HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE AGENDA - Welcome … COMMITTEE AGENDA Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:00 a.m....

HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE AGENDA

Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:00 a.m.

CVAG Offices 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Room 119

Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-1127

THIS MEETING IS HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE.

ACTION MAY RESULT ON ANY ITEMS ON THIS AGENDA.

1. CALL TO ORDER - Chair Sabby Jonathan, Mayor Pro Tem, City of Palm Desert 2. ROLL CALL A. Member Roster P3 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS

This is the time and place for any person wishing to address the Homelessness Committee on items not on the agenda to do so.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR

A. Approval of March 15, 2017 Minutes P4

6. DISCUSSION/ACTION

A. West Valley Housing Navigation Program Update—Cheryll Dahlin P8

Recommendation: Provide staff with direction on next steps for West Valley Housing Navigation Program

B. Funding Formula for West Valley Housing Navigation Program P10 —Cheryll Dahlin

Recommendation: Provide staff with direction of a funding formula for West Valley Housing Navigation Program

C. 2017 Homeless Point in Time Count Presentation—Donyielle Holley, P11 Riverside County Department of Public Social Services

Recommendation: Discussion Only

7. CONTINUUM OF CARE RIVERSIDE COUNTY / EX-OFFICIO AND DIRECTOR COMMENTS

8. INFORMATION 1. Committee Attendance Roster P16

2. Roy’s Desert Resource Center Report March 2017 P17

3. Funding Resources Research Update P18

4. Riverside County Department of Social Services Partnership with Roy’s Desert

Resource Center Transition of Clients (To Be Distributed at Meeting)

5. Invitation: Homelessness: Helping Without Hurting, May 18, 2017 P36

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Regularly Scheduled Meetings at CVAG, 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, Conference Room 119:

Homelessness Committee—Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

Executive Committee—Monday, April 24, 2017 at 4:30 p.m.

10. ADJOURN

Item 2A Coachella Valley Association of Governments

FY 2016-2017 (revised 3/9/2017)

Homelessness Committee Members Roster City of Blythe Vacant

City of Cathedral City Councilmember Mark Carnevale

City of Coachella Councilmember Betty Sanchez

City of Desert Hot Springs Councilmember Joe McKee– VICE CHAIR

City of Indian Wells Mayor Pro Tem Kimberly Muzik

City of Indio Councilmember Lupe Ramos Watson

City of La Quinta Councilmember John Pena

City of Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Sabby Jonathan– CHAIR

City of Palm Springs Mayor Pro Tem Ginny Foat

City of Rancho Mirage Mayor Pro Tem Charles Townsend

County of Riverside John Aguilar, Deputy Director of Housing, EDA

Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians Vacant

Cabazon Band of Mission Indians Vacant

Ex-Officio Members (non-voting)

Linda Barrack, Executive Director Martha’s Village and Kitchen Julie Bornstein, Executive Director Coachella Valley Housing Coalition Darla Burkett, Executive Director Coachella Valley Rescue Mission Angelina Coe, Executive Director Shelter From the Storm-CoC Representative Paul Flores, Outreach Director Health to Hope Kristii MacEwen, Director of Housing Path of Life Ministries-CoC Representative Kristina Starkey, Donor Relations Director The Salvation Army Ray Osborne, Executive Director HomeAid Inland Empire

Additional Support Staff

Lisa Shiner, DPSS Asst. Director Lynne Brockmeier, Admin. Manager, Riv. Univ. Health Sys.-BH

Le McClellan, Desert SOS Director @ Roy’s DRC Jill Kowalski, Admin. Manager II- Homeless Programs Unit

Tanya Torno, Senior Development Specialist, RC Housing Authority

CVAG Support Staff

Tom Kirk, Executive Director Cheryll Dahlin, Management Analyst


Homelessness Committee Meeting Minutes of March 15, 2017

The audio file for this committee meeting can be found online at: http://www.cvag.org/minutes.htm

1. CALL TO ORDER

The Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) Homelessness Committee meeting was called to order on Wednesday, March 15, 2017 10:00 a.m. by Sabby Jonathan, Chair, at CVAG Offices, 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 119, Palm Desert, CA 92260.

2. ROLL CALL

A roll call was conducted and it was determined that a quorum was present. Those in attendance were as follows:

MEMBERS PRESENT AGENCY Councilmember Mark Carnevale City of Cathedral City Councilmember Betty Sanchez City of Coachella Councilmember Joe McKee City of Desert Hot Springs Councilmember Kimberly Muzik City of Indian Wells Councilmember Lupe Ramos Watson City of Indio Mayor Pro Tem John Pena City of La Quinta Mayor Pro Tem Sabby Jonathan (Chair) City of Palm Desert Mayor Pro Tem Ginny Foat City of Palm Springs Mayor Pro Tem Charles Townsend City of Rancho Mirage John Aguilar County of Riverside EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS PRESENT AGENCY Darla Burkett Coachella Valley Rescue Mission (CVRM) Angelina Coe, CEO Shelter from the Storm-CoC Representative Linda Barrack, CEO Martha’s Village and Kitchen Julie Bornstein, CEO Coachella Valley Housing Coalition Kristii MacEwen, Director of Housing Path of Life Ministries-CoC Representative Paul Flores Health to Hope MEMBERS & EX-OFFICIOS ABSENT AGENCY Kristina Starkey, Donor Relations Director The Salvation Army Ray Osborne, Executive Director HomeAid Inland Empire SUPPORT STAFF PRESENT AGENCY Cheryll Dahlin, Management Analyst CVAG Gary Leong CVAG Erica Felci CVAG Jill Kowalski, Admin. Manager Riverside County DPSS Lynne Brockmeier Riverside University Health System

Le McClellan Roy’s Desert Resource Center OTHERS PRESENT Kathleen Kelly, Councilmember, Palm Desert Angie Cota, Housing Agent, Path of Life Jeff Moritz, President, Convergent Center Laurie Baldwin, Palm Desert Area Chamber of Commerce Rosalie Murphy, The Desert Sun Jose Ibarra, Indio Police Department Brandon Haworth, Indio Police Department Frankie Riddle, City of Palm Desert David Teets, RSO Palm Desert Coby Webb, RSO Palm Desert Chris Willison, RSO Palm Desert Jorge Ramirez, RSO Palm Desert Liz Robed, The Salvation Army Tom Cox, CVRM Sherry Finke, CVRM Dwayne Hodge, Cathedral City Police Ivette Zamora Cruz, Catholic Charities Judy Shae, Desert Hot Springs Community Task Force Robyn Kelley, RI International Michelle DeArmond, Riverside County, 4th District 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Member Sanchez led the pledge of allegiance. 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS

Judy Shae spoke on issues in the community.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR IT WAS MOVED BY MEMBER TOWNSEND AND SECONDED BY MEMBER SANCHEZ TO:

A. APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 16, 2016 MINUTES

B. APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 15, 2017 MINUTES

THE MOTION CARRIED WITH 10 AYES. MEMBER CARNEVALE AYE MEMBER SANCHEZ AYE MEMBER MCKEE AYE MEMBER MUZIK AYE MEMBER RAMOS WATSON AYE MEMBER PENA AYE MEMBER JONATHAN AYE MEMBER FOAT AYE

MEMBER TOWNSEND AYE MEMBER AGUILAR AYE

6. DISCUSSION/ACTION

A. West Valley Housing Navigation Program Update-Cheryll Dahlin Cheryll Dahlin gave a brief update. A discussion ensued. The group put together an Request For Interest Review group consisting of Member Foat, Member Jonathan, Member Townsend, Tanya Torno, Linda Barrack, and Jill Kowalski.

B. Roy’s Desert Resource Center Transition into Long Term Care Facility Presentation—

Lynne Brockmeier, Riverside University Health System—Behavioral Health Lynne Brockmeier gave a PowerPoint presentation to the group. A discussion ensued. This committee encouraged staff to highlight ways for cities or the public to access the new facility.

C. Community Outreach Resource Program Regionalization—Cheryll Dahlin

Cheryll Dahlin gave a PowerPoint presentation. A discussion ensued among the committee.

IT WAS MOVED BY MEMBER SANCHEZ AND SECONDED BY MEMBER MCKEE TO:

(1) APPROVE CVAG CHAIR TO SIGN CVAG RESOLUTION NO. 17-001 AND; (2) APPROVE MODEL RESOLUTION TO REGIONALIZE COMMUNITY OUTREACH RESOURCE PROGRAM. THE MOTION CARRIED WITH 7 AYES, 1 NO, 1 ABSTENTION.

MEMBER CARNEVALE AYE MEMBER SANCHEZ AYE MEMBER MCKEE AYE MEMBER MUZIK ABSTENTION MEMBER RAMOS WATSON ABSENT-left the room at 11:18am MEMBER PENA AYE MEMBER JONATHAN AYE MEMBER FOAT NO MEMBER TOWNSEND AYE MEMBER AGUILAR AYE

D. New Ex-Officio Introductions: Coachella Valley Housing Coalition; The Salvation Army; Home Aide Inland Empire; and the Path of Life Ministries

7. CONTINUUM OF CARE RIVERSIDE COUNTY / EX-OFFICIO AND DIRECTOR COMMENTS

John Aguilar gave a quick update on new farmworker housing project by Coachella Valley Housing Coalition and a reduction in the criminal lookback years from 7 years to 3 years.

8. INFORMATION 1. Committee Attendance Roster

2. Roy’s Desert Resource Center February 2017 Report

3. Update on County and Cities’ Action on Homelessness

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS

Upcoming Regularly Scheduled Meetings at CVAG, 73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, Conference Room 119:

Homelessness Committee—Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 10:00 a.m.

Executive Committee—Monday, April 24, 2017 at 4:30 p.m.

10. ADJOURN

The meeting adjourned at 11:34 a.m.

Respectfully submitted by,

Cheryll Dahlin

Management Analyst, CVAG

The audio file for this committee meeting can be found online at: http://www.cvag.org/minutes.htm


Homelessness Committee April 19, 2017

Staff Report Subject: West Valley Housing Navigation Program Update Contact: Cheryll Dahlin, Management Analyst ([email protected]) Recommendation: Provide staff with direction on next steps for West Valley Housing Navigation Program Background: The Request for Interest for a Program Operator for Addressing Homelessness through West Valley Housing Navigation Program was released February 24, 2017. The submission deadline was March 14, 2017. CVAG staff received two submissions from Path of Life Ministries (POLM) and Mr. Bruce Rhodes. Mr. Rhodes has since notified staff that he will have to withdraw his application. Staff has been in email communications with the RFI Review Group, due to scheduling, staff has set up a meeting with the Review Group right before the April Homelessness Committee meeting. Staff has determined that the POLM submission is responsive to the RFI. This applicant is a private, nonprofit organization headquartered in Riverside. POLM has been providing homeless services for over 12 years. They are governed by an eight member Board of Directors and Damien O’Farrell serves as their chief executive officer. POLM supports a Housing First program model and employs 45 staff who are engaged in Emergency Sheltering, Rapid Rehousing, and Permanent Supportive Housing. The organization receives funding from private donors and public sources such as US Department of Housing and Urban Development (through the Riverside County Continuum of Care), FEMA Emergency Food and Shelter Program, and Community Development Block Grant programs. POLM proposes delivering WVHNP services from one location (to be determined) in each of the three cities - Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, and Cathedral City. Using a staggered staffing schedule, coverage will be provided 7 days a week from 7am to 9pm. Homeless Prevention and Diversion (HPD) services will be achieved through emergency rental assistance, housing navigation assistance, and supportive services such as security deposits, utility assistance, and case management services. POLM intends to provide HPD services to 20 households per month. An additional 12 households will receive rental assistance, utility assistance, and supportive services for up to 6 months. Crisis Stabilization Housing (CSH) programming will ensure that individuals in emergency housing exit quickly into stable non-emergency housing. POLM intends to provide 6-10 beds of emergency housing in Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, and Cathedral City though the leasing of up to 4 rental properties in each of these cities. Clients may stay up to a maximum of 90 days.

Fiscal Impact: The total annual budget required by POLM to provide requested HPD and CSH services is $864,737.22. The committee already directed staff to ask cities to budget a place holder. There is no fiscal impact as staff time is charged under the duties of the Homelessness program. :attachments

Item 6B Coachella Valley Association of Governments


Staff Report Subject: Funding Formula for West Valley Housing Navigation Program Contact: Cheryll Dahlin, Management Analyst ([email protected]) Recommendation: Provide staff with direction of a funding formula for West Valley Housing Navigation Program Background: CVAG sent a letter to its member jurisdictions to request the consideration of a financial contribution to support regional homelessness efforts. The letter was to provide an update on the Request for Interest (RFI) process and to ask cities to budget a place holder to help support our regional efforts. CVAG has completed the RFI process and has recommended to move forward with the Path of Life Ministries’ (POLM) Program Outline and Budget, and to seek funding from the County and Cities. In the previous years, CVAG jurisdictions were asked to make an annual contribution of $103,000 to support the operating costs for Roy’s. As we transition into the West Valley Housing Navigation Program (WVHNP), the committee has an opportunity to propose a funding formula for this new program. At this time, the County has not finalized its contribution. The total annual budget required by POLM to provide requested services is $864,737.22. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact on Homelessness program for CVAG staff time and overhead, as these are funded by the CVAG General Fund.

Information

Adult Services Division - Homeless Program Unit

Overview The 2017 Point-In-Time Homeless Count unsheltered methodology consisted of a street-based count, and a service-based count. The sheltered count methodology consisted of data extracted from the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) to count sheltered homeless individuals on the night of January 23, 2017. A total of 1,638 unsheltered homeless individuals and a preliminary sheltered count of 775 (total homeless = 2,413) were identified in Riverside County during the 2017 Point-In-Time Homeless Count on January 24, 2017. In contrast, during the 2016 PIT Count, 1,351 unsheltered and 814 sheltered homeless individuals (total homeless = 2,165) were identified. Therefore, there was a 11.45% increase in the overall total number of homeless people counted from 2016 to 2017 (21.2% increase in unsheltered homeless; 4.8% decrease in sheltered homeless). Among the 1,638 unsheltered individuals counted in 2017, 1,128 were interviewed and 510 were observed.

Rationale for Countywide Increase

The increase in the overall unsheltered 2017 Point-in-Time Count (PIT) reflects a countywide commitment to conducting a more collaborative and rigorous count. The County of Riverside Department of Public Social Services (DPSS) submits that that this increase may be attributed to the following: In 2017, following HUD’s new requirements to have a separate youth count, we increased our efforts to

obtain a more accurate count of youth ages 24 and under that are experiencing homelessness. We expanded our efforts by inviting youth friendly partners to assist in implementing the youth count. These partners included youth opportunity centers, transitional age youth programs, youth emergency shelters, city leaders, and other public, private, and non-profit agencies focused on the goal to end homelessness for youth. The knowledge and experience that each collaborative partner brought to the table helped us to better identify homeless youth during both the traditional and the youth counts. By having youth friendly volunteers, we were more successful in engaging youth to be willing to participate in the PIT Survey. Our 2017 count for youth ages 24 and under is 122; a 36% increase from last year’s count. We believe this increase is due to our increased collaboration and focus on youth experiencing homelessness.

For the 2017 Point in Time Count, there was a targeted countywide effort to significantly increase city engagement activities and the participation of law enforcement agencies working on the frontlines to end homelessness. This enhanced partnership included the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department, various City Police Departments, Riverside County and City Code Enforcement agencies, Riverside County Probation Department, DPSS Homeless Programs Unit, Housing Authority of the County of Riverside, The Riverside University Health System – Behavioral Health (formerly Department of Mental Health), the U.S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA), Loma Linda Medical Center, and other key nonprofit housing providers. These coordination efforts helped to improve planning activities through the pre-canvassing of communities to identify more accurate homeless locations. There was also an increased commitment from community partners to conduct a more accurate count by conducting follow up counts during the seven day window following the PIT Count date.

2017 Point-In-Time Homeless Count Data Report Summary

cdahlin

Typewritten Text

item 6C

Information

Adult Services Division - Homeless Program Unit

Rationale for Countywide Increase (Continued)

Riverside County was under a severe thunderstorm warning by the National Weather Service in the weeks and days leading up to the PIT Count. As the majority of Riverside County’s unsheltered homeless population resides in unsheltered settings, we partnered with first responders to raise awareness for the PIT Count and to promote the outreach services for homeless veterans, youth and families taking place on the day of the count. This message was layered onto an existing safety advisory initiated by first responders to warn homeless individuals of the dangers of residing in riverbeds, flood control channels and areas prone to mudslides during thunderstorms. This countywide effort between partnering county agencies helped to:

Raise awareness and educate the homeless population of the benefits of participating in the count.

Educate the most service resistant individuals residing in hard to reach areas.

Reinforce common purpose to bring homeless individuals out of the shadows and promote a common message not to fear law enforcement personnel escorting PIT Count volunteers into encampments.

Homeless individuals that heeded the law enforcement/emergency management warning either sought shelter in drier areas or felt safe to participate in the survey, thus increasing the number of individuals surveyed during the entire PIT Count.

During the 2017 PIT Count, there was a 65% (201) increase in the number of observational surveys utilized compared to 2016. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) makes provisions for using an observational survey instead of an interview survey in the following situations:

A PIT Count volunteer is unable to enter the location to conduct a survey. A PIT Count volunteer cannot conduct a survey (person refused to answer questions, language or

other issues). A PIT Count volunteer does not wish to disturb people sleeping.

However, due to the limited amount of information collected on the observational survey and the fact that it includes the volunteer’s perspective as opposed to the homeless individual’s response, it makes the deduplication process challenging. Even though every effort is made to remove duplicates, there is no guarantee that some of the individuals observed may or may not have been interviewed at another time during the PIT Count.

Note: The following tables represent unsheltered PIT data only.

2017 Point-In-Time Homeless Count Data Report Summary

Riverside DPSS ASD-HPU/ 4-1-2017 v1

Count Percent Count Percent

City Banning 26 6 25 1.9% 32 2.0% 7 28.0%Beaumont 14 4 10 0.7% 18 1.1% 8 80.0%Blythe 31 28 63 4.7% 59 3.6% -4 -6.3%Calimesa 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 -Canyon Lake 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 -Cathedral City 37 7 27 2.0% 44 2.7% 17 63.0%Coachella 61 20 59 4.4% 81 4.9% 22 37.3%Corona 39 17 83 6.1% 56 3.4% -27 -32.5%

Desert Hot Springs 33 10 28 2.1% 43 2.6% 15 53.6%Eastvale 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 -Hemet 65 54 107 7.9% 119 7.3% 12 11.2%Indian Wells 0 0 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 -Indio 57 32 70 5.2% 89 5.4% 19 27.1%Jurupa Valley 95 18 113 8.4% 113 6.9% 0 0.0%La Quinta 1 1 8 0.6% 2 0.1% -6 -75.0%Lake Elsinore 62 9 53 3.9% 71 4.3% 18 34.0%Menifee 10 4 20 1.5% 14 0.9% -6 -30.0%Moreno Valley 58 20 61 4.5% 78 4.8% 17 27.9%Murrieta 5 2 0 0.0% 7 0.4% 7 -Norco 3 1 12 0.9% 4 0.2% -8 -66.7%Palm Desert 21 7 19 1.4% 28 1.7% 9 47.4%Palm Springs 90 48 83 6.1% 138 8.4% 55 66.3%Perris 27 2 65 4.8% 29 1.8% -36 -55.4%Rancho Mirage 0 0 3 0.2% 0 0.0% -3 -100.0%Riverside 233 167 258 19.1% 400 24.4% 142 55.0%San Jacinto 23 8 18 1.3% 31 1.9% 13 72.2%Temecula 67 18 37 2.7% 85 5.2% 48 129.7%Wildomar 4 2 13 1.0% 6 0.4% -7 -53.8%Subtotal 1062 485 1235 91.4% 1547 94.4% 312 25.3%

Unincorporated Area

Anza 0 0 2 0.1% 0 0.0% -2 -100.0%Bermuda Dunes 10 0 2 0.1% 10 0.6% 8 400.0%Cabazon 1 0 6 0.4% 1 0.1% -5 -83.3%Cactus City 1 0 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 -Cherry Valley 1 0 3 0.2% 1 0.1% -2 -66.7%Coronita 0 5 0 0.0% 5 0.3% 5 -Highgrove 1 4 25 1.9% 5 0.3% -20 -80.0%Home Gardens 0 1 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 -

Homeland 0 0 2 0.1% 0 0.0% -2 -100.0%Idyllwild 8 2 12 0.9% 10 0.6% -2 -16.7%Lakeland Village 0 0 14 1.0% 0 0.0% -14 -100.0%Mead Valley 12 2 0 0.0% 14 0.9% 14 -Meadowbrook 0 0 3 0.2% 0 0.0% -3 -100.0%Mecca 13 2 21 1.6% 15 0.9% -6 -28.6%Mesa Verde 0 0 2 0.1% 0 0.0% -2 -100.0%

Romoland 4 1 3 0.2% 5 0.3% 2 66.7%

Temescal Valley 0 1 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 -

Thermal 1 0 8 0.6% 1 0.1% -7 -87.5%Thousand Palms 12 5 6 0.4% 17 1.0% 11 183.3%Valle Vista 2 2 0 0.0% 4 0.2% 4 -White Water 0 0 1 0.1% 0 0.0% -1 -100.0%Woodcrest 0 0 6 0.4% 0 0.0% -6 -100.0%Subtotal 66 25 116 8.6% 91 5.6% -25 -21.6%Grand Total 1128 510 1351 100.0% 1638 100.0% 287 21.2%

2017 Unsheltered Homeless Count by City

2017

*Note: 2017 PIT comprehensive data. Only unincorporated communities with a 2016/2017 unsheltered count greater than zero are included.

City or Unincorporated Area

Total Unsheltered

Percent

Change 2016

2017 PIT Count

Interview ObservationalCount Change

Riverside DPSS ASD HPU Preliminary PIT Count Data 4/4/2017

Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent

City

Banning 32 2.0% 12 1.1% 0 0.0% 4 0.4% 1 0.1% 11 1.0% 11 1.0% 7 0.7% 12 1.1% 9 0.8% 3 0.3% 6 0.6% 8 0.7% 1 0.1% 5 0.5%

Beaumont 18 1.1% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 2 0.2% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 3 0.3%

Blythe 59 3.6% 11 1.0% 0 0.0% 4 0.4% 1 0.1% 7 0.6% 11 1.0% 6 0.6% 13 1.2% 12 1.1% 6 0.5% 7 0.7% 12 1.1% 0 0.0% 5 0.5%

Calimesa 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Canyon Lake 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Cathedral City 44 2.7% 15 1.3% 0 0.0% 5 0.4% 1 0.1% 9 0.8% 24 2.1% 7 0.7% 9 0.8% 6 0.5% 6 0.5% 6 0.6% 7 0.6% 2 0.2% 18 1.7%

Coachella 81 4.9% 20 1.8% 0 0.0% 5 0.4% 1 0.1% 11 1.0% 12 1.1% 10 1.0% 11 1.0% 24 2.1% 4 0.4% 8 0.8% 11 1.0% 1 0.1% 6 0.6%

Corona 56 3.4% 12 1.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 2 0.1% 6 0.5% 16 1.4% 8 0.8% 11 1.0% 15 1.3% 9 0.8% 9 0.9% 7 0.6% 2 0.2% 8 0.8%

Desert Hot Springs 43 2.6% 5 0.4% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 6 0.4% 7 0.6% 11 1.0% 15 1.4% 6 0.5% 13 1.2% 2 0.2% 11 1.0% 17 1.5% 0 0.0% 5 0.5%

Eastvale 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Hemet 119 7.3% 15 1.3% 0 0.0% 8 0.7% 10 0.6% 26 2.3% 27 2.4% 20 1.9% 19 1.7% 15 1.3% 4 0.4% 17 1.6% 15 1.3% 0 0.0% 13 1.2%

Indian Wells 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Indio 89 5.4% 26 2.3% 0 0.0% 5 0.4% 1 0.1% 13 1.2% 29 2.6% 16 1.5% 10 0.9% 19 1.7% 8 0.7% 11 1.0% 17 1.5% 1 0.1% 9 0.9%

Jurupa Valley 113 6.9% 29 2.6% 0 0.0% 6 0.5% 3 0.2% 22 2.0% 44 3.9% 25 2.4% 27 2.4% 25 2.2% 5 0.4% 21 2.0% 20 1.8% 1 0.1% 13 1.2%

La Quinta 2 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Lake Elsinore 71 4.3% 16 1.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 15 1.3% 25 2.2% 14 1.3% 16 1.4% 19 1.7% 9 0.8% 14 1.3% 12 1.1% 1 0.1% 16 1.5%

Menifee 14 0.9% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.2% 2 0.2% 5 0.4% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 4 0.4% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 4 0.4%

Moreno Valley 78 4.8% 18 1.6% 0 0.0% 4 0.4% 14 0.9% 19 1.7% 23 2.0% 12 1.1% 22 2.0% 18 1.6% 8 0.7% 8 0.8% 13 1.2% 5 0.4% 11 1.0%

Murrieta 7 0.4% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 3 0.3% 3 0.3% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 3 0.3%

Norco 4 0.2% 3 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 3 0.3% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Palm Desert 28 1.7% 7 0.6% 0 0.0% 3 0.3% 2 0.1% 7 0.6% 9 0.8% 4 0.4% 7 0.6% 14 1.2% 7 0.6% 5 0.5% 7 0.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Palm Springs 138 8.4% 20 1.8% 1 0.1% 12 1.1% 10 0.6% 19 1.7% 29 2.6% 29 2.8% 25 2.2% 35 3.1% 9 0.8% 20 1.9% 26 2.3% 4 0.4% 13 1.2%

Perris 29 1.8% 5 0.4% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 4 0.4% 9 0.8% 9 0.9% 8 0.7% 10 0.9% 5 0.4% 8 0.8% 5 0.4% 0 0.0% 3 0.3%

Rancho Mirage 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Riverside 400 24.4% 70 6.2% 0 0.0% 20 1.8% 45 2.7% 66 5.9% 109 9.7% 49 4.7% 81 7.2% 74 6.6% 36 3.2% 41 3.9% 65 5.8% 3 0.3% 32 3.0%

San Jacinto 31 1.9% 8 0.7% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 4 0.2% 1 0.1% 12 1.1% 4 0.4% 5 0.4% 3 0.3% 5 0.4% 5 0.5% 5 0.4% 0 0.0% 5 0.5%

Temecula 85 5.2% 21 1.9% 0 0.0% 6 0.5% 7 0.4% 17 1.5% 25 2.2% 20 1.9% 10 0.9% 18 1.6% 3 0.3% 8 0.8% 17 1.5% 0 0.0% 19 1.8%

Wildomar 6 0.4% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Sub Total 1547 94.4% 317 28.1% 1 0.1% 86 7.6% 117 7.1% 271 24.0% 439 38.9% 258 24.6% 297 26.3% 337 29.9% 131 11.6% 207 19.7% 269 23.8% 21 1.9% 191 18.2%

Unincorporated Area

Aguanga 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Alberhill 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Anza 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Belltown 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Bermuda Dunes 10 0.6% 6 0.5% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 4 0.4% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 5 0.4% 2 0.2% 2 0.2% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 3 0.3%

Cactus City 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Cabazon 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Cherry Valley 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Chiriaco Summit 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Coronita 5 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Crestmore Heights 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Desert Beach 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Desert Center 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Desert Edge 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Desert Palms 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

East Blythe 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Eagle Mountain 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Eagle Valley 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

East Hemet 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

El Cerrito 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

El Sobrante 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

French Valley 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Garnet 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Good Hope 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Green Acres 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Highgrove 5 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Home Gardens 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Homeland 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Idyllwild 10 0.6% 3 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.3% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1%

Indio Hills 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

2017 Unsheltered Homeless Count - Subpopulation Data by City versus Unincorporated Area

City or Unincorporated

Area

Total Unsheltered

Homeless

Individuals

Chronically

Homeless

Families with

ChildrenVeterans

Youth (24 or

younger)Alcohol Use Drug Use PTSD

Mental Health

Conditions

Physical

Disability

Developmental

Disability

Jail (within 12

months)Brain Injury

Victims of

Domestic

Violence

AIDS or HIV


Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent

City or Unincorporated

Area

Total Unsheltered

Homeless

Individuals

Chronically

Homeless

Families with

ChildrenVeterans

Youth (24 or

younger)Alcohol Use Drug Use PTSD

Mental Health

Conditions

Physical

Disability

Developmental

Disability

Jail (within 12

months)Brain Injury

Victims of

Domestic

Violence

AIDS or HIV

Lake Mathews 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Lake Riverside 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Lake Tamarisk 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Lakeland Village 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Lakeview 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Lost Lake 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

March ARB 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Mead Valley 14 0.9% 7 0.6% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 1 0.1% 7 0.6% 6 0.6% 4 0.4% 4 0.4% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 5 0.4% 0 0.0% 3 0.3%

Meadowbrook 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Mecca 15 0.9% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 6 0.5% 3 0.3% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 2 0.2%

Mesa Verde 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Mountain Center 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

North Shore 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Nuevo 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Oasis 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Pine Cove 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Pinyon Pines 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Rancho Capistrano 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Ripley 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Romoland 5 0.3% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 4 0.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Sage 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Sky Valley 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Temescal Valley 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Thermal 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Thousand Palms 17 1.0% 3 0.3% 0 0.0% 3 0.3% 1 0.1% 3 0.3% 3 0.3% 2 0.2% 2 0.2% 4 0.4% 1 0.1% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 2 0.2%

Valle Vista 4 0.2% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 1 0.1% 2 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Vista Santa Rosa 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Warm Springs 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Whitewater 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Winchester 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Woodcrest 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Sub Total 91 5.6% 24 2.1% 2 0.2% 5 0.4% 5 0.3% 20 1.8% 22 2.0% 10 1.0% 12 1.1% 25 2.2% 4 0.4% 5 0.5% 13 1.2% 0 0.0% 11 1.0%

Grand Total 1638 100.0% 341 30.2% 3 0.3% 91 8.1% 122 7.4% 291 25.8% 461 40.9% 268 25.5% 309 27.4% 362 32.1% 135 12.0% 212 20.2% 282 25.0% 21 1.9% 202 19.2%

*Note: 2017 PIT comprehensive data. Unsheltered count and Youth(24 or younger) includes total interview and observational collected data; percent of total unsheltered field and Youth(24 or younger) field calculated on total collected (1638). Families with Children, PTSD and Brain

Injury field are unique to the general PIT questionnaire; percent of total calculated based on persons interviewed (1050). All remaining fields percentage calculated on total persons interviewed (1128).


absent

CALENDAR YEAR 2017 Cancelled DARK

CVAG JURISDICTIONS JAN FEB 15 MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC Cathedral City X X 2 out of 2Coachella X X 2 out of 2Desert Hot Springs X X 2 out of 2Indian Wells X X 2 out of 2Indio X X 2 out of 2La Quinta absent X 1 out of 2Palm Desert X X 2 out of 2Palm Springs X X 2 out of 2Rancho Mirage X X 2 out of 2Riverside County X X 2 out of 2

ATTENDANCE TOTAL 9 10EX-OFFICIO AGENCIES

Martha's Village and Kitchen X X 2 out of 2Coachella Valley Housing Coalition X X 2 out of 2Coachella Valley Rescue Mission X X 2 out of 2Shelter from the Storm-CoC X X 2 out of 2Health to Hope absent X 1 out of 2Path of Life Ministries-CoC X X 2 out of 2The Salvation Army X absent 1 out of 2HomeAid Inland Empire X absent 1 out of 2

7 6

COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS

HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE MEMBER & EX-OFFICIO ATTENDANCE ROSTER

X = in attendance

ATTENDED

ITEM : 8.1

Roy’s Desert Resource Center March, 2017 Report for CVAG 161 unduplicated clients were served: 103 Men 57 Women 1 Transgender 12 Veterans 17 Disabled persons 7 Children under 17 61 Seniors

Of the 106 exiting clients, 85% received case management assistance. Of those exiting, 7 found part- or full-time, employment and 37 found sustainable housing.

Resource and Budgeting classes are held weekly for all clients. 47 clients attended these classes. 57% of the adult clients who exited during March gained mainstream benefits, such as insurance, food stamps, social security, while at Roy’s.

Five Veterans were assisted onsite, by the Homeless Outreach Social Workers from Loma Linda.

Roy’s staff and management continue to enjoy working with volunteer groups from God’s Closet, and St. Paul’s Episcopal Church, as well as Claudia Tatham from EDD, and Liz Campos with the Salvation Army to help get clients back to work and into housing.

Connie Gold and Desert Best Friend’s Closet has helped several clients; providing work apparel for job interviews as well as training.

Health to Hope saw six clients during their visit to the shelter in March. Providing referrals for prescriptions and flu shots.

RDRC continues to work with the Palm Springs Homeless Committee to find more local resources, including bus passes, for homeless clients. Roy’s will continue to serve homeless clients throughout this fiscal year.

Roy’s Management continues to work with all local resources and agencies, including DPSS and CVAG, the Riverside County Veteran’s Services office, The Well in the Desert, and ABC Recovery to help find support, housing, and resources for clients when the JFS contract ends in June.

cdahlin

Typewritten Text

cdahlin

Typewritten Text

item 8.2

Item 8.3 Coachella Valley Association of Governments


Staff Report Subject: Funding Resources Research Update Contact: Cheryll Dahlin, Management Analyst ([email protected]) Recommendation: Information Only Background: At the March meeting, the Committee asked staff to research a stream of funding for regional homeless efforts, in place of CVAG’s annual request to cities. Historically, there are a number of ways to do this: property tax levy; hotel tax; dining tax; real-estate transfer tax; business registration fee; general obligation bonds; demolition/infill fess; rental conversion fees; and linkage fees. There are pros and cons to the collection of these options. The Prevention/Housing, Funding, Resource Group previously met and identified two possible sources for new revenue/funding were brought up by the working group: County Wide Housing Trust Fund; and, the Coachella Valley Housing Trust Fund. Both were discussed as possible vehicles for new sources of funding for homelessness programs. The County-Wide Housing Trust Fund is a possibility, but the County advises that it would be difficult to pursue this at this time. The Coachella Valley Housing Trust Fund is an entity that is currently operating as an educational forum, but could potentially be a conduit for a new funding resources in the future. The County’s Housing Element, that addresses inclusionary housing, was up for review by the County Board of Supervisor in December 2016. A strong Housing Element would include requiring developers of certain types of housing to construct affordable units, pay an in-lieu fee, or donate land for subsidized affordable housing development. Staff had a discussion with the Riverside County Economic Development Agency. Attached is the Riverside County Economic Development Agency’s legislative platform with state and federal bills that may bring funding locally. Most notably, Senate Bill 2 (Atkins) the Building Homes and Jobs Act, would make legislative findings and declarations relating to the need for establishing permanent, ongoing sources of funding dedicated to affordable housing development. This bill would impose a fee, except as provided, of $75 to be paid at the time of the recording of every real estate instrument, paper, or notice required or permitted by law to be recorded, per each single transaction per single parcel of real property, not to exceed $225. A previous version of this bill was passed by the legislature before being vetoed by the Governor. Fiscal Impact: There is no fiscal impact as staff time is charged under the duties of the Homelessness program.

Attachments 1. Riverside County Economic Development Agency Legislative Platform

COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE • http://www.countyofriverside.us/

Economic Development Agency

2017 LEGISLATIVE PLATFORM

14





15

Goods Movement by Rail

Issue: The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are the busiest port complex in the United States and handle as much as 40% of the nation’s international cargo. According to a cargo forecast developed by Mercator International and Oxford Economics, the two ports handled 15.2 million twenty-foot equivalent (TEU) containers in 2014 and are projected to have an annual cargo volume of 41.1 million TEUs by 2040. In addition, there is significant domestic goods movement in Southern California, particularly to and from facilities in Inland Southern California, and this is also expected to grow in the coming years. There is therefore an increasingly urgent need to improve the system of goods movement in the region. Action: 1) Support the development of rail transport-related infrastructure in California, including streamlining of the entitlement process and limits on litigation against projects with significant regional benefit; and 2) support the creation of Federal and State incentives to induce shippers to reduce reliance upon trucking for goods movement and invest in badly needed improvements such as intermodal facilities and rail/transfer yards. Background: The volume of goods movement around and through Southern California is forecast to increase significantly, which will in turn be accompanied by greater traffic congestion. As a result, there is an increasingly urgent need to reduce road congestion associated with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. There are a variety of mechanisms available to reduce congestion, amongst which the enhanced use of rail is one which has the greatest potential to be effective. To accomplish this, additional rail facilities, mainline track, and infrastructure will be required throughout Southern California. The entitlement process is often used as a weapon to stall or stop new projects; witness the recent cancellation of BNSF Railways’ Southern California International Gateway (SCIG) project in Los Angeles following a CEQA challenge. SCIG would have moved cargo onto rail within just a few miles of the ports, increasing rail capacity where it’s urgently needed and maximizing use of the Alameda Corridor (the primary rail route serving the ports), and was expected to reduce current and future truck traffic within the South Coast Air Basin by approximately 1.3 million trips annually. The inability to build new infrastructure in California limits the ability to move cargo in an environmentally friendly and efficient way, drives up the cost of doing business, and ultimately hurts supply chain competitiveness and the region as a whole. Complicating matters is the cost associated with operations through the Alameda Corridor. The Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority currently charges $47 per container for movements through the Corridor, which likely contributes to the fact that the Corridor is operating at just 25% of its capacity. The expense associated with rail movements, combined with the perceived speed and flexibility offered by using trucks for the transport of goods, has reduced rail’s share of overall goods movement. Benefits: Improved rail infrastructure and increased use of rail for goods movement within Southern California would results in numerous benefits, including:

Reduced truck traffic along the region’s freeways, which are heavily impacted by truck-related congestion

Improved air quality




16

Investment and job growth related to the creation of new rail/transfer yards, intermodal facilities, and mainline track

Improved efficiency of cargo handling at the Ports, which would allow for quicker cargo container handling and distribution to markets

Increased capacity for passenger service along key routes, including those serving Inland Southern California (such as the San Bernardino, 91, and Riverside Lines)

Revenue Sharing on Energy/Mineral Extraction (Federal) Issue: Federal/Local Government revenue sharing on Energy/ Mineral extraction.

Action: Riverside County supports the Salton Sea Authority in looking to bring about more development of local resources while protecting from predation by entities that would extract resources without compensation to the impacted communities.

Background: Revenue sharing on Energy/Mineral extraction has been a concept that has failed to materialize in the past. In order to get clear legislation addressing this issue passed, it will take the support of not only the Salton Sea Authority but all of the local stakeholders involved in the area. Specifically, the Salton Sea Authority is looking for legislation that supports revenue sharing agreements that are mutually acceptable to all concerned that warrant support, along with legislation that will enable such arrangements. Cooperative ventures between the Federal Government and the mineral rich counties in the Salton Sea region may offer opportunities to equitably address federal and local priorities with new resources. There have been bills in the past such as S. 1407 (Heller), and current bills such as H.R. 2663 (Gosar) and S.2568 (Feinstein) that address this issue. These bills call for an environmental review process to assess public lands and determine which renewable energy projects would be most viable in those areas. Under the bill, the Bureau of Land Management would collect a royalty from developers that site their projects on these public lands. From these funds, 25% would go to the state, 25% to the county, 15% to the Bureau of Land Management, and 35% would be deposited into a fund for conservation purposes. However, it seems unlikely that the current bills numbers will be passed this session and thus the Salton Sea Authority will look for the reintroduction of bills containing revenue sharing provisions as called for in the Salton Sea Authority board-adopted Guiding Principles for Legislative Action.




17

Community Development Block Grant Issues:

1. Increased annual appropriations for the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program to allow grantees to effectively plan, administer, and utilize funding allocations;

2. Regulatory reform of the CDBG program to ensure long-term sustainability and effectiveness; and

3. Supplemental CDBG appropriations to encourage and expand use of CDBG for economic development and infrastructure revitalization.

Action: 1. Support proposed FY 2017 CDBG funding and continuing resolutions in both the Senate and

House; 2. Support increased appropriations for CDBG to assist state and local government’s efforts to

address chronic poverty, unemployment, and deteriorating infrastructure; 3. Support regulatory reform of the CDBG Entitlement Program to modify thresholds for grantee

entitlement status to ensure long-term viability; and 4. Support supplemental CDBG appropriations for economic and infrastructure development

activities and modify public benefit/job creation requirements and other regulatory requirements.

Background: Stable Funding: Previous funding reductions together with stagnant funding levels in recent years continue to leave the CDBG program at its lowest funding level, when adjusted for inflation, since the programs beginning. It is important that the funding for CDBG remain stable and that it also allows for increased program administrative costs to allow HUD, grantees, and sub-recipients to appropriately and effectively plan and utilize this important resource. Entitlement Reform: The CDBG regulations must be modified to change the “formula” or thresholds for grantees to attain “entitlement” status. In 1984 there were 795 grantees dividing up a $3.486 billion CDBG allocation. For FY 2017, there will be more than 1250 grantees dividing up $3 billion. The effectiveness and viability of the CDBG program is at risk and cannot be sustained. Therefore, the County should advocate for legislation in the best interest of the County’s CDBG program. Economic Development and Infrastructure: Encourage special supplemental appropriations of CBDG funds aimed at sustainable, community-based economic development, as well as infrastructure revitalization. The funding would be used to target job creating economic development and infrastructure improvement activities in areas with higher percentages of poverty, unemployment, and lower-income households, and both inadequate and deteriorating infrastructure. To encourage grantee participation, CDBG regulations pertaining to job creation (CDBG $ per job), public benefit, and other performance issues need to be amended.




18

Renewable Energy Development

Issue: Renewable Energy Development at the Salton Sea. Action: Riverside County supports the Salton Sea Authority working with the State and local agencies on how best to identify pathways for aggregating a power purchase of at least 250 MW of new geothermal energy from the Salton Sea region. Background: California has been very progressive in its policies concerning renewable energy development. The Salton Sea Authority supports efforts to promote geothermal energy development in the Salton Sea Known Geothermal Resource Area and is thus looking to work with the Department of Energy’s (DOE) and the Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP). There is significant baseload power supply nearly devoid of any GHG – Greenhouse Gas that has been identified. The Salton Sea Authority has and will continue to support the development of all renewable energy resources at the Salton Sea in order to provide potential revenue streams to help fund revitalization projects and activities.

State Bonds and Grants

Issue: Salton Sea’s need for additional revenue sources.

Action: Riverside County supports the Salton Sea Authority pursuit of legislation and budget line items that would appropriate much needed funding in the form of bonds and grants to be used in the development of projects that would improve the health of the ecosystem, environment, and economy at the Salton Sea.

Background: The Salton Sea Authority continues to advocate for additional appropriation from 2014 State Water Bond (Proposition 1) for Salton Sea projects from the $475 million provision related to state obligations in water right settlements including the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA). As well as coordinating with the appropriate state agencies to ensure that any funds appropriated under this provision include short-term, medium-term, and long-term financial commitments. Recent bonds such as AB 2444 (Garcia) - California Parks, Water, Climate, and Coastal Protection and Outdoor Access for All Act of 2016 would have authorized the issuance of $3.497 billion in State General Obligation bonds to finance parks, water, climate adaptation, coastal protection, and outdoor access programs. Of note for the SSA, this bond would have specifically granted $37.5 million to the Salton Sea Authority. Of this amount, not less than $10 million shall be available for purposes consistent with the New River Water Quality, Public Health, and River Parkway Development Program.




19

State Low Income Housing Tax Credits

Issue: California’s shortfall of affordable homes and the continued dramatic rise in rents has contributed to California’s rising poverty rates. Action: Urge California Lawmakers and the Governor of the State of California to support and pass AB 2817. Background: Existing law established a low-income housing tax credit program operated by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC). Existing law also limits the total annual amount that the committee may allocate to $70 million. AB 2817 would increase the aggregate housing credit dollar amount that the committee may allocate by $300,000,000 and potentially leverage an additional $600 million in federal housing resources that would otherwise go unclaimed. The bill would also increase the amount the committee may allocate to farmworker housing projects from $500,000 to $25,000,000 per year. Increasing the amount of State credits would have a positive impact on the overall Tax Credit program by reducing the amount of Federal credits needed for a project. Currently for a project to be financially feasible state tax credits are combined with federal tax credits, which typically only allow three to four projects to be funded annually in the Inland Empire. AB 2817 directly responds to California’s shortfall of affordable homes and continued rise in rents and poverty rate by leveraging hundreds of millions in federal and private funds to create thousands of new affordable homes and well-paying jobs.

Low Income Housing Tax Credits

Issue: The current regulations of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program group the Inland Empire region to include San Bernardino County, Riverside County, and Imperial County into one geographic set-aside that accounts for 12% of the state of California’s population. Action: Urge local and state legislators to support regulatory changes to the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program to align the allocation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits with the region’s population. Background: The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTAC) has established ten geographic regions and allocated a percentage of available low income housing tax credits to each region. The County of Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial are grouped together to form one of the ten regions defined as the Inland Empire Region. The California Department of Finance estimated the Inland Empire population in 2015 at 4,627,677 residents representing 12% of the statewide population. The Inland Empire region currently receives only 8.3% of the geographic apportionments compared to San Diego County at 8.6% and Orange County at 7.3%. The current regulations of the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program disproportionately allocates low-income housing tax credits by region and unjustly places the Inland Empire region at a disadvantage.




20

Farmworker Housing Assistance Tax Credit Program

Issue: The California State Treasurer’s Office (STO) Farmworker Housing Assistance Tax Credit Program is underutilized due to outdated and inefficient policies. There have not been any housing projects funded under this program since 2008. This underinvestment in farmworker housing has created hardships for this labor force and their families. Action: Urge California Lawmakers and the Governor of the State of California to support and pass AB 2140. Background: The California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (CTAC) administers two low-income housing tax credit programs – a federal program and a state program. Two types of federal tax credits are available and are generally referred to as the nine percent and four percent credits. The nine percent federal tax credits are highly competitive and oversubscribed, however the four percent credits historically have been underutilized. In 1996, legislators authorized the Farmworker Housing Tax Credit Program which is an annual set-aside of state low-income housing tax credits for farmworker housing developments which is a set aside from the California state tax credits. This program is annually allocated $500,000 for the entire state, which accrues and is carried forward into future years if not awarded to farmworker housing projects. The total State Farmworker Tax Credits available in 2016 was $5,047,118.

Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018

Issue: California is experiencing an extreme housing shortage with 2.2 million extremely low income and very low-income renter households competing for only 664,000 affordable rental homes. This leaves more than 1.54 million of California’s lowest income households without access to affordable housing. Action: Urge California Lawmakers and the Governor of the State of California to support and pass SB 879 with a provision for CEQA reform. Background: Under existing law, there are programs providing assistance for, among other things, emergency housing, multifamily housing, farmworker housing, home ownership for very low and low-income households, and down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers. Existing law also authorizes the issuance of bonds in specified amounts pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law and requires that proceeds from the sale of these bonds be used to finance various existing housing programs, capital outlay related to infill development, brownfield cleanup that promotes infill development, and housing-related parks. This bill would enact the Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018, which, if adopted, would authorize the issuance of bonds in the amount of $3,000,000,000 pursuant to the State General Obligation Bond Law. Proceeds from the sale of these bonds would be used to finance various existing housing programs, as well as infill infrastructure financing and affordable housing matching grant programs, as provided. The bill would provide for submission of the bond act to the voters at the November 6, 2018, statewide general election in accordance with specified law. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.




21

Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (Federal)

Issue: Congress has slashed funding for workforce education programs by $400 million since 2010. Action: Provide full funding for workforce and career and technical education. Background: Riverside County has a less skilled and educated workforce than our neighboring counties. This in turn limits economic development opportunities and impacts our residents’ ability to obtain high quality jobs that provide pathways to the middle class. The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) helps job seekers and workers access employment, education, training, and support services to succeed in the labor market and matches employers with the skilled workers they need to compete in the global economy. Congress passed WIOA, the first legislative reform of the public workforce system in more than 15 years, by a wide bipartisan majority. In doing so, Congress reaffirmed the role of the American Job Center (AJC) system, a cornerstone of the public workforce investment system, and brought together and enhanced several key employment, education, and training programs. Over 15,000 Riverside County residents turn to these programs annually to obtain training and jobs.

Summer Youth Employment Program (Federal)

Issue: Youth unemployment remains at a high rate nationally and in Riverside County. Action: Promote and fund summer employment programs targeted to low-income and disconnected youth. Background: The national unemployment rate has dropped significantly since the recession. Youth unemployment remains at a high rate nationally and in Riverside County. Youth employment increases household income for low-income families; provides opportunities for skills development and career exploration; and increases community engagement. A re-implementation of the “summer youth employment program” rooted in career and industry sector pathways would be of significant benefit to high poverty communities and households.




22

USDA Watershed Program (Federal)

Issue: Revenue streams from the State for the Salton Sea are currently inadequate, and thus Federal revenue streams must be procured as well.

Action: Riverside County supports the Salton Sea Authority in supporting the Senate Appropriations Committee proposal of more than $100 million for the USDA Watershed Program in FY 17. Background: Under the Watershed Program NRCS – Natural Resources Conservation Service cooperates with States and local agencies to carry out works of improvement for soil conservation and for other purposes including flood prevention; conservation, development, utilization and disposal of water; and conservation and proper utilization of land. The Salton Sea Authority has received a NRCS grant of $7.5M and is looking to expand that funding, in order to help facilitate the need of multiple sources of revenue to revitalize the Salton Sea. Congress has not funded the Watershed program for two or three years, but the Senate Appropriations Committee has proposed more than $100 million for the program in FY 17. Thus, the Salton Sea Authority will continue to watch the progress of the proposed $100 million and support in any way necessary.

Appropriations from existing WRDA – Water Resources Development Act authorization (Federal)

Issue: Revenue streams from the State for the Salton Sea are currently inadequate, and thus Federal revenue streams must be procured as well. Action: Riverside County supports the Salton Sea Authority in supporting the Senate version of WRDA 2016 S.2848 provisions, throughout the conference committee proceedings. Background: The Salton Sea Authority supports Federal funding and cooperation with the US Army Corps of Engineers. $30 million in federal funding for Salton Sea revitalization was authorized in 2007 under the federal Water Resource Development Act (WRDA), but never appropriated. While WRDA funding has been appropriated in the President’s budget for annual Energy and Water Appropriations Act budget for the Army Corps, this funding has fallen away during the years when Continuing Resolutions wiped out such necessary adjustments. The $30 million authorization thus remains available, subject to appropriations. Projects could be funded through the Army Corps, if the budget is passed with provision for $200,000 for completion. The current WRDA 2016 legislation S. 2848 (Inhofe) would not only maintain the $30 million authorization but also specifically designate the SSA as a preferred partner for the funding agreements to be established with the Army Corps. This legislation has passed the Senate and is going to a conference committee to mediate between the Senate and House versions of the bill.




23

Low Income Housing Tax Credits (Federal)

Issue: The Low Income Housing Tax Credit rates are currently determined by a formula that is tied to federal borrowing rates, which consistently change. The lower the federal borrowing rates fall, the lower the housing credit rate becomes which reduces the equity available for individual affordable housing developments. Action: Urge Congress to make the minimum housing credit rates permanent. Background: Currently, the affordable housing rates are established at a minimum 9% for new construction and substantial rehabilitation and 4% for acquisition and moderate rehabilitation. Due to the fact that federal rates have dropped to historic lows, there is now 15 to 20 percent less housing credit available for any given project. Most of the projects are underwritten with other funding sources; however, in recent years these sources have experienced a significant cut in funding. Without the flexibility to provide increased housing credit equity many projects will be impossible to finance.

HOME Investment Partnership Act Program Funding (Federal)

Issue: Over the years Congress has significantly cut funding for the HOME Investment Partnerships Act Program by nearly 50%. Action: Urge Congress to increase funding to the HOME Investment Partnerships Act (HOME) Program. Background: The HOME program is the only federal community development block grant left at the state and local level designed to create and preserve affordable housing that meets the specific population needs of states, cities and counties. The County of Riverside is the 10th largest populated county in the United States consisting of urbanized neighborhoods, suburban cities and rural communities. Since 1994, the County of Riverside has utilized HOME funds for the construction, acquisition, and/or rehabilitation of more than 3,323 units, provided rental assistance to more than 1,430 households, and provided down payment assistance to over 752 First Time Home Buyers. Occupancy within these units often consists of special needs populations including individuals with disabilities, veterans and chronically homeless. The HOME program is also the only program left at the state and local level that is used to leverage funds to produce the greatest number of affordable units. Newly constructed and rehabilitated units with HOME funds are typically leveraged with private investment dollars through the tax credit program. If the HOME program funding is reduced it will detrimentally impact new construction of needed affordable housing. When HOME funds are utilized for the new construction or rehabilitation of affordable units it ensures that these units will remain affordable for a minimum of 20 years. Therefore, an increase in HOME program funding is needed to address the creation and preservation affordable housing.




24

EB-5 Permanent Reauthorization (Federal)

Issue: EB-5 permanent reauthorization. Action: Permanent authorization of the EB-5 Program by Congress after 23+ years of bipartisan support and current record-breaking economic impact statistics. Background: The interconnected world we live in today demands public policy that takes advantage of the fact that economic opportunity, capital, and people are crossing national borders at a record-setting, and seemingly ever-increasing, rates. “Immigrant investor programs” exist all around the world, all competing for the same economic benefit of attracting entrepreneurial investors to their shores and each with a unique purpose once the capital is attracted. The U.S. designed the EB-5 Regional Center Program to allocate capital to regional economic development and U.S. job creation, and it is now delivering on its promise in a major way. As of November 2016, Riverside County has over 47 local EB-5 projects, totaling over $908 million dollars in investment and projected to create over 12,000 jobs upon project completion. Other items to note regarding the program are as follows:

1. The program has attracted a total of $4.2 billion in investments and supported the creation of at least 77,150 jobs nationally.

2. The program’s regional focus provides valuable opportunities to states and localities, particularly on civic development and infrastructure projects. The program’s ability to provide long-term, low-interest capital that can complement existing public funds presents valuable opportunities for state and local leaders to address some of their public-spending projects, including in highly underinvested but critical public infrastructure and affordable housing.

3. With increased security, functionality, and integrity, the program has great potential to support regional economic development. Considering its relatively limited size, the EB-5 program alone will not be the primary solution for the country’s most expensive and critical needs. However, with effective reforms to increase the program’s integrity, security, and functionality, the EB-5 program has the potential to provide for incremental but relatively significant opportunities for regional economic development.

Housing Choice Voucher Program for the Chronically Homeless (Federal)

Issue: There are 750 chronically homeless individuals in Riverside County awaiting an affordable or supportive housing unit. Action: Replicate the Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH) Program model to provide housing and services to the chronically homeless through the use of targeted Section 8 vouchers. Background: The Housing Choice Voucher program also known as “Section 8” is the largest provider of affordable housing in Riverside County. The Section 8 program leverages the existing private rental market to provide affordable housing for low-income households. This public-private program provides an effective means to quickly end homelessness for these individuals through the use of a voucher. Supported services would be provided off-site through existing social service programs.




25

Support for Small Business and Entrepreneurship (Federal) Issue: Access to capital remains a top area of concern for economic developers as a reflection of a near constant need for more readily accessible financing to start or expand small businesses. Action: Improve access to capital for businesses by supporting the implementation of crowdfunding regulations, streamlining federal small business financing programs, and improving access to private loans through implementing legislation such as the Jumpstart Our Business Act of 2011, Startup Act 2.0 (H.R.5893), Small Business Lending Enhancement Act (S.2231), and the Bipartisan Tax Simplification and Fairness Act (S. 727). Background: It should be noted that while there might not be a credit crunch limiting the availability of financing for entrepreneurs and small businesses – this point is often debated to a great extent – what is more universally understood is that requirements and processes for obtaining financing are cumbersome and onerous, ripe for review and corresponding reform. As new alternatives such as crowdfunding become available, it will be critical for the federal government to review financing opportunities through agencies such as Small Business Administration (SBA) and Department of Agriculture (USDA) for relevance and cohesion in order to efficiently and effectively leverage federal resources.

Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8) (Federal)

Issue: There are over 56,000 households registered for the Section 8 waiting list in Riverside County and an additional 750 chronic homeless individuals awaiting an affordable or supportive housing unit. Riverside County’s Section 8 program is at maximum capacity and cannot serve any additional households. Action: Urge Congress to increase funding to the Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8). Background: The Housing Choice Voucher program also known as “Section 8” provides resources essential to ensuring that vulnerable seniors, families, veterans, and people with disabilities have access to decent, safe, and sanitary affordable housing to help stabilize and improve the quality of their lives. More than 5 million people in more than 2 million low-income families use vouchers to help pay for housing that they find in the private market. About half of the households using vouchers are seniors or people with disabilities; most of the rest are working families with children. These households have incomes of about $16,100, on average, well below the poverty line. Vouchers sharply reduce homelessness and other hardships, lift more than 1 million people out of poverty, and give families an opportunity to move to safer, higher income neighborhoods. These effects, in turn, are linked to educational, developmental, and health benefits that can improve children’s long-term prospects and reduce costs in other public programs.




26

Cantonment Area Expansion- March Air Reserve Base

Issue: March Air Reserve Base (MARB) is one of the most critical components of the Inland Southern California regional economy. According to a December 2015 Financial Impact Analysis performed by the Rose Institute of State and Local Government at Claremont McKenna College at the behest of the Economic Development Agency (EDA), MARB has a direct economic impact of nearly $600 million; the indirect amount is doubtless significantly greater but was not estimated in the study. MARB is currently home to over 9,000 military and civilian personnel, and is one of the oldest installations in the Air Force; the base will celebrate its centennial in 2018. For reference, a list of units, detachments, and missions based at MARB is included at the end of this document. A significant step in that effort would be the expansion of the cantonment area of the base (i.e. the secured area within the base that serves as a permanent military installation), which would bring additional units and missions to MARB and thus further enhance the base’s stature within the nation’s defense system. Eventually this effort could lead to MARB being designated as March Joint Reserve Base, a broader and further reaching designation that would lessen the likelihood of downsizing or closing the base. Pursuing a Joint Reserve Base designation would entail a prolonged process with agreements required between various branches of service, up to and including a formal basing action and/or a Moratorium Waiver for base expansion. The designation would also require Congressional approval and formal environmental impact analysis documents. Action: The cantonment area currently encompasses an area of approximately 2,100 acres, and includes several units and missions that are critical to the base’s function and help secure its place in the nation’s defense structure. However, there are some additional facilities that would become a more permanent presence on the base following cantonment expansion, potentially including the following:

U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Training Center: currently just outside the cantonment area, the center would be moved inside the fence line and thus benefit from the additional security. Adding the center to the cantonment area would be a major step toward facilitating the “Joint” base designation mentioned above.

An alternative possibility would see the Army continue to own the land; the Air Force would simply extend the fence line as necessary to place the USAR facility inside the cantonment area. This would be a less burdensome and expensive process, likely a federal/federal permit resulting in a zero cost lease; however, it could lead to an incremental process that would have the same end result.

It should be noted that, in a separate action, USAR is investing in a new $25 million facility at MARB, construction of which has already started.

Base Commissary: expanding MARB’s perimeter along the Heacock Channel would provide for the possibility of having the Base Commissary inside the fence line. This would improve security, and would facilitate adding a new gate and base access via Heacock Street.

Base Exchange: Providing sufficient real estate to relocate the AAFES Base Exchange adjacent to the Commissary and inside the fence line, thus improving security for those using the exchange.

American Forces Network: expansion would accommodate the possible relocation of the American Forces Network facility to a location within the secured area.

Benefits: Many of the potential benefits of cantonment area expansion have been described above, but to sum up, there are numerous beneficial outcomes that could result from this effort, including but not limited to:




27

Addition of new units and missions, thus enhancing MARB’s importance and status in the nation’s

defense facility network

Potential designation as a Joint Reserve Base

Reduced vulnerability in future rounds of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process

Improved security for those based at, and working on, MARB

Investment and job growth related to the increased number of facilities and personnel, with benefits both on base and in nearby communities

MARB Based Units, Detachments and Missions (as of 12-27-16) Air Force

452d Air Mobility Wing (AFRC)

4th Air Force (AFRC)

912th ARS (AD AF)

144th Fighter Wing Detachment 1 (CaANG)

163rd ANG Reconnaissance Wing (CaANG)

701st Combat Operations Squadron (AFRC)

922nd Civil Engineer Staff (AFRC)

Western Recruiting Squadron (AFRC)

362nd Recruiting Squadron (AD AF)

610th Air Operations Group (AFRC)

Joint Units

Total Force Honor Guard

Air/Marine Operations Center (DHS)

Navy Operational Support Center (USNR)

1st Marine Expeditionary Force, Detachment (USMC)

304th Sustainment Brigade (USAR)

358th Civil Affairs Brigade (USAR)

250th Military Intelligence Battalion (CaARNG)

1498th Transportation Company (CaARNG)

315th Engineers, Vertical Construction Company (CaARNG)

100th Troop Command (CaARNG)

Army Honor Guard (USAR)

12th Marine Corps Detachment, Recruiting Station Riverside (USMC)

Full Spectrum Partners

Commissary

AAFES Exchange

United States Office of Personnel Management

Veterans Administration

Boeing Corporation

U.S. Customs Service

American Forces Network Broadcast Center

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

United States Selective Service

Glossary AFRC AD AF CaANG DHS USNR USMC USAR CaARNG AAFES

U.S. Air Force Reserve Command U.S. Air Force (Active Duty) California Air National Guard U.S. Department of Homeland Security U.S. Navy Reserve U.S. Marine Corps U.S. Army Reserve California Army National Guard Army and Air Force Exchange Service




28

Pavement Improvements - March Air Reserve Base Issue: There are sections of concrete pavement at March Air Reserve Base (MARB) that are in need of repair, replacement, and/or augmentation to support future generations of United States Air Force (USAF) aircraft. For instance, MARB has not yet been assigned the Boeing KC-46A Pegasus next generation tanker, a versatile new aircraft currently being acquired by the USAF that will revolutionize the capability of air mobility missions for the nation’s armed forces. MARB is not likely to be considered as a KC-46 base in the absence of the improvements described below. It should be noted that the base’s pavement systems are more than adequate to support the aircraft currently based at or utilizing MARB, including the C-17 Globemaster III, the KC-135 Stratotanker, the C-5M Galaxy, the KC-10 Extender, the C-130 Hercules, the F-16 Fighting Falcon, and other military aircraft. MARB also routinely supports operations by a number of large commercially operated aircraft (such as the Boeing 747 and 767) that augment the military’s airlift capacity through the Civil Reserve Air Fleet. Action: Encourage federal and state elected and appointed officials to invest in improvements to the pavement systems at MARB that will facilitate assignment of future generations of aircraft to units at MARB while continuing to accommodate current users. Areas that have already been identified as requiring work include portions of the base’s primary runway and sections of the ramp. Certain of the improvements can be constructed in phases; however, the runway strengthening and repair project is the highest priority of the projects that have been identified to date. Background: The issue that brought the need for improvements to the paving systems at MARB was the KC-46 basing decision process. The initial basing decision by the USAF was to assign the KC-46 to active duty and Air National Guard installations, a decision that was driven by the fact that the vast majority of KC-135 aircraft and bases are assigned to those units. However, it became apparent after the first round of KC-46 assignments was announced that MARB was unlikely to be considered in future rounds as a result of certain structural deficiencies. While Air Force Reserve Command bases were not considered for the initial rounds of assignments of the KC-46, Reserve bases are being considered for future basing opportunities. Additionally, MARB currently houses units from all three USAF components: active duty, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve Command. Current active duty and Air Force Reserve Command units at MARB operate KC-135 Stratotanker and C-17 Globemaster missions. Additionally, while the 163rd Air Reconnaissance Wing of the Air National Guard currently has a remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) mission, the unit previously operated KC-135 Stratotankers. The Air National Guard’s 144th Fighter Wing, Detachment 1 also operates ready alert F-16’s from the base. The KC-46 Pegasus was selected by the USAF to replace older KC-135 Stratotankers. The USAF is seeking a total of 179 aircraft to replace 179 KC-135s, and Boeing is under contract to deliver 18 KC-46’s by 2017. The Pegasus can refuel all US, Allied, and Coalition military aircraft compatible with international aerial refueling procedures, any time, on any mission, and can carry passengers, cargo, and patients whenever and wherever needed. The ability to detect, avoid, defeat and survive threats using robust defensive systems and cockpit armor protection will allow the KC-46 to operate safely in medium-threat environments. Owing to its increased capabilities and landing gear configuration, the weight bearing characteristics required for KC-46 operations are greater than those required by aircraft in the current inventory.




29

Benefits: As a former Strategic Air Command base, MARB boasts the infrastructure necessary to host the KC-46 and other next generation aircraft. Since the base already supports units of all branches of the U.S. military (including all three USAF components), it is also functioning as a de facto Joint Base, though it has not been given that designation formally. MARB also enjoys broad community support not only for its mission but also for uniformed and civilian personnel and their families. Many of the potential benefits of improving the pavement systems at MARB have been described above, but to sum up, there are numerous beneficial outcomes that could result from this effort, including but not limited to:

Addition of new aircraft, units, and missions, thus enhancing MARB’s importance and status in the nation’s defense facility network

Potential designation as a Joint Reserve Base

Reduced vulnerability in future rounds of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process Investment and job growth related to the investment in equipment, facilities, and personnel, with benefits both on base and in nearby communities

Community Mission of Hope and County of Riverside Continuum of Care Presents:

Homelessness: Helping Without Hurting

cdahlin

Typewritten Text

item 8.5

HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE AGENDA - Welcome … COMMITTEE AGENDA Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:00 a.m....

Documents

Transcript of HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE AGENDA - Welcome … COMMITTEE AGENDA Wednesday, April 19, 2017 10:00 a.m....