses because I assured them that I would. It is my desire to go back and deliver an update that I promised that I would give them before anything happens in the space.
And then after that, I would say to you that I appreciate the notion of you wanting to go speak to them, and I would wholeheartedly encourage you to do so, because I know that you can anticipate what the thoughts are that everyone has about this as they surface, just the same as the Cherry Avenue conversation, and any other location that ever gets named as a possible location for this type of service.
So, being able to go in and answer questions. The difficulty in having that particular conversation is the desire is to know exactly what is going to happen, and you don't know that. To some degree, you don't know that.
But being able to explain how you plan to approach serving in that building and what services will and will not be available in that building, I think they would appreciate hearing that. And there is a feedback element for us as well.
What are their biggest concerns? Yes. And how can we design to mitigate against- Absolutely ... those as early as possible. And they are absolutely prepared to share that with you. Absolutely. And I assured them that I was never taking the position, and there was the same message that I delivered to the Fifeville neighborhood.
It is not my posture that I would come in and just simply say, "We're dropping this in your neighborhood, and we're walking away." That doesn't work. This was always going to be about you will know what's happening.
I can't solve for you liking what happens. I want to make sure that I solve for you understanding what's happening. And once you have an understanding of what happens, we do our best to mitigate concerns.
So, if you identify problems, we work to solve those problems. They share their concerns. They share their concerns about what's happening today, and they share their concerns about what they anticipate happening with this being located there.
So, I think that's what you would be preparing for. What do you need from us to be successful in that engagement? We're pretty familiar with going into- Unfriendly spaces ... unfriendly spaces. Okay. And making it clear from what we do.
They didn't know if there... Since you had already... Yeah. I think it's about the answers to about the building is what I anticipate them needing, because they know their programming. Yeah. They know what they're going to be doing.
That's great. Shall we move on to encampments? Yes. Yeah. Just want to... We would love to meet with city, Haven leadership. We'd love to meet with city staff. Our concerns overlap with PACHMM and BRAC's, the conditions that we need met at the site.
So I'm making a- I think identification of that exchange with staff is probably a matter of days that we can conclude that. Sounds great. Yeah. Thank you. All right. So encampments, we have 45 minutes slated for this.
Might have to- We have to move quickly ... trim that down a little bit. Yeah. We have 45 minutes left, so like 35 minutes for this one. Mm-hmm. And first, I'll share some CoC observations. As of reported today, there are about 80 people residing at the Free Bridge and Zero East High encampments.
That number has reportedly increased over the last several months since January, potentially quadrupled, according to business owners along that stretch. These community members are at serious risk of death from flooding, from their personal belongings getting washed away, and we're working to rehouse these community members is a moral obligation for all of us.
BRAC has partnered with Clutch Consulting to bring in their expertise about a direct-to-housing initiative. We brought them for a two-day on-site training to our CoC in mid-February. We had some planning sessions and generated some initial cost estimates to rehouse 50 individuals from an encampment.
They actually provided updated numbers to us yesterday. So a 1.5 year long initiative to rehouse 50 individuals would be $1,775,000, which is a lot less than the 4 million we initially proposed at the May 4th session.
I do have a breakdown of the numbers for case management, rental subsidies, project management, landlord engagement, all of that. So if you're interested in those numbers, I'm happy to share those with you.
But 1.775 million. Based on our recent count, we would likely need twice as much money to rehouse all the community members at Free Bridge and Zero East High, just because of the cost of rent and security deposits in particular.
So the BRAC board decided to table this conversation. We're still in engagement and communication with Clutch Consulting and Community Solutions, which is willing to sponsor Clutch coming here and helping us on site with this work.
Mainly because of the cost, we didn't have the capacity to undertake this project, and the rental vacancy rate is very low compared to some other cities across the country.We heard concerns from the city manager's office as well that the cost was a little too high, considering there's a lot of fundraising needs across the COC for the Salvation Army Center of Hope campaign, and also for Holiday Drive.
And so that's why we decided to table this. We've communicated, or BFC, or Built For Zero, has communicated directly with Mayor Wade and sent their proposal. I think it was at a standstill at that point just because we weren't sure how to proceed as a continuum of care with that.
So we've notified Clutch Consulting that we're still interested. Those lines of communication are still open, and we would love some next steps from you all if you're interested in pursuing this project.
Owen and I have also been a part of the Public Spaces Working Group, which has been meeting since January to identify some short-term and intermediate-term solutions for how to address the Free Bridge and Zero East High Street encampments.
What we have identified as some potential resolutions just for the intermediate is additional porta potties, trash removal, more sharps containers. And yeah, just addressing some of the sanitation needs and increasing mental health and behavioral health supports at the encampment.
Can I pause you right there real quick? So, the Public Space Working Group submitted a letter to council last Monday. I have copies here if folks want it. There was a lot going on last Monday. But, this has been a really excellent group that had started meeting in January.
Again, Shayla and I are representing the Haven and Brock. We have the Ravenna Conservation Alliance, who are focused on the river health and the environmental factors. We have the Ravenna Trails Foundation, who is focused on community trail access and the friction points around people who are using the trails recreationally and the people who are living there.
We have the Ravenna Rafting Company represented as a local business that's been seriously impacted by the encampment. Anyway, we've been able to identify, even though we're coming from very disparate perspectives, there's shared solutions that we can all get on board with to improve both the situation for the folks who are unhoused and the folks who are accessing the trail recreationally, and the general environmental concerns and factors.
So, that is a really effective working group that's been working since January. Again, we did a little bit of partnering with Parks and Rec when they did the recent cleanup, and that was a great beginning.
They have found it hard to complete that project because the access to the trail is really challenging. I don't know if you want to speak towards any- Sure. It pretty much sums it up. It is difficult due to the logistics of the trail and where it is, especially with neighboring businesses.
Thank you. Could you walk through just in more specificity what makes it difficult to access? What are concrete barriers you encounter? Sure. Yeah, so, we know that folks are staying there, right? But being able to navigate where people are staying, trying to decipher what is to go and keep, all brings a challenge.
So we use our internal resources to make that determination, working closely with Lieutenant Wade, Sergeant Thomas to use their relationships with the individuals who are there to make this as smooth as possible.
And I think to what we talked about last Monday, it's also not knowing where we're responding to when the call comes in, or because it's not necessarily coming from a specific person down there. It might be somebody reporting it from a business or something like that, and we get multiple addresses that are given to us through dispatch.
And so accessing it by vehicle, you have to go through private property most of the time to get there. And that's time. Obviously timing. Well. So Shayla was trying to identify, this is a very complex situation, right?
And the response is multilevel. There's immediate responses, there's midterm responses, and long-term responses. So the immediate needs are in regards to what Parks and Rec has begun to do around sanitation.
That project has not been completed. There was additional trash installed at the site and two sharps containers installed near the bridge. And there are really two distinct encampments. One is the Free Bridge.
This is in the flood way. This is the most dangerous site to camp because when the water floods, as it does regularly, there's rapidly moving water moving through all of those tent encampments. So that's a critical safety issue site.
There's also a distinct encampment at Zero East High, the city-owned property, which is more of a trail system that's probably a half mile south of the Free Bridge. So the city cleanup focused on the Free Bridge encampment.
What we have heard is that the trash receptacles weren't sufficient. They need more due to the number of people there. The sharps containers also, they could use more and more broadly dispersed through that area.
Okay. And then the most critical issue is porta potties. And I know Rian and the Parks department has been working hard to try to cite a porta potty here. But, they are not able to get access from the property owners or permission to put a porta potty anywhere in that areaAnd so this is one of the critical public health issues, is that there's human waste everywhere in that site.
Okay. It gets washed into the river, and this is health hazard, community interest hazard. Makes the river less useful. So, that is a critical need that, again, whatever the city can do to site porta potties in the site as soon as possible, that is just the top of- Mm-hmm ...
the immediate priority list. And Zero East High needs all of those same facilities. There is no plan currently that we're aware of, the Parks and Rec maybe works on this, to create additional facilities up to Zero East High Encampment.
We heard the cost of this was $5,000 or less for the cleanup at Free Bridge. So this is not a lot of money that City Council needs to allocate to make the necessary sanitary interventions that are required to complete at Free Bridge, and again, understanding that the porta potty is the missing piece and additional trash and sharps.
But citing several porta potties is a critical need, and there's no restriction on Zero East High. That's a city-owned property. The Ravenna Rafting Company- Yeah ... is happy to partner with the city in.
So those are, again, we would love for these action items to be accomplished in the next two weeks. I also think it's important, some of the other... You hit the nail on the head with a lot of those issues there, but there's also the issue, and this came up over the weekend with the fire- Mm ...
I know Joe Phillips was there. The propane tanks. Mm-hmm. Those fires, one of them was venting during that fire, is what I was told. And so just, I can't imagine those propane tanks being everywhere down there and those fires, and being so dry.
And so that is another immediate public safety risk that if we do a cleanup, I'm not sure if they can clean those up or how you dispose of those propane tanks, but that's going to become a real issue.
On another, I know it's just one small piece of it, but with the porta potties specifically, so Parks and Recs would be responsible for them. I'm just thinking of the city has porta potties at a concert.
If there's not constant maintenance, they're going to overfill, have problems. Even at community events, some teenager will vandalize them or something. What would be the expectation for who's maintaining it, and what's the frequency of being out there?
Gabe, you want to speak to this? Do you have thoughts? Yeah. Gabe Silver, Ravenna River Company. I think that certainly maintenance issues, misuse issues, vandalism issues are all very possible. And yet, right now there's probably hundreds of pounds of human waste hitting the ground all along the river every day.
So every day that goes by, there's that environmental and public health, and health in the camps cost. So I think that the theoretical issues... And to be clear, I'm not endorsing encampments along the river as a good solution for any of the people long-term.
But in the short term, since it exists, it's our strong feeling that we should get the porta johns there. And if a porta john gets destroyed, at least we're still trying. And we'll take the risk at Zero East High to contract to do that, and be the middle person, so to speak, and be responsible for it then.
Understood. And I think similarly, it would seem to me if the city is going to, even just for basic health and safety as I think we need to, being going out there and doing cleanups as well as monitoring fire safety and to the extent possible trying to enforce basic fire safety rules and regulations.
It would seem to me the city would need to be out there on at least weekly, if not almost daily basis, given that there's potentially 100 people and the trajectory is expansion. Natalie or someone, Natalie had her hand raised.
Natalie? Hey there. A quick question about access. Oh, you'd said that the city hasn't been able to access porta johns on the East High half of the encampment. Is the city not allowed to go down the Duke Street, Caroline Ave corner access point?
I don't think there are any access limitations on the Zero East High Street. I think there's plenty of access points. Is that accurate, Gabe? Correct. The access problem is at Free Bridge. Yeah, access is- The Free Bridge.
Yeah. Okay. Sorry, just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. Yep. Another question on the propane tanks, just because at our last council meeting- I guess I want to pause that because this is a fire rescue question, which is critical, and could be incorporated into the public space working group as far as the near term sort of concerns.
It is a little outside of our scope. I think Joe Phillips is on here too. But I'll just say that there's no setting aside of the issue because the issue is a clear and present danger. Yeah. That's absolutely- And I'm just going to raise it because at the last council meeting, we received very specific examples of emergency fire safety, and I think we're at an extreme drought is the exact terms-And this weekend, obviously, there was a fire that, by the grace of God, there was not serious injury, even though in the reporting, that very easily could have happened.
And again, by the grace of God, it did not spread to other areas. But couple things go different, someone easily could have died. So I ask- Mm-hmm ... questions of access to the site. Were there difficulties accessing that situation, and just kind of what other fire risks are going on?
The continuum of care may not have the answer, but I just know Joe is on. I don't know if there's any... Joe is on. I would say, and this might be a question for the city attorney, too, if that is city property there still- Mm-hmm ...
can the city say you could be there, but you can't have propane tanks there. Are we able to say you can have this and that there, or... As the landowner, we can- Yeah ... say anything can happen or anything cannot happen on our land.
Okay. And as for the fire and access question, I think Joe's on there, and you can access it. Cool. Joe, you on? I'm on. Sorry, I clicked the wrong... If we can get lucky in a fire, the access to the tent that was burning is the best access I have.
It was right there near the advanced auto and the stairs. We were able to go right under the bridge as well. But you move it 100 yards more upriver, and it's a difficult access. We had the fire extinguished in about eight minutes, but the pictures of the fire before we got there are enormous.
So there was a lot of material there burning, and it's what the resident referred to as a workshop. It was not his living tent. It was his workshop, art studio, that is what he referred to it, and then it spread to his tent.
Wow. And I know there's reference to sharp containers for used needles. Obviously, there's a role for that. These are public trails, so obviously there are used needles in areas where any member of the public could be, children could be.
Shouldn't the city be out there on a daily basis if there's a risk of children getting hepatitis from a p***k, or...? I guess the question that you're posing is should the city. I think it goes both ways.
It's the providers that are serving the needs of the individuals as well. I think we have to make sure that we're sharing the scope of what this now requires. We are present on a daily basis. Parks services this area on a daily basis.
The sharps containers are serviced, and I'm kind of speaking for Cliff, but- Yeah ... they're serviced as needed. If it's full, it is emptied. So if it was full as of yesterday, it is emptied today. If it's full again tomorrow, it is taken away tomorrow.
That is the posture- That is correct ... that has been authorized for us to impact the changes that need to happen in this place right now. I think what I'm-- Are you finished? I'll wait. Well, this is the first of four sort of responses to the encampment.
Mm-hmm. And I just want to make sure we have enough time to- Mm-hmm ... The others include identifying and creating infrastructure for alternative encampment locations. One of the issues is that this is not the ideal spot for a variety of reasons, primarily because of the safety and the flood way.
Quickly identifying an alternate location that could be safer, could have better fire management protocol, food, et cetera, it is where I would like to spend more of our time, personally, in this space.
Though I completely understand the city's need to address the fire concerns, and don't want to minimize those in any way. But our time is limited here, so I do want to focus on a medium and long-term solutions- And I'll- ...
that I want to make. I'll let you continue. I'll just highlight again, any day someone could die there, so- Of course ... I don't think there's time to waste. I'll share that the any consideration of an alternative location for a campsite is my purview.
That is not a heavy decision-- That is not an easy decision for me to make. It is a very complicated matter, and there is no decision that I can share with you at this time. So the answer to that question is, that isn't done, that isn't settled.
But I do think that the conditions that we see in this particular encampment has to be addressed, and it's got to be addressed by all of us. And I'll just say plainly and clearly that what we are allowing to happen out there today is unacceptable.
We cannot allow people to continue to be at risk of burning themselves with propane tanks. That just should not be on site. The provision of them by whoever is providing them needs to stop. They can't have those.
It is not being provided by our organization. I'm not saying that it is. It is a threat to safety. That is a threat to public safety. We are in a drought. The rain that we got is not enough to prevent us from losing someone if a cooking instrument that is being manufactured on site tips over.
We can't permit that. And that is a struggle that I'm having right now with where we are on this encampment space, because there are things that we could restrict in the way of establishing rules, because there are none today, and that is where we're going to have to go, is the establishment of rules.
And I'll call out Cindy, because you gave me the language in the presentation that POTCM has rules, and POTCM has the low-barrier shelterAnd if we are in a posture that encampments are our alternative version of that outside, then there must be rules.
So we're going to have to find a way to wrap our arms around the implementation of some parameters for anyone who is outside while we continue to work to try to get as many of them inside, and make sure that we continue our service delivery, our comprehensive work to bring more services to these folks.
But we all acknowledge that the individuals closest to the river should not be there, so they need to move, and we're going to have to initiate that process. And what I would hope is that all parties involved in where we stand on this matter are going to support that because it is in the best interest of the individuals being in the most dangerous area of our riverfront, that we should all be in agreement that they need to move, and we should all work to help get them to move.
And that is not what I anticipate we're going to find based on what our past experience has been. I'm saying this out loud because I tend not to hold back. But the point of this matter is, we are at a point of high concern that after the report that I received on Friday while out of town, that there was a fire at this encampment, we cannot allow this to continue.
So there's a quick point of reconciling that I want to talk about in terms of the shared responsibility in terms of what the city's doing and the providers do. And based off each organization in the CoC, I want to share that each of us are at capacity.
This is not an abdication of the encampments. This is not in terms of these organizations feeling as though, "This is not our responsibility. We are currently at our max." And so in terms of that, BRAC's board discussed this yesterday.
We've had conversations with folks in terms of developing an RFP of what this would look like for someone to help us conglomerate resources on how to address this, what would be the best approach, so that we have something tangible that our council can take a look at, sink their teeth into in terms of a viable option.
And each of the organizations, the CoC stands ready to ultimately, whether it is an alternative site or whatever the case may be, to be able to do that. But I want to make the point that those folks who are in the encampments and those folks who are single individuals, there's sometimes some conflation in terms of these two groups are the same.
So for example, who would be served by Holiday Drive and who are in the encampments are not the same population. Right. And so there has to be a vertically integrated program in terms of, these are people with pets, these are people who are couples, they don't want to be split up, served by a program that have single or serve single adults.
So there has to be some thought process in terms of what program model can vertically integrate to serve both subsets of that population. Who does that? Who produces that? In terms of servicing both of those populations- Some recommendation on how to do that.
That's what BRAC is doing right now in terms of soliciting for those RFPs, so that there is an outside approach or an outside set of eyes to say, "This is how you best solve this problem in tandem with our partners at the city." And to piggyback off of that as far as the capacity, the CoC under BRAC has one outreach provider, Sal Mensah, who's doing an amazing job of bringing services to the 80 to 100 people who are currently camped there.
That's not an appropriate ratio. So I guess we need additional outreach capacity to be able to serve these folks. And yeah, I just want to observe that. Does outreach capacity include assisting in the relocation?
That has not been what the CoC outreach staff has done, and in conversation with Ashley, who Ashley talked a lot with us about and did delineate that if there were city-funded outreach positions, they would likely be assisting with relocation, where that could be more of a challenge for CoC outreach positions who are more working on housing navigation, are housing-focused.
So, does the city have capacity for additional outreach? Today, no. No. So if we're both in the same boats, will we be able to get on the same boat? Because the problem is great size. So two additional staff members handed to Misty is an option, but two additional staff members is not what it's going to take.
Sure. If the request from the CoC is additional supports to add outreach workers across all three of you, or however it were proposed, it would come with that condition. Yeah. Because that's the question is, would it be met with, "We can do that"?
Our request, the way we would like to devote our resources would be to identifying alternate encampment sites that would be easier to access, easier to service, easier to provide safety. And this is the kind of work that the Public Spaces Working Group has been doing to identify alternate locations.
That's the kind of work that we would like to-- If folks are going to be forced to move, we would love for them to be able to move to a better situation that's not going to have these same issues- Yeah ...
in six months from now. So can we find a better location where we can admit we've identified the concerns. It's cooking, it's propane, it's the floodway. Can we identify an alternate location to quickly, humanelyFrom the CoC standpoint, offer to folks.
From the city's standpoint, it might be require or-- So again, this is where there is a little bit of a philosophical tension, which is- I hear philosophical difference, and that is problematic. And a question- Well, then let's resolve it because seriously, I think- And I want to- ...
we can come together. Yeah ... I want to just add an additional question is, if the city did that, would the continuum of care consider it acceptable or feasible to, in that new site, have some level of rules?
Oh, my gosh, we have rules for all of our programs. So we are- And I guess the other question is, it sounds like the capacity to operationalize that does not exist. We would need a-- So part of our need for this whole sort of subset of needs, we have not gotten to the others.
We need a full-time project manager to coordinate our encampment response, the setting up an alternate campsite, getting the clutch consulting proposal rolling again. There is enough work for one full-time staff member, who the CoC would be glad to take on to-- Well, again, we have boards.
This has been quick conversations. But the three of us are enthusiastic, pending board approval, to have a project manager who can hit the short-term needs, the medium-term needs, and the long-term rehousing needs.
Get all of those balls rolling, in conjunction with the city. So that's something we are eager to dig into. We do need funding for that position, right? City would need to provide funding for at least one-year position for a project manager.
Offhand, I would guess that with benefits, that would be around $80,000. But obviously, those details would need to be worked out. But we see the need to respond. We do feel like we're well-situated to respond in conjunction with the city.
So yeah, that's- You had mentioned, I guess maybe I'm applying a different verb than you did, but there's a reviving or revisiting the clutch consulting project. That works out to over $35,000 per person.
It does. That's right. Is that- Thirty-three per person, bizarre ... 35 five actually, if you divide 50 into 1,775. Our spreadsheets be off. My question is, I have no idea what is expensive within that field.
That seems to my outside eyes as being ridiculously expensive, but I don't know what standard to judge that against. At what point does somebody say, "There's got to be a cheaper way to do it than that.
We're not going to pay $35,000 per person for 18 months." Yeah. In terms of rent. Well, just to talk- Cheaper to hire the person and pay him to- So- ... dig ditches ... specifically for numbers, 25 of that 35 are rental subsidies.
With a average cost of living, we're estimating about $1,500 per month rent per person. That's $18,000 per person, plus the additional, we need to pay landlords additional security deposits, additional fees, so that they will take a risk on our folks.
Some of those funds we get back, but the majority of that is rental subsidy support for folks. The rest is housing navigation, case management support, that sort of project management and coordination piece, but the majority is rental subsidies.
So this is why BRAC board made a pause in terms of this conversation because we saw the numbers. Clutch and Community Solutions has worked with much larger populations, and obviously, there's a higher affordable housing vacancy.
And so the thought process is to your point, how do we find someone who has a more nuanced approach, that can take the time to learn Charlottesville, learn Charlottesville's specific needs, and help us from that vantage point.
So there was the conversation to say, "What can we find that's more economically feasible for our specific area?" Oh, Natalie. Hey, thanks. Backing this up. Owen, you'd originally mentioned there were four things you were going to talk about.
Mm-hmm. And we got stuck at the relocation. Was that the fourth thing, or was there another piece of the- So relocation is the second and third thing. So it's identifying and creating infrastructure for an alternative encampment, which we would like to propose Holiday Drive as an alternative encampment location.
Since the city owns it, it is not in the floodplain, it is easy to access. The second piece is creating management protocols for that alternative encampment location. What are the rules? What are the requirements?
Or how do folks cook? Again, the public space working group has been digging into this. We've begun to identify what are the management protocols we would need in place. I guess I would also add that the Rivanna Trail Foundation, for example, has a ton of volunteers.
The Rivanna Trail reps think that their volunteers would be very motivated to help create campsites and infrastructure in another spot, to again, create an alternative that's attractive and well-serviced and well-managed, to draw as many folks from the dangerous spot as we can.And then the fourth is leading the rehousing initiative, so this is the CLUTCH Consulting effort.
So we have touched on all four of them in one shape or form. We haven't talked about Holiday Drive as a possible encampment location. So, we have about eight minutes left before we need to wrap up. And so the CLUTCH piece, their focus is on rehousing, not shelter management.
Or what counts as housing for them? Is it hotel? Is it shelter? Is it long-term- Rental market housing. Okay. And so in the interim, how close is the city or the organizations or in partnership or with whatever grants we can apply for, how close are we to being able to buy or lease a hotel?
And who's leading that conversation? Is that a conversation we've had? We've had conversations. We don't have a point person identified for who would take that on, though. Because again, it's a staffing capacity issue.
Right. What about at the city, as the city? I'd offer from the city perspective that I have probably 10 different things on a list of active pursuits, but that doesn't mean anything because at this moment, there's nothing that's landed.
And if there was a hotel, that could be a destination for the Direct to Housing initiative. So the Direct to Housing initiative is the mechanism by which we get folks out of encampments into housing. The destination, typically CLUTCH puts folks into market-rate rentals.
It would be a lot easier if we had an alternative or transitional housing option for folks. So that would expedite the process and possibly make it cheaper as well. And who would fund it? And so initially, when we were backing up a little bit to talk about who would be assisting or managing a relocation process, we're talking about that in terms of an alternate campsite, not a housing situation just yet.
We're probably talking about all of the above. Exactly. Yeah. Yep. So- That's what makes it challenging, because all these things are very expensive, and the question is how much of them can we do at the same time?
But the right approach would be an all-of-the-above approach. So, since we're just looking at ideas, what if we look at, I think we're looking at 18 months. What if we said use financial incentive to expedite the construction of the Holiday Drive reconstruction?
When I was in transportation, we would use incentives for them to finish projects. I'm thinking about the big Rio Road 29. That was done months and months and months ahead of time because they had a financial-- They were working around the clock on holidays and things.
I just think a lot of this would be resolved if we get that Holiday Inn Drive done, and hearing about meetings and re- and talking to architect. We just need to get the damn thing done. And I know it's a lot of conversations need to take place, but if we do that, then we can be able to say, "You know what?
You can't be here. We don't want you here, but you know what? We have a place for you to go with services and things that you can do." But I know that it's going to take time for that. What's happening along the river is not acceptable.
It sounds like there's a lot of ideas out there, and we don't have all the answers here. We won't be able to say do A, B or C tonight. But, we need to come up with something because it's not acceptable for the residents there, the businesses or say for our unhoused brothers and sisters there.
We can do better, to take care of those residents out there. And we have the brainpower here and CLUTCH and others to try to address this. It's just we don't have enough housing. And that's one of the reasons that it's so high, and that's why that we're in this situation now that we don't have enough housing.
So anyway, Jen, do you have anything you want to- Yes ... chime in? I do. Thank you. Okay. I could use a better sense of who's willing to do what. Because if you say relocate to me, that is prioritizing indoors.
I think that- Can you clarify that? Hotel. Something that is acting shelter-ish that is immediately available. So, I think we would have to still have, as you've mentioned in your letter, all the things.
An outdoor encampment area because of pure numbers. We may not be able to fund or find hotels that are available. But I think putting all the eggs in the encampment basket is a bad move on our part because more people die in heat than cold, and we're about to come up on hurricane season in four weeks, and heat too.
And the problem changes from fire to heat exhaustion. Indoors is the way to go and the most compassionate way we can address this. But it is multi-pronged because immediately you're saying even if we start tomorrow, we still need port-a-johns and wraparound supports and more engagement people down there to be mobilized and to strike that team tomorrow.18 months is too long.
We need- What is 18 months? That's the CLUTCH timeline. So- It's not 18 months to start. It's an 18-month-long program. Placement. Placement to housing, right. But could CLUTCH work on with us indoors, as in a hotel?
Would that suffice? Are you saying that is an option for them, or it has to be long-term housing? Do they consider- They consider- ... a hotel ... hotel as a kind of-- It's almost like a shelter, but- Yeah.
I think we can set this project up however we want to. Councilor Payne had the observation, though, if buying a hotel is more like operating an overnight shelter- Mm-hmm ... than market-rate housing with dispersed case management.
Right. So, um- I think we want to get to market-rate housing. I'm saying in the phasing of this, are we ready to set some groundwork and rules on the city side that move folks instantly, in the next two weeks, out of the most critical zones of the river by, with engagement and- Into- ...
the port ... a hotel. That would be ideal, but just moving-- Can we do some engagement that says, "Do you have anywhere else to go? Is there someplace to go?" I don't know how that process works because I'm not in your world, but, I mean, soon.
If we displace people in two weeks, they will disperse. They will be camping in other locations- Okay ... in the city. So we need, in the immediate, not only the supports down there, but the instant plan for getting the first priority set of folks into, what I would say, indoor housing would be preferred, but this other site.
So can you, in tandem, do the work to identify who needs to move and set up the other encampment zone and a hotel? I mean, what do we need? What's the timeline? Okay, so if we had a project manager, then they could probably, working with the public space working group, the resources we have, I think we could set up an alternative camping location within three to five months.
If at the same time we're engaging CLUTCH and getting the direct housing initiative going again, CLUTCH is very ambitious with their timelines, and they could-- But that does involve staffing up. We have one outreach person right now.
There is just not the capacity. So, the project manager is working on hiring and coordinating these different projects. So there's no two-week solution that I can see. So if I was saying to you, "What can we do in eight to 12 weeks?" And I'm choosing those numbers only from a very limited set of research I've done on cities our size who have relocated encampments and folks living in them inside two hotels, is the only example I have, and other encampment sites.
That was an eight to 12 week, so three-month, eight to 12-week process. What could we feasibly get done if, magic genie lamp, everything was available, the staffing, the project management, in eight to 12 weeks in your mind?
Do we know what it would take and what that- Are we talking about a direct to housing? Talking about relocating encampment. So, from me being BRAC chair, again, I think this is a much larger conversation in terms of strategy, and this is why BRAC, again, has had conversations with various folks in terms of RFP to help us figure out what this process will look like versus what apparatus we use in terms of the, I don't want to say the enclosing, but getting the encampment taken care of in a humane process.
So, I think that that conversation, again, we just started that conversation, or we continue that conversation in terms of what's going to be the best fit and how we're going to get the best bang for our buck.
In terms of that. I will say in terms of the CoC, the entire CoC stands ready to collaborate with the city in whatever humane capacity is possible to solve this problem. We just need to have a chance to kind of gather our bearings, figure out what resources are available to develop that plan of action.
But I emphasized to the board only yesterday, we need to move quickly. And so we are literally-- I'm texting folks as we're talking right now in terms of I want to have something for the city to have ASAP.
Yeah, I don't think it's a tiny plan. Owen, to speak back to what you're saying, I think this is a plan that is massive that says step one, porta johns to housing. And the thread that connects it all are the people who help connect the people to the steps along the path.
There's just an immediate strike zone right now because of the environment bearing down on us with hurricane season and the state of the situation from a public health perspective. And we have to work both micro and macro on it.
So I'm trying to figure out where we-- Are we, the city, the overarching piece? Are we the strike piece and then we come in later? It would be great to see what we can accomplish to solve this on that long spectrum and what we need so we can say, "We actually need 12 workers.
Five are working on strike, five are working on long-term housing, five are working on the crew." We still have to identify everyone. We have to priority list them, I'm assuming. We've got to figure that out.
I don't know if we know everybody down there. The engagement has been amazing. So it'd be great to see what we need to be successful on the immediate and the long-term. So what would you like from the CoC in regards to that plan of timeline.
What you can do as a COC, what, if you had the right staffing and you had the right resources, you would be willing to do. You're obviously not going to say, "I'm going to make an ordinance." That's us.
I think define the roles, and then a reassurance that you could do that in tandem to number two, because I'm not willing to give up on Holiday Drive progress. Can they both be done in tandem? Yeah. Is city council willing to fund a project manager position to drive this forward with speed?
Because with our current capacity, we cannot drive forward with speed on this project. Not how we do that. Oh, I'm sorry. I don't know about these things. Yeah. I've captured the question. Okay, thank you.
And I think that's where we are. I think what I hear you saying is you would like us to try to help you frame it better, so that then you can respond with, "This would be a proposal for doing that." I think we have all the pieces.
Okay. But laying them out in a way that makes sense to everyone, I think, yeah, we could. Would love to collaborate with you on that. And I'll just say as a final statement for myself, I think one of the challenges is we know the environment is immediately crisis-level unsafe in terms of flood risk, fire risk.
Access in the city, at least in my perspective, is going to have to impose some level of structure and rules and relocation to safer areas on a faster timeline than five-plus months. I'm not a lawyer, but in my mind, this is approaching an area of gross negligence where the city is-- This cannot continue as is.
Yeah. Natalie, you had your hand up, and Sam, I don't know if you just wanted to add any wrap-up. Yeah. I'll be really quick. Go ahead. Yeah. I know we're running right up to time. We're over. There's a lot.
If we decide that Holiday Drive could be an alternative camping location, I'm nervous about the fact that three to five months was put out there as the time we would need to allow people to get there.
If that's a time limit that just is using the resources, the immediate resources of the COC, I think we probably would expand that into resources that the city has to go notify people and to help with the move the way that we did it a couple of years ago.
So I would hope that that three to five months could be consolidated into a much shorter timeframe. Is that a reasonable assumption? That if city staff and volunteers that you mentioned, were able to give a week of notice, assist with moving items, is that feasibly something we could do within three weeks?
If Holiday Drive is open to camping, and there's time to prepare the site and generate infrastructure, we do need a project manager for this, so we need to hire someone. So it certainly shortens the timeline significantly from three to five months.
But there are some rate-limiting steps there still. Site has to be prepared. Project manager has to be hired. We can move quickly forward on those if this is what the city wants, how the city wants to proceed.
And to clarify, I'm not making promises here, I'm asking questions about timelines, so thank you. And I do want to just one quick thank you and appreciation note before we close that. The conversation that you've driven today, you came outlined, you came organized with requests for specific actions.
I think that that indicates that, as three groups, you're working together well, which I think we can kind of bank on that now, which is good. But I know that there's still challenges from operations level to board level communication, and then with city, so I'm glad that we're asking for additional meets.
And I think there's a lot of if-thens, and as soon as one decision gets made, things will fall into place. And so, I'm looking forward to that moment. Okay. Other comments? So I think the first thing there's going to be some meetings that you're going to be involved in, and I think Sam is probably going to be getting back with us with some additional guidance.
And then, sorry, I know we didn't get to assessing COC structure. Are we on a hard deadline or should we not- Yeah ... get into it? I don't know what our constraint is for time. I think we had promised staff we were on a hard deadline.
Yeah. Okay. What I'll say to that, and Ruby if you would pull up the slide deck and go to the last slide. What I'll say to the just item number six is the question that I would suggest there is, what does that mean?
What does assessing the COC structure look like? And that becomes a part of this exchange that begins here, that finds its way back to council as the way of information. My wrap-up is, before we had this conversation, I tried to predict what we were going to end up needing to talk about as next steps.
So here's what I heard, and just a minute, I'm not prophetic, but this is what I do. The providers, how do you align to produce an operating plan for Holiday Drive? We have touched on that this evening.
How would you activate overnight sheltering at Holiday Drive right now as part of what you just heard, as part of a request that we have heard before? If we were to go that route, in addition to or in place of alternative campsite, how would you activate Holiday Drive right now?
I think that is a question we would love for you to give us an answer to.How will you determine and produce individual budget requests for Holiday Drive project? We've had conversations about that as well.
For me, how do you intend to manage encampments in the city of Charlottesville? That is my obligation, and I have made it clear that what we see today cannot continue as is. It has to change. So I've began to work on that, and I'll continue that work.
I shouldn't say began, because I'm already doing it. How will you operationalize expanded homeless outreach capacity? I think we hear that loud and clear from the CoC request, and we have also indicated that we're having internal conversations about how we would do that as staff.
City Management Council, how will you finalize the vision plan for Holiday Drive? I think we have shared exactly where we are at this moment, that 27,000 square feet is what we purchased. That is what we hope to activate.
We need to know what the impact of that firm decision is, so that we can then solve for the impacts of that and plan for alternatives or augmentations to that impact. Because the desire is loud and clear, we would prefer that all three organizations are at this site.
That is the desire, that's where we started, and nothing has changed in regards to that. City Council, how do you get comfortable with the tensions and trade-offs that result from this effort? Those are my two favorite words as it relates to doing your job, because it's never easy, and you will never have an easy answer for any of these complicated questions.
And how do you prepare the community for this long and hard conversation? Because I think what we have also indicated is time is needed for everything. Nothing goes quick. None of this can be done overnight, and I would stress that we have to be careful that with any effort to rush, because the community well-being report for the City of Charlottesville said that we have had a sustained presence of unhoused individuals at a very high number since 2007.
That's what I'm trying to get everyone to not lose sight of. This has been going on for some time. We cannot fix this overnight. This is a long-standing issue that we're going to have to address, and that is why all hands on deck is the request that I'm making.
We have to come at this from every angle that we possibly can. I think as a community, we punch above our weight class, as you know I like to say, and for that I say that we should be able to do this.
There is enough resources in here, there's enough brain power, there's enough commitment to wanting to care for these individuals in a way that is better than what we see today, and that we can do our best to do it in a compassionate manner.
I've been consistent about that, I believe that wholeheartedly, and I recognize the job that I have is hard, and it conflicts with that. So I'm doing my best to ensure that what actions come next will come from having thought this through and tried to plan for every version of what could happen, and to ensure that if you ask the question of why I did it, I have an answer, and if you ask what are we doing next, I also have an answer because we can't stop.
That's where I am. So I think that's- Yeah ... how I'll get off my soapbox now. Could I ask one thing? That would be that we just plan at every Monday council meeting to have at least a two-minute update on where things stand.
Sure. I can commit to that. Can I ask that we can ask for some help from our friends, like other localities and municipalities to help us with this? Yeah. I've had a couple of engagements with our region.
So the CoC's region is my peer region. I've made a presentation to them of the concept when we were initially pursuing this property. I brought them in on the conversation when it was about Cherry Avenue.
I made it clear to all of them that I do intend to come and make a case for why they each should fund money and be a part of this coordinated effort because everyone here is not just people who came from here.
And for that, I think we should be able to rely on them to support us. And I think it was well-received because I did not hear a huff and a gruff in the room. I think everyone indicated that they understood that this is something that we all need to rally around and do something about.
So I do believe that we have the support, and the interest has remained. Good. Yeah. Thank you all so much for coming out and- Thank you ... is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. All in favor, please say yes.