HomeMy WebLinkAbout24-Development Services
03/1j!/2009 10:26
,/
MAILING ADl>RISS
1'0 Box 970
Son .B~'nQ,.d""o, CA
92402.0970
Ph"".: (909) 383-1602
FtI%; (909) 889-7312
BO"RD OF
DJ'R.ECTORS
DiGm And.r,rOh.
RUI)"i"lf ChUd",
/(a,hryn &vi"
S"rah HarrisDn.
'Veall'tce Jews .
William Loflg
Paulo Mclemo,.e
Ma", Par'"
rot;"",l'cwk)'
oherl Saenz
Mary Textira
mber V,mtl.,. H~l
Xtcutiye.Dircctor
elda Griffin
.....ProfiL SOI(C)(J)
Tax ExempU
9S.J16tJ212
] ~adoAS ~ Tax
Deducdble
i:sir au 011 drI wb ta:
.Opt;onIJm,,$c.~
.
Ut"'tiDOd'--y
Kecelvea:
9513682550
Mar 1l lUUa 11:J~am
ICLS RIVERSIDE
PAGE 02/04
RECEIVED-CITY CLERK
Op~ion House, Inc. ,ZSO'I1AR 12 . .
rfltervDrliOII fIIUI PNvttlltion SBVU:U ,,4gIUlCJI PI1 ,. So
813 NortIr "D" Stnet. Ste. 3. Sail Bellardillo, C4 92401
VIA FAX ONLY
Marcl11l"' 2009
Mayor Pa1rick Morris
Membets of the City Council
City of San Bernardino
300 N. "0" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIl' NO.08-21 FOR 840 N. SlEKRA WAY,
SAN BERNARDINO; HEARING DATE: 3/1612009
Honorable Mayor Morris and Respeclled Members oftbe City Counci~
I am writing to request a continuance of the hearing on the above-mentioned appeal so that
the voices of opposition from Option House are heard by the counciL The Executive
Ditector of Option House, Velda Griffin IIId me, the Vice-President of the Board of
Directors at Option House, are scheduled to meet with Assemblywoman Carter and
Senator McLeod in Sacramento on 3/16/09 to taIIc: about budget cuts affecting victims of
domestic violence in San Bernardino.
California Partnership to End Domestic Violence (CPEDY) manges these meetings once a
year for shelters to connect directly wi1h elected representatives and this year lhe meetings
are going to focus on the nUd in Sacramento to keep local citizens in mind when making
tough decisions on allocating funds and cutting back funds. This is the OIlly cl1l111ce Option
House has to be heard in Sacramento and to garner support for the worlc we do to end
violence in our commun ity lIDd make Sill Bemazdino a safe place for families.
Unfortunately, March 16& 2009 is also the day when the city council for Sail Bernardino
will hear the appeal on denial of conditional use permit No. 08-21 and I strongly
recommend denial of the permit for the facility.
W"ile we at Optioa House s..pport the work tot tile facility propolCli to do, we
stroagly feel that the proposed locatiOD ia lUI5DitabJe lor thD type of f'aeiJity.llI
particular, tIIu facility is gOiDg tel be prec:ariouly close tel a sbelter for domestic
violeace victims aad their fllJllilies that ba$ provided a safe-b_ for Seeing "ioleace
in the home for .1m0lt tIIirty (30) yean iD t"e city of San Beroardmo.
The sbelter is operated by OptiOJlHoase u.d is tbe only shelter ofits kind i. a 40-mile
radius.of....e city of Sa. BelDardillO. As a reslllt of operatillg this sbelter, Option
House bas bee. able to _ u a SI!C:lU'e, safe aDd reliable resolln:c for those
sarv;von ud families of domeatie violeaee wIIo waut to eDd the c:yde of abuse and
begin a new life bere ill tbe city of San Bernardino.
Together, We ATe Making A Difference
SB/'IIUIg BatrBrBd Women t>1Hi Childr", Sine,; J977
/lgt-ltl/a J:te...
-#2f
"3/ IIJ/ 0'1
03/12/2009 10:26
.'
lII"ILING ADDRESs
PO Bo:c 970
SO" Bf/7rl11'di"o, CA
92.102-0970
Pho",,: (909) 383-1602
Fax: (909) 889-7312
BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
Dl"l14 Anderso"
R..yli.g C",",,,#
Kmn"," Mi.
Saran Harri&on
Vstmoics Jews
Willio", Long
Paula Mcl.emore
MOly POI'ks
Proti",a PQ1tdt:)1
Robrn Soe""
ary T~Jttira
mber Yandor Relll
ecutive Director
f/<k1Gri/li"
on-Profil SO\(C)(J)
""" Excnlpl ~
95-3760212
I Donationn.. Tox
DocIuClibtc
UU w em the web ar:
Wlf.opf'itmhoJLf4,orr
.
U"'ili:lCO'~
Necelvea:
9513682550
liar It lUU::t I' ..:Ioam
ICLS RIVERSIDE
PAGE 03/04
Option House, Inc.
IlItD'11elltiolllllld Prr:vmtUJn Services Agellcy
813 No"" UD" Strut, Ste. 3, Sa" &muuditro, C4 92401
Page 2
To place a facility housiDg parolees, SOllIe of whom may be pa-pe1rators of domestic
violence on parole from. the sentence for abusing their MUieS, will directly threaten the
safety of the vel)' victims who fled the crimes committed by potential rc.sidents of the
proposed facility. I would like to voice in particular my CODcerns for the following:
A) Vally iDcrease the cJuauces of jeoparcliziDg saldy of Dill' resideats aDd their
childrell;
B) Tile lac:k of ..y other siDol.r f.cility for domestie violeace victillUl ill the city of
Saa Beraarcli.ao leaviag victillUl witb choosing to stay ill a violeat home or leave to go
f.r from tlleir childrell'. ichool, their s.,port system, their jurisdictioa for family I....
eases., etc.;
C) The poteatW cll.il1i.g e8'eet OD future victims aDd families 'll<bo W.llt to fIH
violeace b1lt are afnid that ~ey lOigbt ellcoullter- "'e very abDser they fted from if
tloey move to ollr shlter aDdlmow th.t the proposed facility is operatiag Dcarby;
D) Tile iIlcrellSe ill crime statistics ill the city of Saa BeraantiDo falulting hm fewer
lSmilies asillg our !aciDly aad services due to its safety CODteras;
E) The mesll8ge ....t the city collDcll "illend out if the pel'lllit is grukd- FleeiDg
from Family Violmce is not .. ilDportaDt as rehabilitatillg the lives of perpetnton of
falIIiJy vioIuee.
I have a more exhaustive list of CODCCnl$ that I will be able to voice if pettDitted to have a
hearing. As a practicing attorney representiog low income victims of domestic violence, it
is my experience and opinion that fleeing family violeDce, seeking assistance to break the
cycle of abuse and approaching ageacies like Option House for help are Dill easy choices
for victims to make. H....e WUlt to ....ke the city of Saa BemardiDo . place where
&mi6es know their safety aDd security .re priorities to the govenaillg lDembers oftloe
city od to the elected representatives of the city, tbe coulldllDust deDY the graat of
tile pel'lllit for r_as th.t tlte locatioll of the raaliiy wiD chiU . 3O-year effort at
eDdiag violeDte ill our commuDity.
Wlule for-profit agencies, like the one seeking the pennit, have the option to seek another
IocBtion within the city more suitable for the proposed facility, Option House cannot go
anywhere. If the permit wen: to be granted at the location above, our residents' safety will
be jeopardized and they will return Of remain in the vel)' enviromnent that potential
residents of the proposed facility committed the crimes that they are 01\ parole for.
Together, We Are Making A Difference
SlI'Ving Barrel'ed WO"'''" tIJId ChildrUl Si7u:e J 977
03/12/2009 10:26
.-
MAILlI'lC 4DDRESS
PO B"" 970
Sa" &"nal"dino, CA
92402-0970
Ph.,.,,: (909) J8J-1602
Fta: (909) 889-7312
BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
DiGfff! Anderso"
Ru..vIi'1( C'-g
K"'h~." Ervi.
Sarah HQ1',.i.1on
V,a'rice Jtw$
Willi.", L01l$
Paula McLemore
rOlima Pa~
ohm Saenz
ary Tu,w
mho, Vander H.u/
xeeutive Director
.lda Griffi"
N n-Prollt SOI(C)(3)
Tax Exempt II
95-3760212
A DonationsmTu:
.Deductible
U""~CI ""u
ru:a.:t:IVCU.
9513682550
IIIdl ,,'VV"' 11."gGRI
ICLS RIVERSIDE
PAGE 04/04
Option House, Inc.
IIIIU1JeIlliDII _d P,evenJitJ" Suvicu Agmcy
813 North *D" Street, St& J, Stili BemardbuJ, C4 92401
Page 3
For these and related rea500s that can be better voiced at a hearing. I strongly urge the
council to vote against grantins the CODditiODaI use permit and deny the appeal in the
interest of continuing to work towards providing safe havens for families fleeing domestic
violence.
This will Dot cmly 1Ie1l~ the riglat message to the residents of our historic: city but will
also let the COIIlDlunity know that we a.... stiJI a city "'.e.... &miIies eome first.
If the council allows a continuance of tile bearing on 3116/09, Velda Griffin and me will be
present before the council at its next meeting on 416109 and testifY to these and other
questions that the council may have while detennining the outcome of the appeal.
Thank you for putting families first in the city of San Bernardino. We hope fOJ' a favol'llble
outcome to the appeal- a denial.
Respectfully,
~~eY
Attomey At Law
Vice-President,
Board ofDiI'ectors,
OptiOD House Inc.
Together, We Are Making A Difference
Serving Batter.d WO""" and Chiltb-UI Si"", 1977
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
~
Date: February 20, 2009
Subject: Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21
(Appeal No. 08-07) - Appeal of the Planning
Commission's denial of a Conditional Use Permit
to convert an existing 6,747 square foot church
building into a 56-bed homeless shelter with
related support facilites and office space located at
840 North Sierra Way in the RM, Residential
Medium land use district.
MCC Date: March 16,2009
From: Valerie C. Ross, Director
Dept: Development Services
Synopsis of Previous Council Action: None
Recommended Motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor & Common Council deny Appeal No. 08-07 and
uphold the Planning Commission's denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21, based on the
recommended Findings of Fact.
Alternative Motion:
That the hearing be closed and that the Mayor & Common Council grant Appeal No. 08-07, declare
an intent to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 and continue the matter for two weeks to
consider Findings of Fact and Conditions of Approval.
WwVu.~
Valerie C. Ross
Contact Person: Amn Liang, Senior Planner, ext. 3332 Pbone:
384-5057
Supporting data attacbed:
Staff Report
Ward:
I
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A
Source:
(Acct. No.)
Account Description:
Finance:
Council Notes:
Agenda Item No.
;).'1
3- /'-oCf
-
_.
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACflON
STAFF REPORT
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 (Appeal No. 08-07) - Appeal of the Planning
Commission's denial of a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing 6,747
square foot church building into a 56-bed homeless shelter with related support and
office space located at 840 North Sierra Way in the RM, Residential Medium land
use district.
OWNER:
Faith Temple AP Ministries
840 North Sierra Way
San Bernardino, CA 92401
909.215.8683
APPELLANT:
Garnett Newcombe
Human Potential Consultants, LLC
500 East Carson Plaza, Dr. No. 127
Carson, CA 90746
310.756.1560
Backuound:
The appellant is appealing the Planning Commission denial of Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
No. 08-21 to convert an existing 6,747 square foot church building into a 56-bed homeless
shelter with related support and office space located at 840 North Sierra Way in the RM,
Residential Medium land use district (Exhibit 1 - Location Map).
Ibis project was originally scheduled for review by the Planning Commission on September 16,
2008. The item was continued to October 21, 2008 to allow time for staff to address the issue of
Senate Bill 2 (SB2) compliance raised by the applicant.
At the Planning Commission Meeting of October 21, 2008, the Planning Commission opened the
public hearing and received public testimony on the subject matter. After a lengthy discussion
including comments from the City Attorney's Office, San Bernardino Police Department, several
concerned citizens, supporters of the projects and the applicant, the Planning Commission closed
the public hearing and Commissioner Munoz made a motion to deny Conditional Use Permit No.
08-21 and continue the item to November 5, 2008 for adoption of findings and final action.
Commissioner Mulvihill seconded the motion, which carried unanimously with Commissioners
Coute, Durr, Heasley, Mulvihill, Munoz, Rawls and Sauerbrun voting to deny the project.
Commissioners Hawkins and Longville were absent.
On November 5, 2008, the Planning Commission considered Findings of Fact prepared based on
information presented to the Planning Commission and comments and conclusions of the
Planning Commission during the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz made the motion to
adopt the Findings of Fact and deny Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21. Commissioner Heasley
seconded the motion, which carried with the votes of Commissioners Durr, Heasley, Munoz,
Rawls and Sauerbrun. Commissioners Longville and Mulvihill voted against the motion.
Commissioners Coute and Hawkins were absent. All reports and findings presented to the
- Planning Commission are attached as Exhibit 2.
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-2 j (App",,1 No. 08-0"/
Hearing Date: March 16, 2009
Page2or2
The applicant filed Appeal No. 08-07 (Exhibit 3) on November 20, 2008, to request that the
Mayor and Common Council overturn the decision of the Planning Commission. The Appeal
application states that the Planning Commission action to deny the appeal conflicts with Federal,
State and local laws, including the State Housing Accountability Act and State Housing Element
law. The Appeal application is supplemented by a letter from Remy De La Peza of Public
Counsel Law Center dated November 26, 2008 (Exhibit 4).
A fmal set of Findings of Fact for denial of CUP No. 08-21, prepared by the City Attorney's
office, is attached as Exhibit 5.
Financial ImDact:
No impact. The appellant paid applicable processing fees.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Mayor & Common Council deny Appeal No. 08-07 and uphold the
Planning Commission's denial of CUP No. 08-21. An alternative motion is also provided.
Attachments:
Exhibit 1
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
Location Map
Staff Report and Memoranda to the Planning Commission
Appeal No. 08-07
Letter dated November 26, 2008 from Public Counsel Law Center
Findings of Fact
'-
EXHIBIT 1
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
LOCATION MAP
PLANNING DIVISION
HEARING DATE: 03/16/2009
PROJECT: Conditional Use Permit 08-21 (Appeal 08-07)
NORTH
C/J
-
m
::0
:::a
).
8TH
-
--,
(C) C~f San Bernar~!no.:
~.. .~,....II.I ... .
Oe:a42ft " .
EXHIBIT 2
'---
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
Development Services Department - Planning Division
Interoffice Memorandum
TO:
Planning Co~ission /J !?
7':vr'~~
Terri Rahhal, Deputy Director/City Planner
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Agenda Item 2: CUP No. 08-21 - Human Potential Consultants
DATE:
November 5, 2008
COPIES:
Valerie C. Ross, Director; John Wilson, Senior Assistant City Attorney
The attached Findings and Conclusion were prepared based on the evidence presented to the
Planning Commission at the public hearing on October 21, 2008 and the written record
consisting of the materials submitted to the Commission by the applicant, City staff, and
members of the public.
Recommended Motion: That the Planning Commission (I) deny Conditional Use Permit No.
08-21 based on the evidence presented to the Commission at the public hearing held on October
21, 2008 and the written record consisting of the materials submitted to the
Commission by the applicant, City staff, and members of the public, and (2) adopt the Findings
and Conclusion prepared on the basis of that evidence.
,
Attachment: Findings and Conclusion
"-
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PLANNING COMMISSION
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION OF THE COMMISSION
IN THE MATTER OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 08-21
Proposed for adoption at regular meeting of November 5, 2008
(Matter continued from regular meeting of October 16, 2008 for adoption of findings)
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
Based on the evidence presented at the public hearing and the written record consisting of
the materials submitted by the applicant, City staff, and members of the public, the Commission
finds:
1. BACKGROUND FACTS
1.1 The applicant seeks a Conditional Use Permit for an Adult Education,
Employment and Residential Center. The applicant states that the occupants of the facility would
be homeless individuals.
1.2 Abutting the proposed project site to the north, west, and south of the site are
residential properties in the Residential Medium land use district. Directly across the street from
the site are single-family residences in the Residential Medium-High district.
1.3 There are currently ten existing homeless shelters in the City of San Bernardino
and two mare under construction. Existing facilities provide 265 beds. Space for another 164
beds is under construction.
1.4 On October 20,2008, the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino enacted an urgency ordinance establishing within the City the Emergency Shelter
Overlay District. The Overlay District consists of a designated area within the Industrial Light
land use district in which emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional
use permit or other discretionary permit.
2. PROJECT REVIEW STANDARDS
The applicant asserted before the Planning Commission that its proposed project was
required to be reviewed under the provisions of California Government Code section 65589.5,
subdivision (d). Those provisions limit the ability of a local agency to deny approval for a
proposed "emergency shelter."
.-
1
'-'
The Commission finds that the proposed project, described by the applicant as an Adult
Education, Employment and Residential Center (AEERC), does not share the characteristics of
an emergency shelter as set forth in California Government Code section 65582 and California
Health and Safety Code sections 50801 and 50801.5, in that:
2.1 Spaces at the AEERC would not be filled on a first-come-first-served basis,
by admitting any person needing emergency shelter who requested admission. Instead,
prospective residents would be required to have a referral source to enroll at the facility. In
addition, potential residents would be screened for suitability based on their ability to benefit
from an intensive training program.
2.2 The AEERC would not provide minimal supportive services for homeless
persons, but would instead require participation in a full curriculum of educational activities for
which not all individuals seeking emergency shelter would qualify.
2.3 Occupancy of the AEERC would not necessarily be limited to six months but
rather, according to the applicant, an extension could be allowed, on case by case basis.
3. PUBLIC SAFETY CONCERNS
3.1 The Commission finds that it is likely that many or all of the occupants of the
AEERC would be individuals on parole or probation. The San Bernardino Police Department
advised the Commission that the resident population of the applicant's similar facility in the
Riverside area consisted entirely of parolees and probationers.
3.2 The Commission further finds that there is already a high concentration of
parolees/probationers in the area of the proposed project, which along with other conditions
makes it difficult for the Police Department to service the area. The Commission finds that the
applicant was asked whether it would consider excluding parolees/probationers or limiting their
number at the proposed facility, but the applicant was unable or unwilling to do so.
3.3 The Commission finds that past experience with parolee/probationer housing
facilities in the City has been unsatisfactory. From August 1998 to May 2001, a 24-unit facility
operated on North H Street. The concentration of parolees/probationers resulted in an extreme
number of calls for service that forced the Police Department, in conjunction with Code
Enforcement and other elements of the City, to shut down the facility in the interest of public
safety. From 1999 to 2002, a 14-unit apartment parolee/probationer facility operated on North H
Street. As a result of an extremely high incidence of calls for service associated with parolees,
the Police Department eventually shut that facility down as well.
3.4 In view of this prior experience, the Commission has concerns regarding security
at the proposed facility if, as appears to be the case, all or a substantial portion of the residents
would be parolees/probationers. The Commission finds that these concerns have not been
-
2
adequately addressed. In particular, the applicant did not provide any specificity as to what
security training it would give personnel in charge of managing the facility.
3.5 The Commission also has concerns regarding the applicant's procedures for
discharging residents, which concerns the Commission finds have not been adequately addressed.
The applicant stated that if a resident of the proposed facility were under the influence of a mind
altering substance not prescribed, the person would be given a referral for shelter for the night
and asked to leave the facility immediately. There was no mention of any intent to contact the
Police Department in that event. The Commission is concerned that this situation could lead to
the release of a dangerous individual into the community without the Police Department's
knowledge.
3.6 The Commission finds that security concerns raised by the potential for
unsupervised release of facility residents into the community have not been adequately
addressed. The applicant stated that it planned to maintain a day laborer program, but there was
no indication of whether the facility would allow residents out on the street unsupervised to
permit them to get day jobs.
4. LAND USE CONFLICTS
The Commission finds that adverse impacts on neighboring land uses would result from
approval of the project that could not be avoided with the adoption of the ameliorative measures
the applicant was able and willing to adopt. The most notable of these impacts would be the
effect of the project on Option House, a women's shelter for victims of domestic violence, and
on the planned Lincoln II Elementary School.
4.1 Option House was the first domestic violence shelter in California and has been at
its location for 26 years. The facility is located in close proximity to the proposed project site. It
maintains 32 beds, not counting cribs. Victims of domestic violence sometimes are placed at
Option House the same evening they report being abused, at a time when they are particularly
fragile.
4.2 Option House is the only domestic violence shelter located in the central San
Bernardino Valley region. The Commission finds that if a facility that might be housing
domestic abusers were located in close proximity to Option House, domestic violence victims in
the central Valley region might be discouraged from turning to Option House.
4.3 Women residing at Option House who have employment or are students must
continue to attend work or school. In addition, other Option House residents must leave the
facility from time to time to attend to daily affairs. Due to the proximity of Option House to the
proposed project site, if the project were approved Option House residents would have occasion
to walk by the AEERC. The Commission finds that the possibility that perpetrators of domestic
violence, and potentially the actual perpetrator of violence against an Option House resident,
.-.
3
could be residing in close proximity would increase fear in the Option House residents and
interfere with their free enjoyment of the shelter and its environs.
4.4 According to the applicant's Chief Operations Officer, among the training
programs offered at the AEERC would be anger management and domestic violence training. In
addition, the applicant stated it would not conduct criminal history checks on prospective
residents who are on parole or probation. The Commission finds, therefore, that it appears the
AEERC would accept residents with a history of domestic violence.
4.5 The proposed project site is located about 150 feet from the site of the planned
Lincoln II Elementary School. The school is planned to begin operation in 2011. The
Commission finds that undesirable contacts between students walking by the facility and
residents of the facility likely would occur.
4.6 The applicant proposed that it mitigate the impacts of the project on the school by
agreeing to relocate the AEERC after two years, when the school is expected to open, and to
replace the AEERC at that time with a use that would complement the school, such as providing
youth-oriented educational programs. However, the applicant never specified what the
subsequent use would be, what would happen if the planned subsequent use proved infeasible at
the end of the two years, or what would happen if the property were sold. The Commission finds
that without specific information on these points, the proposal that a limited-term conditional use
permit be granted cannot adequately be considered. The Commission further finds that a limited-
term conditional use permit, even if followed by an appropriate subsequent use, would not
mitigate the immediate conflicts with the neighboring land uses that would exist if the proposed
proj ect were approved.
5. ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN CONFLICTS
5.1 The Commission finds that the proposed AEERC would be inconsistent with both
the City's zoning ordinance (Development Code) and its General Plan, as they existed on the date
the project application for CUP No. 08-21 was deemed complete, May 27,2008.
5.2 Section 19.04.030(2)(T) of the Development Code requires social services to
conform to the residential density standard of the underlying land use designation, and to have a
level of intensity compatible with the residential district surrounding the site. As originally
proposed, the project was to accommodate 56 residents. After consultation with staff, the
applicant agreed to reduce the number of residents to 36. However, even that number would be
at the extreme high end of the density allowed for the land use district, and would be the
equivalent of assuming the maximum permitted number of dwellings on the Y:z-acre site (6), each
with the maximum number of assumed residents per dwelling (6). The actual intensity of the use
would be even greater, given the staffing requirements and the non-residential activity that would
occur at the site on a daily basis. .
-
4
5.3 Furthermore, Section 19.04.030(2)(T)(9) of the Development Code requires a
one-acre minimum site area to establish a social service in a residential land use district. The
Commission fmds that the \-1- acre project site does not conform to this standard of the zoning
ordinance.
5.4 The Commission further finds that the proposed project would not be consistent
with the General Plan in that, for the reasons noted above, the proposed project would alter the
character of the surrounding neighborhood. Existing homes in the immediate vicinity of the
proposed project are single-family residences. The Commission finds that introduction of a
social services facility with a dense residential component would conflict with General Plan Goal
2.2: "Promote development that integrates with and minimizes impacts on surrounding land
uses." General Plan Policy 2.2.10 provides: "The protection of the quality oflife shall take
precedence during the review of new projects. Accordingly, the City shall utilize its discretion to
deny or require mitigation ofprojects that result in impacts that outweigh benefits to the public."
6. CONCLUSION
For the reasons previously noted, the Commission finds that the proposed project would
impair the integrity and character of the surrounding residential neighborhood where the project
is proposed. Therefore, the Commission concludes that the necessary findings to approve
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 cannot be made.
-
5
.";
TO:
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
DevelopmeDt Services DepartmeDt - PlaDDiDg DivisioD
IDteroffice MemoraDdum
Planning Commission e....//f
Terri Rahhal, Deputy Director/City Planner 7t
'.-..J
FROM:
SUBJECT:
AgeDda Item 1: CUP No, 08-21- HumaD PoteDtial CODsultaDts proposal to
cODvert aD existiDg church located at 840 North Sierra Way to a 56-bed
homeless shelter
DATE:
October 16, 2008
COPIES:
Valerie C. Ross, Director; Henry Empeilo, Senior Deputy City Attorney
BackgrouDd: Item I on the October 21, 2008 Planning Commission agenda is a request for a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP No. 08-21) to convert an existing 6,747 square foot church located
at 840 North Sierra Way to a 56-bed homeless shelter. The applicant is Human Potential
Consultants, LLC. Originally scheduled for hearing on September 16, 2008, this item was
continued without a staff presentation or a public hearing. Staff requested the continuance to
October 21, 2008 to address the applicant's assertion that SB 2 (Senate Bill 2 of 2007, effective
January I, 2008) would preclude the City from denying the subject project.
)
SB2 amended California Housing Element law and the Housing Accountability Act to reduce
obstacles to development of emergency shelters for the homeless. A primary reason for SB2, as
stated in the law, is to reverse the trend of concentration of homeless individuals ui poorer
communities by requiring every city and county to plan for development of additional homeless
shelter capacity. A copy ofSB2 and a technical assistance memo from the California Department
of Housing and Community Development (HCD) dated May 7, 2008 was distributed to the
Planning Commission on October 7, 2008.
Public Counsel Law Center, a non-profit agency serving Los Angeles County, submitted a letter
of support for CUP No. 08-21 (Attachment A). This letter also warns the City about the
provisions of SB2, including potential limits on the City's ability to deny any application to
provide emergency shelter for the homeless.
Staff met with the applicant on October 8, 2008, to discuss details of the project, as well as the
CUP review and appeal processes. Upon considering the land use conflicts discussed in the
September 16, 2008 staff report, the applicant proposed a copcept of interim use of the site as a
homeless shelter and subsequent conversion of the site to provide youth-oriented services in the
future. The applicant's revised proposal, supplemental program information and project site
photos are attached as Attachment B.
)
'-
CUP No. 08-21 - Human Potential Consultants
10/16/08 Memo to Planning Commission Page 2 of 3
-
SB2 Compliance: Staff is currently working with a consultant, The Planning Center, to update
the City's General Plan Housing Element. SB2 compliance is a major component of this effort.
In order to comply with SB2 pending completion and certification of the Housing Element, the
City Attorney will present an urgency ordinance to the Mayor and COlmcil for adoption on
October 20, 2008. The Request for Council Action and ordinance, if adopted, will be distributed
at the Planning Commission meeting. The ordinance will establish an overlay district within a
portion of the IL, Industrial Light land use district to encourage establishment of emergency
shelters, which will be permitted by right in the specified area of the Overlay District.
Development standards and siting criteria for emergency shelters are included in the ordinance,
consistent with the provisions ofSB2, in Section 65583 (a)(4)(A) of the Government Code.
Another provision of SB2, Government Code Section 65589.5 (d), limits the authority of a local
agency to disapprove an emergency shelter unless one or more of 5 specified findings are made.
Some elements of the specified fmdings are already discussed in the September 16, 2008 staff
report as standard findings for approval of a Conditional Use Permit. However, to comply with
the specific requirements of SB2 for denial of CUP No. 08-21, staff offers the following
additional finding as a supplement to the findings in the September 16, 2008 staff report:
Additional Finding of Fact:
'-'
The emergency shelter, as proposed by CUP No. 08-21, would be inconsistent with both the
zoning ordinance (Development Code) and the General Plan, as they existed on the date the
project application for CUP No. 08-21 was deemed complete, May 27, 2008. As noted in the'
staff report dated September 16, 2008, the project site is too small to accommodate 56
residents in a manner that would be compatible with the low-intensity land use of the
surrounding neighborhood. The site is located in the RM, Residential Medium land use
district, which permits single and multiple dwelling units, up to a maximum density of 12
dwelling units per acre. The RM district also permits social services subject to the
requirements of Section 19.04.030(2)(T) of the Development Code, which requires social
services to conform to the residential density standard of the underlying land use designation,
and to have a level of intensity compatible with the residential district surrounding the site.
The proposed project does not conform to these requirements of Section 19.04.030(2XT) as
follows:
The proposed emergency shelter for 56 individuals would far exceed the maximum
residential density permitted in the RM land use district. Utilizing a range from the average
household occupancy of 3.2 persons per dwelling to the maximum assumption of 6 residents
per dwelling, a 56-resident facility would be equivalent to 9 - 18 dwelling units. Since the
site is only \t2 acre, the equivalent density would be 18 - 36 units per acre. The intensity of
the use would be even greater, given the staffing requirements and the non-residential
activity that would occur at the site on a daily basis. The maximum residential density
permitted on the project site would be 6 units, which would accommodate a range of 20 - 36
residents. Furthermore, Section 19.04.030(2)(T)(9) of the Development Code requires a one-
acre minimum site area to establish a social service in a residential land use district. The Y...
acre project site does not conform to this standard of the zoning ordinance.
-
CUP No. 08.21 - Human Potential Consultants
10/16/08 Memo to Planning Commission Page 3 on
'-
The proposed project would not be consistent with the General Plan. The application for
CUP No. 08-21 was deemed complete on May 27, 2008. At that time, the City of San
Bernardino General Plan Housing Element was certified, in full compliance with the
requirements of HCD. As noted in the September 16, 2008 staff report, the proposed project
would alter the character of the surrounding neighborhood, where existing homes in the
immediate vicinity are single-family residences. Introduction of a social service with a dense
residential component would conflict with General Plan Goal 2.2: "Promote development
that integrates with and minimizes impacts on surrounding land uses." Therefore, based on
General Plan Policy 2.2.10: "The protection of the quality of life shall take precedence during
the review of new projects. Accordingly, the City shall utilize its discretion to deny or require
mitigation of projects that result in impacts that outweigh benefits to the public. " CUP No.
08-21 should not be approved.
Conclusions: The applicant's alternative proposal to establish a homeless shelter as an interim
use and to eventually convert the facility to a youth-oriented service facility would be superior to
the original proposal. However, the ability of the City to enforce a planned land use change
would be limited, and incompatibility of the shelter facility with existing single family residences
in the area remains a concern, even in the short term. Another meeting is planned to review
security, operation and management plans for the proposed facility with the Police Department
on Friday, October 17, 2008. Staff will reserve its final recommendation on CUP No. 08-21 for
the oral staff report to the Planning Commission on October 21, 2008. In the meantime, the
previous staff recommendation to deny the project stands, as follows:
~-
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the staff reports
and recommendations, together with testimony from the applicant and members of the public, as
well as the attached supplemental information, and that the Planning Commission deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21.
Recommended Motion: That the hearing be closed and that the Planning Commission deny
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 based on the Findings of Fact presented in the September 16,
2008 staff report and the additional Finding of Fact in the staff report memorandum dated
October 16, 2008.
Attachments:
A. Letter of Support for Human Potential Consultants and CUP No. 08-21, from Public
Counsel Law Center of Los Angeles, CA dated October 10, 2008,
B. Letter and Supplemental Program Information from Human Potential Consultants dated
October 14, 2008
C. Background documents related to the proposed urgency ordinance
'-
~~om:~Jblic Counsel
213 385 9089
10/10/2008 ATTACHMENT A
~~~
L A VI
C E N T I! R
610 SOU1ll MDMORE AVENUE
LOS ANGELI'S, CALI.'OItNlA 90005
TELEPHONE: 213/385-2977
FAX; 213/385-90~9
TIlE PUBUC ~IEREST LAW Of'FICEOFTHE WS A."<<.it:.U:S COUNTY AND BEVERLY HIlLS BARASSOCIATIONS
FACSIMILE COVER LEITER
DATE: 10/10108
PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING ~ PAGE(S) (WHICH INCLUDES THIS
COVER):
TO: e..~ of St::\n ~u~~ino
Ptdnni".'Oi CcmWlIS'S.'l7Y\i
atv €{erK
FROM: Pemj De.ltt Pc.UI
F8.I#: (~D"')~-9>I30 i
(~oef) ~S4- SlgB
REMARKS:
A~(~ is ~ l~ _ Pu!;lfic ColAnsel r(..~
-HIt oct. 2J , ZOO13 hl"lI~ DVI C Ll P N D. 0&-;1-1.
T~n" '10lA.
~~~
(213) 385-2."171 l( 2~r
The information contained. in thi!il fac.~imile message is privileged and confidential. It u. ink:ndcd o.u1y foe the use of
the indiyjrlual named abovc, Iftbe recipient of this mcsimile is an individual or entily other thall that named .bove,
any \L'lIC, di~-w:mination, distribution or reproduction is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication
in error, please notitY us by telephone and retUrn the original to \IS via V.S, Poslal Service. Thank you, .
~.
Received 10-10-2008 05:16pm
from-213 385 9089
T o-C!TV OF SAN BERNARD J Par. 00 I
>>a.tJwot'~<aU
lANJ'AM.~
0-_
lPN^THl\N ANSCHEll
mnFon.-
su.w.............SIa.:.~"R....UJ>
.IAUES ... ASPEiU:.bk
..~';~6ti'llJ'
~rutl\G't fl"" llJ'
'~~(";Htr
Ir.lYMnai. ~
o.-.l'..Uc..~u.P
m&.COCK
~~~P!lAND
DYANA, OICICD
t.WUC K. '~'f!ij; I;U
~.ir-PS.or-llJ'
CaoootlT&ANS
~~"",,"llJ'
~<h.?M""Pft.-..ll.P
PLI. !SMI:'M
lJ: ~~...
~-=,fE~A!'!-C
~~T...
r;:;:::1il'ZW'
~1.0 E. HANOUiIl
TI\w-..,~AlloooIln-UP
nANHA1'r.fof
::t'~{~:tNl!Y"
.......w " "- LLr'"
ME.U5SAD. ~
~."""JP
DA.VID o. JOJ-fN3Qlof-
~iik..:.:.:JilHNSON
~~~'~OY
.... llJ'
.. L<2ARUS
Allin 0..111 .sa.. "'- II Fad UJ'
"""""1. LEVIN.
).f....k-...11P
DAVIOll.llIlA
Cv.MI , JCa.
B~ L MALMLUNO
tflfcu~ARo"
~~,.....~w>
""~~~
LM'1M!..U'
THPOnoR" '" \II".': ....~
~~llJ'
~~Mlml"'" MUlU'HY"'
aoNALO 1. N'BSSlW
- -.... -~'U"'" - ,...r~
=t~~LAJi..,. tlJVm W"
~.OOlll<-
O'"^",,,N
, .A 1..__ UJ>
~".0XlBY
e:rnu.~1',~1.U'
::m~W
a.;.. 0.-
AN"1'&o.Nt ~ f'J.B5S
'""-_".........11'
~T.m.ncx:m.VEll
M~.......W'
f;H;t~t..c~....
ll'a:~(,.....W'
~~~
fife ~...." H~UJ'
JX)U.... IV __I I
r..,~~r...:.
AUAN L """""
~mtou.LU
~+T."~
fiPi:~n
~~~~~lilu.-
~~LU
~~~~:l.lNof!-W'.
or.,. '1rSN
~Yl..lt',II"&......_W'
:m5i.W..'S.Sl>ij.j0UiA
~~~__UJ
=[~
~~..
_Y~~~'u.P
>AVID A. SWJJl.t2
ttTt~I!f.1tl.
..........fi1~~c.n.Elbr1LP
....rT_VTrin-.I.TTTTF."
:".....~___u.P
t:uXA. un.ENA.}1\,.
~?'7<""'''''eot,cems mentioned in FJndinSS of Fact from Staff Report SunUnuy from City of San l.Iernardino
CBiiiT~~:r' Phmninl!Diviliionre: ConditionaJUsePennitNo. 08-21. hearing date September 16, 2008
~ D. WOOD
'_'QllUI
8:NETH ZlPPJ.~
ti:~AoG~.aL
~_____ ""l
."-"'""........
--
_ ..,.J
From:~Jblic Counsel
213 386 9089
10/10/2008 18:34
1159 P.llC2/0t13
~~
~cpnalJOL&l
WA'r'NEM.Bll.iISKY"
-
~u.;,-~~L
v_~
,.,......._tJ~
S1'VttSH to ncx::Er."'l
'""-
~.C'.I;"",..U-
Mo\llTHA:a. fORO/\1'o-
r_
~''lIV.....~
H!JtN..\N O. VC\A
"",,-,,,>,0
~L..~;:-",,",<>
LAW CBNTBIl
THS:'UBUC INTiJliST LAW omcaoPn-nlI...OEiANOIiUS cot..'N:'T AN~ B&VIi.Il:...Y M~ --.~rlONS
The Sa~ c.Jdgm...'\tt&tiag uf ;t.., l...a...,...' (,;aauau....;~ CMI i.ic:iu- ti.... u.
Selll vUI faestmJJe to: 909-384-5080
October 10, 2008
City of Son Bernardino
Planning Commission
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re:
October 21,2008 Planning Commission Meeting
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21
Dear Commissioners:
Public Counsel is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to advancing
equal justice under the law by delivering free legal services to indigent and
underrepresented children and adults throughout Los Angeles County. In
furthernnce of Public Counsel's mission, the Community Development Project's
lIousing Opportunities, Preservation and F.nforcement ("HOPE") Unit advocates
for local land use policies that further the production and preservation of
affordable housing in cities throughoUI\h.. COWlty. We are currently
collaborating with cities in the development of their housing elements for the
2008-2014 planning period to ensure compliance with state law requirements and
La ensure lhat the housing element mea,ningfully and adequately responds to the
housing needs of the City's lower-income and homel.."" I1l8id..nls.
We understand that a proposal has been made by Human Potential Consultants,
LLC to conven an existing building at 840 N. SilOlJ1l Way into a homeless
facility . We also understand that the original hearing (September 16, 2008) on
this application has been continued to October 21, 2008 to give staff additional
time and opportunity to research applicable state law in the context of some of
the concerns that were raised in the public hearing process (including.
impairment of the integrity and character of the land IL"" district; negative
impacts on quality of life; security issues surrounding activities of the residents;
disturbing the existing peace and harmony of \h.. surrounding residential
neighborhood; nuisance. of traffic, noise, light; security issues for children at
play in the Seccombc Lake recreation area and walking to future elementary
school in close proximity; adv....... La tWo public interest, health, safety,
convenience and welfare of City; site not physically suitable). .
W.. lire writing to advise you that the City would take a significant risk in making
a decision to deny an emergency shelter under applicable law, including, but not
limited to, California Senate Rill 2 ("Sa 2") and the Housing Accountability Act.
~ '.0. DOX7t5900e tOSANCtu:s.CA?OC76G9OQ eT!l.. Zt).J8S.2971 F!JC. 211.]85.')08') -WWW.PUBUCCOUNSELOW
-n.~re ;H nn ,,-e.cer jratice thlUJ eqwJ ,justice. #II
Received 10-10-2008 05;16po
From-213 385 9089
To-CITY OF SAN BERNARDI
Po.e 002
.;=rom:Public Counsel
213 385 9089
10/10/2008 18:34
11159 P.OC3/003
Page 2 of2
-
You may be aware that the City has failed to adopt a housing element for the
current planning period (2008-2014), which was due to the State Oepartment of
Housing and Community Oevelopm""l ("HCO'") by June 30, 2008. The City's
udopted 2008-2014 housing element must comply with SB 2, eft'ective Jan~ I,
2008, which strengthened existing state law to provide opportunitie.~ for the
development of emergency shelters (as well as transitional and supportive
housing) by ensuring that every local government has the zoning and land use
controls in placc to cncourngc this hOlL~ing type. The City's housing element
should include the fullowing:
. Estimate of the number ofpcrsons in need of emergency shelter in the
City of San Bernardino (including analysis of both seasonal and annual
need);
. Identification of at least one zone permitting emcrgency shelters without
a conditional use permit or other discretionary review. This zonc or
zones must have sufficient capacity to meet aU orlbe City's identitied
need for emergency shelter and applicable land use controls must
encourage and facilitate the development of emergency shelters;
· If the City does not currently have such a zone, a program to lIffilood illl
Zoning Code to provide a sufficient 7.onC or 7nnes within one year of
adoptiou of its housing clement.
-
Based on the requirements outlined ahove, prior to making any decision to deny this application,
tbc City must assess whether such denial would make it more difficuh for the City to meet the
requirements of SB 2 becaWle, lIffiong olber things, it must identitY additionallaod with capacity
availahlc for emergency shelters. To the extent the City asserts it has adequate 1'C90un:es
available to meet its existing homeless needs, the City should make clear the grounds on which
this assertion is based, including any calculations made.
Regardless, the City is still severcly Iimitcd in it.. ahility to deny this application under the
Housing Accountability Act, particularly because it does not have a valid housing element. We
welcome a meeting with the City to discuss these issues in further detail.
v cry truly yours,
~~'C? )
Attorney
Equal Justice Works Fellow
Public Counsel Law Center
cc: Tony R.hh.hl, Planning Oirector (rahhahl te@sbcitv OTl1:)
AIoll Liang, Senior Planner (lian" arfiilsbcitv.OrlZ)
'-
Received 10-10-2008 05:16PM
From-21l 385 9089
To-CITY OF SAN BERNARDI
Pa.. 003
ATTACHMENT B
~~=-~~.
-
Ckrobc:r J4. 2008
('tt)' urSan Bernardino
~fs. Tmi Rahhal, P!:mnmg Dm:ctor
\1r. Aron llang. Senior Planner
.~lJO N. 0 Strm
San Bemanhno. Ca 91418
HE: ellP 08-11_ 848~. SlelTI WI)', San B.rn.,diao
Ikar \15. Rahhal & \1r. liang-
rhank you for taking the time to met.=1 with lluman Polenual Consultants. L.L.e.. ItIP(~1
Ia...t W\:dnesday. ()eMOer ~tIl, 2008. We found the mectmg to be beneficial through the
,:Iant) that \"'$ provided on a number of points. In an effort to respond complc(c1~. we
.lre providmg additIOnal material that may not have been circulated pnor. Additionally.
we are outlinmg S()mc of our vision for the future use uflhe building on X40 N SIerra
Way.
-
\Vith regard 10 many ufthe qucstlollllO abuut the site U~. integratlOn (3..1{ pan (lfthe
...urrounding l;ommunity) and safety. we are including addinonal infonnation regardmg
the safery plan as wclla5 programming for the site. This additiunal documentatIOn wIll
~ho": a ..met pulicy that all resld~nts iII1e required to tollow as tcnnf) of their stay The
~fCIY plan monitors and ensures that all policies an being enforced. There are 'itrict
mgrC's....egre~~ control mea.<roreslo reduce 3Ctf\"lty at the SltC'. We strongly helic\'C' Ihat
thl~ model nut only ser\'cs III create structure and fU!itcr the growth and development of
Its ft..'Sldcnts ","'hlle they arC' there. hut its progr.unmmg also t;onsldcrs the surroundmg
IlI..'ighborhood and respects Hlany of the same social panem.<; ~"l as to he d guod lll'lghhor
It t~ undear. as .....as made cloIJenl in tbe mcetlDg. that the Polu.:c Department 'Was
provIded all materials as presented hy If PC. As such. those necessary Items are cnclo"icd
.\Iso. as (lfthe dale thi...lcner w;u suhmittC'd. City StatTha\'c been unable to rl'ach \is.
Sharon Crawford lor foIlO\"-.up. Other discrtpaOl.:ies Wl:re verified inlhe mecting, and
while many of Ihe/jC mailers were danficd, It is our understanding that the :otatf repon
will he revi~ed to retlect less ofa presumpruous understandmg of the building':; use. and
a more rrao;onable intrrpretation ofthr reJeloaDl facts a~ the)' pertain to the proposed U\C'
..tnll It"; applicability to the City's zoning.l-ode
To better understand the SoilC'. an aenal photo 15 being attached as part of this ...uhmlnal. J.~
well as photos {)f the nClghborhood direclly surrounding the sUe. Come,t plays a kc)o'
-
'-
role In understanding wh) thls site is perfectly situated for our proposed use In the shon
temt \\;,hlle the Clty:md SchtXJI Districts' plans for me m:a show great promise for
future growth. II IS dear mal neither the Seccombe Lake redevelopment. nor the new
dementary school are likely to come to fruition in the next few )"cars.
IIPC' mtend.. to keep the property in a manner that is well groomed and attractl\'C In
"arurC'. In an ..-ffon to maintain the character oflbe existing area, UPC' proposed fenl;m~
thai IS similar to thai oflhc adjacent cemetery. but it appeared to be ILOSS than well
received by planning ~tatTin th.:ir rcpon. IlPC is open to alk-mati..c perimeter fencing
malenals. and feels [hat in combination with adequate JaOli~apmg. the street "ceDC \1,'111
be more than r~ntahle
While ~Iatfwas most hdpfullD as!tisl1ng IlPC to understand Its concerns. there were nul
J.n) suggestions from ~la1Ton how to work ..ith us on crafhng 3. strJ.tegy to making.
~nfon:cablc commitments .....Ithin thc ConditionallJse Permit conditions. IIPC was
laded with suggeshng altemah"cs to long term use for thc Mte. Some dISCUSSI(lR
~urroundmg a 'sun..~d clause' for the permit was made. hut '\taffw3.'i hesitant to commit.
tiP(' even ~uggC'ited a deed re~triction for the property. hut ClUff's hellcfwas that it was
only J start. and not something they could cnforce.
If is LOur shun Ie"" guaL.1I lhis MtC. tu be abk to proVide ~cr\,I(;l:S to the homdc~
utill7.lng 3 strate!!)' that has heen proven to work. The area In whll.:h this buildmg IS
located Will allow Us to begin laking strides in that direction. Howc\cr. thiS location IS
hnutL-d 10 sUe. and Will only serve to begin assisting those m need. It IS the goal of HPC
to e,'entually relocate to largt."f qU4lrler5. rhereby wO\l:rllfig Ihis budding infO a use that
would enhance the 'iurroundmg neighborhood.
rhe rl:\'lsed uS( will 1 n(; ludc c~ntinued provision of <;er\"IC~ tor thost' in need of training
In the area. I hesc !K:r\lces may include trainmg and services complimentary TO that of 3n
.:du\.:at1Unal faCility, Gll,cn the adjacent planned school. this location may he anle tf'
provide additIOnal programming calenng to the llX.'aJ youm IIpe \\ ill \.:untmuc: to wurk
"ith the school district to \.:r\.'31C 3' parmc~hlp for providing 50uch cou~s.
With this proposal for future lIse. we arc [ask.~ wuh findmg a mutually agreeahle
terminology that Will satlsf)>' our intt.:rcst to be~lD SCf\ing the homdt'ss in this area \10. tll Ie
guar.mteeing the City and Its rc'lOldc:nts that rhlS use will be relocated once certain, agrC1:d
upon. trigger actions are real.-hed. Such ilL'lions \.:ould indude such things like reltlCatlOn
,)f "PC ..en'lee.. tot Ihe htlmeless to another ;lrea unce tht' Cc:nitkatc: tlfO\:cupancy lS
lS~U..xl for th< !<ochoa!. Or, .should the redevelopment occUr finit. 4 change In use tied tn
~Uildjng pennit Is!ouam;e or Similar appro\'aI could he utilized. HPC IS Willing It) .l\.:i.:Cpt a
condition lhat hmils the use ufthlli fa(;lillY as a humeless shelter once rea..<;onahle activit)>
on the aforementioned plan.. [akes place.
Flnallv we ha\'C mduJed the rdc-vanl .natl..ticCl on the homeless popularilln in San
Bema~dino. "icnate 81111 abo pronJes a ~trllng toundation for supportmg thiS ~'PC of
rennll. Their amocacy group has also pru...idcd input on our Pro.lt.-'Ct, and thelT !cner is
--
--,-
InduJ(.-d. By ~te~m@.lhe num~B In these ~lOIh~IU':llo In tandem wllh the: ..-um:nl numbct
ofa\'3.liable c;:1015 ser\'ins the l:ummunif) ma slmd.ar c3pat'rfy tn lhat of HP('"!!i prognun.
It hc-comcs deaf thallhlllypc of project will pro'w'IOe a largely wKh.~f\'~d pofIularion
\A, IIh the tools ll<<e'Ssary 10 Inregrate ba..:k into socitty. Other sites CUJ1'ef1tJy operatmg m
the (jty do not have the capacllY fO provide the extensive tralnmg and programnllng that
liP<' has outlmed. HP<. "s theus I~ to ser\'e the community of San Hemardlno. As such.
Ihc.'Jr I,\oal i. lu hill: from", lthan the community and '-"lI1I'lu)" a!\ man)' df lheir rt'sidmts
')ucc:cssfuUy
IlPC l~ fOf""".ud to lindJl\@ 01 mUIWlII) agRCabk: wlUlJon In !l.hun term and long lenn
.,..;(."fL1rtOS for [hie;: "lie If my ~ue~tlo"-" or aOdItiunal m"1C~nal\ J.n:' rl."qum:d. please
~,)nu..."'1 "'Icole \1oun~ JI 'itl'l-2l1:'-bJ":'fI or nen nbc.l,,"4Jn"~JJm"~],Jtl-.:om
lllank )lIU l.lT ~..\U lime .tlkl ,oru.IJer,mon m thi!'> rT1d.tter
'1I1ccrcly.
(~l)
'Ar3<,...rI
rl:~. C..Ju..-~
Dr l1MTh.'"n 'C\\ ..-.Ilnhc:
cEO
lIuman P,'lcnfl.1ll ',"'n~ltanB. L L t"
'"<.-
'-
'1,~'~TAHTUC
"-
August 13, 2008
Mr. Aaron Liang
Sr. Planner
Development Services Department
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA. 92418
RE: Responses to Questions Raised by San Bernardino Police
Department on July 31, 2008 at the City of San Bernardino,
Development Service Department, Environmental Review Committee
Dear Mr. Liang:
Pursuant to the request from the San Bernardino Police Department, Human
Potential Consultants, LLC has provided a response that is an addendum to our
previous information submitted to the City of San Bernardino, Planning
Department regarding our Adult Education, Employment and Residential Center
(AEERC) site.
Our Security Plan addresses activities such as: site security, discipline/seizure,
disturbance control, facility containment/parking, search and seizure and
emergency evacuation procedures. HPC maintains for all its sites an operations
manual that details specific procedures and policies related to site operations.
We have provided some preliminary detail for our proposed facility site: Adult
Education, Employment and Residential Center (AEERC) at 840 N. Sierra Way,
San Bernardino, CA. 92410.
The AEERC includes a program effective security plan that encompasses the
installation and use of six (6) security cameras in the following areas: a)
Kitchen/Dining Stations, b) Resident Living Quarters, c) Front Entrance and door,
d) Side/Back Patio and door e) parking area and the f) recreation room.
-
The CV0204DVR (Digital Camera Video Recorder) is s feature packed digital
video camera recording system. This complete system comes with four outdoor
cameras that can be displayed all at the same time (quad view). AEERC has the
capability of customizing the recording and to set a 24- hour recording schedule
based on preferences. The DVR may record continuously during the day, then
record only when motion is detected at night. Each camera is equipped with
AEERC.Conditional Use Pennit No. 08-21
Human Potential Consultants, LLC
10/14/2008
-
night vision, so that security guards/monitors can view and record in total
darkness. The Digital Camera Video Recorder's list of features and system
operating materials are below.
. 4CH DVR w/ 160GB hard drive
. 4 0./67 Cameras
. 1 DVR Power Adapter
. 4 x 60ft RCA video/power wire
. 4 Camera Power Adapter
. 5 BNC connectors
. RJ-45 Ethernet Cable
. Software Installation CD
. RCA to RCA Wire (male)
The AEERC will additionally use two Indoor Speed Dome (270x Day/Night) Zoom
cameras. The day/night high-resolution indoor speed dome with a super
Spherical pan/tilt will continuously rotate 360 degrees, records 24 hours with
automatic turn over of 180 degrees. It has 27x optical and lOx digital zoom
capability, delivering 270x zoom power that captures the finest details. RS-485
Communication channels are available for remote control purposes and may be
programmed for 64 preset precise locations of target areas.
The AEERC utilizes a Biometric Hand Punch - touch Station for facility inGress I
eGress control. computerized by a log system to capture resident sign in/out.
Case managers and guards/monitors use the hand unit to record resident time,
attendance, monitor and control building access and track program activities.
The system provides safeguards against security threats and eliminates "buddy
punching". The unit is constructed of injection-molded plastic, lightweight with
a silicon rubber keypad and an internal lithium battery to keep time and calendar
in event of a power outage. There is no parking of resident vehicles at this
facility or loitering allowed and the AEERC will provide limited transportation for
common trips and off site storage. The facility will be gated, establishing a
controlled environment for educational and programming purposes. No,
drug/alcohol use is tolerated by homeless residents and surveillance is
maintained through ongoing and continued observation of resident
behaviors, searches, random testing, and is also based on the client
assessment, previous history, and current status in relation to substance abuse.
Overall, our guards/monitors will be uniformed, trained in all matters related to
emergency and disaster procedures outlined in our manuals.
-
AEERC-Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21
Human Potential Consultants, LLC
2
10/1412008
The AEERC Emeraencv Evacuation Dlan and quarterly emergency drills will be
conducted and are fully documented to include date and time, evacuation path
used, number of staff participants, and visitors involved. The documentation of
the emergency drill will also include the amount of time to complete the drill, and
other pertinent comments. The drill will also include the testing of smoke
detectors. Fire drills will ensure familiarity with exits in an organized manner.
The following summary procedures will be documented and implemented at all
AEERC facilities:
A. Designation of Emergency Drill Coordinators
B. Diagrammed Emergency Drill Plan
C. Emergency Procedures
D. Drill Documentation
The AEERC has a written Disturbance Control Plan (DCP) in the event of a
major disturbance at one of the AEERC sites. The plan shall include crowd
control procedures, steps for requesting after hours emergency transportation of
resident participants at temporary facilities, assistance from local law
enforcement and/or emergency agencies as circumstances warrant.
The follOWing summary procedures are documented and implemented at all
AEERC facilities:
A. Definition of Disturbance
B. Emergency Procedures Implementation and Monitoring
C. Notification Procedures for Disturbances /Intervention
D. Disturbance Resolution and Documentation
A copy of the disturbance report shall be maintained in the facility's central
administrative filing system, and a copy provided to the AEERC Project Manager.
The AEERC, Search and Seizure Dolicv/Drocedures establish measures to
control the introduction/possession of contraband at the AEERC program site in
order to maintain a safe and secure environment for staff and resident
participants. Control is accomplished through searches of participants and
participant's living and common areas. Possession of contraband as will result in
disciplinary action and confiscation of the contraband.
The following procedures provide specific guidelines for searches, including the
completion of appropriate reports and accompanying documentation.
-
AEERC.Conditional Use Permit No. 08.21
Human Potential Consultants, LLC
3
10/1412008
A.
-
B.
C.
D.
E.
Unauthorized Property/Illegal Contraband/Illegal Drugs and Controlled
Substance Defined
General Guidelines on Search and Seizure Policy and Authorized
Personnel
Facility Search Procedures.
Seizure Definition/Policy
Staff Reporting of Contraband
A copy of the contraband report shall be maintained in the facility's central
administrative filing system, and a copy provided to the AEERC Project Manager.
Guidelines pertaining to AEERC participants' Proaressive Di$Cillline Policy and
basic rules of conduct, and policies that address zero tolerance on alcohol and
drugs use, fraternization, smoking and personal appearance and hygiene are
outlined on Sections B8 - B12 of the AEERC Handbook. Serious violations of
these rules may result in disciplinary actions that can lead to immediate
discharge from the program.
The AEERC Program shall classify reports of rule violations as Administrative Rule
Violations or Serious Rule Violations.
-
A. Rule Violations Defined: Administrative or Serious
B. Disciplinary Methods: Counseling or Violation Report
C. Supervising Case Manager Review of Disciplinary Actions
A copy of the rule violation report shall be maintained in the facility's central
administrative filing system, and a copy provided to the AEERC Project Manager.
Human Potential Consultants, LLC has taken time and good faith measures to
ensure proper understanding, education and cooperation for proposed operation
of the AEERC for the benefit of the highly concentrated homeless population in
Ward 1 and Supervisor District 5 and for the city and county of San Bernardino,
California.
Sincerely,
Garnett Newcombe
CEO
_.
AEERC-Conditional Use Permit No. 08.21
Human Potential Consultants. LLC
4
10/14/2008
-
...-
W
...J
::)
C
W
:E:
o
en
:E
c(
c:::
/8
c:::
C-
o
1m
,0
i
i
i
-
-
...
..
ie
..
-
."
..
..
.;
I!
~
..
...
c
.
.,
ff
~
"
..
1:
..
t
I!
.
.c
..
~
-8
:
c
..
i
t
J
f
o
:E
I
i
..
'"'
m
<
...
m
<
.. .,
Q ..
- . '"'
",..",
~,,~
o 55
w'.,
.,;1..
<<w
U:E"
<.J
m
c .~
'"'
m
<
..
..
j!
.,
0>
"'
. ..~
~ II' i I
fHU
.
'6
..
~
u
" ..
--
""
em
.
~
u
..
~
u
~Cii
~E
t.
;:~
..
co
>olili
::tOir
.
..
- c
li .2
1;!C
a::a..~
~ c
08
oZ
N
~-
.....
~=..
......
.,0
.....
~=;
....
.,e
.&
1
U
...
w
loU
JlU
'ii
.&
~
~
U
,
.
U
,
.
U
...
a
d
d
d
~
~
~
0.5
d
.
'6
..
~
u
~i\i
H
;:~
J! .
.. -
o!
.
'6
..
~
u
.. c
.!:.2
~1:
,,-
H
~o
....
55
&E
cco
<~
~
o
..,
2
do
~
lOl
g
II
....
l!'!1
~!
".
--
" ..
em
~
..1. os;
C "
8'.~
u~.li
:t
U
Z
:>
...
""
--
" "
em
~
E
o
u
t
U
@tdr
...au.. 0
d fJ
:z:
U
z
:>
...
ifl
'11
tc I
i'til ~I
-
~~
..en
<>
E :E &
8 ui
:t
U
Z
:>
...
-
..
i
:E
U
..
f
:E
U
~
E
o
u
..
11
:E
:E
U
~,
~
o
..,
~
o
..,
~
..
U
EI!
-~
~:f
'"
.!5:..!!!
g.~
uen
f
:E
u
..
f
:E
U
&
i
:E
U
~
is
u
..
f
:E
U
" J
d !.~u
d
d
I
.
U
..
f
.
U
~
~
..
.0
o
~
..
..
.
;;;
>
I
.
U
f
8
~
..
f
:E
U
-
..
i
:E
U
8
on
g
.
....
J.
..
'"
"
C>
;:::
>
I!
"
"5
"2_
~::
,.,0
"'CD
co
-
,-
---
-
-""-
-
-~''''....
'-
3:
.Q) 3: 3:
> Q) Q)
.c. 'S; '>
t.c.+-'
o +-' 00
Z ::J ro
.gr
>-
ro
~
ro
....
....
Q)
.-
w
z
o
'V
ex>
E
o
.::
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Summary
-
According to the San Bernardino County Homeless Census, 7,331 respondents
were homeless at the point-in-time that Census was conducted. An annual
estimation of 17,551 people will also experience homelessness.
-
· 1,420 of the respondents reside in District 1 (City of San Bernardino)
· The ethnic breakdown of those respondents is as follows:
o 44% Caucasian
o 24% African American
o 21.8% Hispanic/Latino
· The gender breakdown of the respondents is as follows:
o 63.1% are male
o 35.8% are female
· The age range of the highest numbers homeless respondents is as follows:
o 31.3% are 41-50
o 27.1% are 31-40
o 18.9% are 22-30
· 17% of the respondents are United States Veterans, with 6.3.5% rate of
honorable discharge from the military
· 38.1% of the respondents are chronically homeless
· 23.7% respondents experienced a loss of employment, and 23.5% cite the
use of alcohol and drugs as the top two reasons for their current homeless
status.
· Reasons cited for homelessness:
o 33.9% of respondents are unemployed because they did not have a
permanent address
o 32.1% had no transportation
o 29.3% had no phone
o 24.3% were using Alcohol/Drugs
o 23.5% did not have appropriate clothing
· 71.9% of respondents reported that they were living in San Bernardino County
at the time they became homeless
· Ofthe 83.4% of unsheltered respondents in San Bernardino County:
o 21.9 % are on the streets of San Bernardino city
o 11% are living in emergency shelters
o 5.6% are living in transitional housing.
· 34.5% of County-wide respondents have less than a high school diploma, and
35.2% of respondents have obtained their high school diploma.
· 26.3% of respondents were currently experiencing mental Illness and 42.0%
were experiencing depression
· 66.9% of the respondents are NOT using Mental Health Services
· 54.0% of respondents were not receiving government assistance services
· 82% of respondents were not aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Help
Line
-
-
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION
From: JAMES F. PEJ'..'MAN
City Attorney
Subj ect: AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
AMENDING SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL
CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE) SECTION
19.02.050, 19.08.020, TABLE 08.01, A..1I/D
ADDING CHAPTER 19.10-E, EMERGENCY
SHELTER OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO
PERMIT EMERGENCY SHELTERS WITH
APPROVAL OF A BUILDING PERMIT
WITHIN AREAS OF THE IL, INDUSTRIAL
LIGHT, LAND USE DISTRICT L VING
SOUTH OF 3RD STREET, EAST OF
WATERMAN AVENUE AND NORTH OF
CENTRAL AVENUE, DECLARING THE
URGENCY THEREOF, AND TAKING
EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.
Dept: CITY ATTORNEY
Date: October 17, 2008
MCC Date: October 20, 2008
Synopsis of Previous Conncil Action:
October 1, 2007- Mayor and Council approved CUP No. 07-03 to aJ]owthe Salvation Army to
construct a two story, 34,833 square foot, 124 bed mens shelter and
rehabilitation center on 8.8 acres at 363 South Doo]ittle Road.
October 15,2007- Mayor and Council approved Ordinance No. MC-1258 amending
Deve]oprnent Code Section ]9.08.020, Table 08.01(34) to allow Social
Service Centers as a conditional use in the IL Land Use District.
May 19, 2008 - Mayor and Council approved Reso]ution 2008-]51, an Agreement with the
Planning Center to provide an update of the City's Genera] Plan Housing
Element, including an analysis ofthe need for emergency homeless shelters.
Recommended motion:
That said Urgency Ordinance be adopted.
Phone:
Ward:
Source:
Finance:
5355
1st
Contact person: Henrv Emoeflo. Jr.. Sr. Deouty Citv Attornev
Supporting data attached: Staff Re.port
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount:
Council Notes:
-,.,_.
Agenda Item No. ;2 4
F.\EMPENO\Ordmances\EmergencyShelten;.RCA-Urgency Ord1nance - IO-16-08.......pd
STAFF REPORT
Council Meeting Date: October 20, 2008
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
Mayor and Common Council
James F. Penman, City Attorney
October 17, 2008
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING
SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE) SECTION
19.02.050, 19.08.020, TABLE 08.01, AND ADDING CHAPTER 19.10-E,
EMERGENCY SHELTER OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO PERMIT EMERGENCY
SHELTERS WITH ABUILDING PERMIT WITHIN AREAS OFTHE IL, INDUSTRIAL
LIGHT, LAND USE DISTRICT LYING SOUTH OF 300 STREET, EAST OF
WATERMAN AVENUE, AND NORTH OF CENTRAl AVENUE, DECLARING THE
URGENCY THEREOF, AND TAKING EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.
Background:
Senate Bill 2 (Chapter 633, Statutes of2007, effective January 1, 2008) has been adopted by
the State to encourage the location of "emergency shelters" i.e. emergency homeless shelters. Senate
Bill 2 works in two ways. First, it requires the amendment of the General Plan Housing Element.
The principal modification is the identification of a zone in which an emergency shelter can be
established as a permitted use without a conditional use permit or other discretionary permit, and
without conditions except as specified in the statute. Any draft housing element submitted to the
California State Department of Housing and Community Development after March 31, 2008 will
be required to comply with Senate Bill 2. Second, and presently, Senate Bill 2 prohibits the denial
of an application to establish an emergency shelter within any zone except upon the making of
specified findings based on substantial evidence in the record. The City currently permits the
establishment of emergency shelters in numerous commercial land use districts and in the
Residential Medium, Residential Medium High, and Residential High land use districts with a
conditional use permit. Emergency shelterslhomeless shelters have recently been permitted in the
IL, Industrial Light Land Use District, subject to a conditional use permit and the approval of the
Mayor and Common Council. The City cannot deny a conditional use permit for an emergency
shelter unless the proper findings can be made to deny that application pursuant to Senate Bill 2.
Under Senate Bill 2, one ground for denial of an application for an emergency shelter is that
the proposed project is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction's zoning ordinance and general plan
land use designation, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised housing element that is in substantial
compliance with the applicable portions of the statute. Siting an emergency shelter in other than the
districts described above, and without a conditional use permit is inconsistent with the City's
Development Code and General Plan. The City does not currently have a revised Housing Element.
F:',EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters Staff Report - IO-16..Q8.wpd
However, Senate Bill 2 provides that where a local government 1) has in place an ordinance that
identifies a zone or zones where emergency shelters are a permitted use without a conditional use
permit or other discretionary permit and, 2) are not subject to conditions for development that are
distinct from those for residential or commercial development in the same zone and, 3) otherwise
apply only such conditions as are specified in Senate Bill 2, the jurisdiction need not take additional
action to identify zones for emergency shelters.
The urgency ordinance presented to you for adoption puts in place an ordinance that meets
the requirements of Senate Bill 2 with respect to permitting approval of an emergency shelter without
a conditional use permit, and otherwise limiting any conditions on that approval to those authorized
by Senate Bill 2. This right of approval is limited to emergency shelters established in the areas of
the IL zone that are south onn! Street, east of Waterman A venue, and north of Central A venue. This
area includes the Salvation Army's new 124 bed homeless shelter under construction, the County's
Food Bank, and the offices of the County's Community Action Partnership. Once adopted, the
ordinance places the City in substantial compliance with Senate Bill 2. With such amendment, the
City can continue to enforce its regulations respecting the location of ernergency shelterslhomeless
shelters.
Adoption of an urgency ordinance of this type requires findings that there is a current and
immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare and that the grant ofland use approval
would result in that threat to public health, safety and welfare. The appropriate findings are set out
in the ordinance. The evidence in support of the findings is derived in part from the attached
Exhibits which are incorporated herein:
A. List of Emergency Shelters in the City of San Bernardino
B. Map and Aerial Photos of the area between 3n! Street and Central A venue and from
Waterman Avenue to SB Airport dated October 1, 2008
C. San Bernardino County 2007 Homeless Census and Survey Comprehensive Report
by Community Action Partnership
D. City of San Bernardino 2007/2008 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation and
Report (CAPER) by the City's Economic Development Agency
E. Memorandum of the California Department of Housing and Community
Development Division of Housing Policy Development, Re: Senate Bill 2, dated
May 7,2008
F. SB 2 Senate Bill Analysis, As Amended August 31, 2007
Financial Impact:
Undetermined
Recommendation:
Adopt the Urgency Ordinance
-
F:\EMPENOIOrdinances\EmergencyShelters Staff Report - IO-16-08.\\ol'd
I
-- 2
3
4
5
6
7
8.
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
.,- 28
II Adopted: October 20. 2008
. Effective: October 20. 2008
ORDINANCE NO. HC-1288
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING
SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE) SECTION 19.02.050,
19.08.020, TABLE 08.01, AND ADDING CHAPTER 19.10-E, EMERGENCY SHELTER
OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO PERMIT EMERGENCY SHELTERS WITH APPROVAL OF
A BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN AREAS OF THE IL, INDUSTRIAL LIGHT, LAND USE
DISTRICT LYING SOUTH OF 3RD STREET, EAST OF WATERMAN AVENUE AND
NORTH OF CENTRAL AVENUE, DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF, AND
TAKING EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.
The Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino do ordain as follows:
WHEREAS, Section 40(z) of the City Charter vests the Mayor and Common Council with
the power to make and enforce all laws and regulations with respect to municipal affairs, subject only
to the restrictions and limitations provided in the Charter or by State law; and
WHEREAS, Sections 31 and 121 of the City Charter provide for the adoption of an urgency
ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety if passed by a two
15 third's (2/3) vote of the Council; and
WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858 provides that for the purpose of protecting the
public safety, health, anawelfare, the legislative body of a city may adopt, without following the
procedures otherwise required prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance, as an urgency measure,
an interim ordinance, by a vote offourth-fifths (4/5) majority, prohibiting any uses that may be in
conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body,
planning commission or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study
within a reasonable time; and
WHEREAS, effective January 1, 2008, Chapter 633, Statutes of 2007 ("Senate Bill 2")
amends California Government Code Section 65583 to require local governments to amend their
General Plan Housing Element to identify a land use zone wherein emergency homeless shelters are
F :\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergcncyShelters. Urgency Ordinance. 1 0-16-QS.wpd
I
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
'-' 28
II MC-1288
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
a permitted use without a conditional use permit or other discretionary permit; and,
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 2 amends Government Code Section 65589.5(d) to provide that a
local agency shall not disapprove a land use application for an emergency shelter within any zone,
or conditionally approve a land use application for an emergency shelter within any zone in such
manner as to render the project infeasible, unless it makes written findings, based upon substantial
evidence in the record as to one of five (5) findings; and
WHEREAS, finding number five (5) under Government Code Section 65589.5(d) provides
the exception that:
The...emergency shelter is inconsistent with both the jurisdiction's zoning ordinance
and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan as
it existed on the date the application was deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has
adopted a revised housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in
substantial compliance with this article.
WHEREAS, finding number five (5) is subject to the furtherrequirement that the exception
is not available if the local agency has failed to identify a zone or zones wherein emergency shelters
are allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use permit or other discretionary permit; and
WHEREAS, through the adoption of an urgency ordinance amending the City of San
Bernardino Development Code which identifies a zone or zones where emergency shelters are
allowed as a permitted use without a conditional use or other discretionary permit, the City will be
in substantial compliance with the above described exception pursuant to California Government
Code Section 65583(a)(4)(D); and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 2 recognizes that legislative bodies, prior to the adoption of a
revised Housing Element in compliance with Senate Bill 2, may adopt a zoning ordinance which
identifies a zone or zones where emergency shelters are allowed as a permitted use without a
conditional use permit or other discretionary permit, and thus recognizes that the adoption of said
F :\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters.Urgency Ordinance 10-16-QS.wpd
2
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
"- 28
II MC-1288
ordinance may constitute substantial compliance with Senate Bill 2; and
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino Development Code currently includes emergency
homeless shelters in the category of social services with residential components, which are allowed
as a conditionally permitted use City-wide in several residential and commercial land use districts
and throughout the IL, Industrial Light land use district with such conditions that do not render such
projects infeasible for development; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino, in a variety of locations, currently has several
existing ernergency shelters which provide a total of 267 beds for the homeless, in addition to the
Salvation Army's 124-bed year round homeless shelter for men currently under construction within
the proposed Emergency Shelter Overlay Zone, at 363 South Doolittle Road, and another Salvation
Army I 50-bed homeless shelter for families and children at 925 W. 10th Street, which application
is currently under review (see list of service providers attached as Exhibit A to the Staff Report and
which is incorporated herein by reference); and
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2008, the City of San Bernardino retained a consultant, The
Planning Center, to update the General Plan Housing Element. The Planning Center has extensive
experience with housing element preparation and the certification review process with the California
Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The City's Request for Proposals
issued on January 2, 2008, specifically stated that an update of the City's General Plan Housing
Element in compliance with Senate Bill 2 was needed, among other requirements. The City's
contract with The Planning Center specifically listed the requirements of Senate Bi112 in the Scope
of Work, including an identification and analysis of the needs of homeless persons and families in
the City of San Bernardino as required by Senate Bill 2; and
WHEREAS, as identified on HCD's website as of October 17, 2008, no city out ofthe 24
F:\EMPENO\Ordinanccs\EmergencyShelters. Urgency Ordinance 10-16-08. wpd
3
26
'-
27
28
'I Me-1288
,
;
cities in the County of San Bernardino and no city out of the 24 cities in the County of Riverside has
2
3
4
5
6
adopted and received HCD certification of a revised Housing Element; and
WHEREAS, in spite of significant budget cuts and the loss of numerous employees, the City
of San Bernardino has made substantial progress in complying with the requirements of Senate Bill
2. The Preliminary Draft of the revised Housing Element is expected from The Planning Center in
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
November 2008; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council recognize that Senate Bill 2 requires that the City's
General Plan Housing Element must include land use zones which will provide sufficient
opportunities fornew emergency shelters to meet the need identified in the consultant's analysis; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council find that the existing emergency shelters, the emergency
shelters under construction, and the new emergency shelters proposed for construction, together with
opportunities for development of new emergency shelters in the residential and commercial land use
districts with the approval ofa Conditional Use Permit, and the adoption of this Urgency Ordinance,
which will permit new emergency shelters with approval of a building pennit within the IL,
Industrial Light, Land Use District lying South of3n1 Street, East of Waterman Avenue, and North
of Central Avenue (520.3 acres), will provide sufficient emergency shelters to meet the needs of the
homeless in the City of San Bernardino in the interim, until a revised Housing Element in full
compliance with Senate Bill 2 is adopted by the City.
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council make the following findings of a current and
immediate threat to the public health, safety and welfare as required by California Government Code
25
Section 65858:
I. The City of San Bernardino has sufficient emergency shelters, transitional and supportive
housing facilities in existence as "grandfathered" uses under prior versions of the
F:\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters. Urgency Ordinance 10-16-08. wpd
4
I
2
3
4
5 2.
6
7
8
9
10
11 3.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 4.
20
21
22
23
24 5.
25
26
27
- 28
MC-1288
Development Code. It also has numerous low-income housing developments and
govemment subsidized housing facilities which lower the threshold of the transition from
homelessness to sheltered.
As a consequence of the recent housing crisis and of previous housing crises, the City of San
Bernardino has experienced a history of housing affordability relative to other communities
which has facilitated the location in San Bernardino of sufficient emergency shelters,
transitional and supportive housing facilities that accommodate six (6) or fewer unrelated
adults and are not therefore subject to regulation by the City.
Because of the systemic hostility of other regional entities to the presence of homeless
persons, the City of San Bernardino is in the same posture as downtown Los Angeles in
terms of the disproportionate supply of shelter and service providers across the region that
has led to a disproportionate concentration of homeless persons in the City of San
Bernardino. There exists a confusion as to the needs of the San Bernardino homeless, the
regional homeless who migrate to San Bernardino, and the national homeless for whom San
Bernardino is a wann weather stop.
The concentration of homeless persons in the City of San Bernardino, including the mentally
ill and those suffering substance abuse, is detrimental to their rehabilitation in that they have
developed in some instances, and have become part of informal but enduring networks that
support their illness against the efforts of the local institutions for their rehabilitation.
The improper location of emergency shelters in all parts of the City of San Bernardino, at this
time of economic crisis in the housing market, will facilitate the entrenchment of land uses
in such manner as to further perpetuate the disproportionate distribution of services across
the region and will in fact serve to accelerate the processes Senate Bill 2 seeks to defeat.
F:\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters.Urgency Ordinance 10-16-08. wpd
5
25
26
27
- 28
Me-1288
NOW THEREFORE, THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
2
3
BERNARDINO DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
The Mayor and Common Council fmd that the above-stated Recitals are true
4
5
6
and hereby adopt and incorporate them herein.
Section 2.
San Bemardino Municipal Code (Development Code) Section 19.02.050,
7 Definitions, is hereby amended to add the definition of "Emergency Shelter" to read as follows:
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
19.02.050
DEFINITIONS
Emergency Shelter. As used in Government Code Section 65582, 65583, and 65589.5
(Senate BiIl-2), and as defmed in Health and Safety Code Section 50801(e), "emergency shelter"
means housing with minimal supportive services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of
six months or less by a homeless person. No individual or household may be denied emergency shelter
because of an inability to pay. Also referred to as a "homeless shelter", "homeless facility", or "social
service center with a residential component."
Section 3.
San Bernardino Municipal Code (Development Code) Section 19.08.020, Table
08.01, Industrial Districts List of Permitted Uses, is hereby amended to allow Emergency Shelters as
a permitted use, requiring a building permit in the Emergency Shelter Overlay District of the IL,
Industrial Light, Land Use District pursuant to Development Code Chapter 19.1O-E, see Exhibit A,
attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Section 4.
San Bernardino Municipal Code (Development Code) Chapter 19.IO-E.
24
Emergency Shelter Overlay District, is hereby added to read as shown on Exhibit B, attached hereto
and incorporated herein.
F:\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters.Urgency Ordinance 10- t 6-08. wpd
6
I
',..".., 2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
-
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
-- 28
Me-1288
Section 5.
Pursuant to the requirements of Senate BiJl2, the Mayor and Common Council
hereby direct the Development Services Department to implement a program to amend the City's
zoning ordinances to meet the requirements of Government Code Section 65583(a)( 4)(A) within one
year of the adoption of the City's revised Housing Element of the General Plan.
Section 6: This Ordinance is based upon the recitals and findings set forth above, and the
accompanying Staff Report and its attachments to this Ordinance, and is adopted pursuant to the
authority granted to the City of San Bernardino in Article II, Section 7 of the California Constitution,
and Sections 31, 40(z), and 121 of the Charter of the City of San Bernardino and California
Government Code Section 65858.
Section 7:
Pursuant to Sections 31 and 121 of the Charter of the City of San Bernardino
and Government Code Section 65858, this Ordinance shall take effect immediately. This Ordinance
shall be of no further force and effect 45 days from its date of adoption unless extended by action of
15
16
the Mayor and Common Council.
Section 8:
Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Mayor
and Common Council finds that this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) (the activity will not result in a direct or
reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity
is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of
Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the
environment, directly or indirectly.
Section 9:
Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause or
phrase in this Ordinance or any part thereof is for any reason held to be unconstitutional, invalid or
ineffective by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity or
F :\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters. Urgency Ordinance 10-16-08. wpd
7
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
_ 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-.
II
MC-1288
effectiveness of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or any part thereof. The Mayor and
Common Council hereby declares that it would have adopted each section irrespective of the fact
that anyone or more subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared
unconstitutional, invalid, or ineffective.
III
III
III
F:\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShelters.Urgency Ordinance 10.16-08. wpd
8
" Me-I288
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AMENDING
2 SAN BERNARDINO MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE) SECTION 19.02.050,
19.08.020, TABLE 08.01, AND ADDING CHAPTER 19.10-E, EMERGENCY SHELTER
3 OVERLAY DISTRICT, TO PERMIT EMERGENCY SHELTERS WITH APPROVAL OF
A BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN AREAS OF THE IL, INDUSTRIAL LIGHT, LAND USE
4 DISTRICT LYING SOUTH OF 3RD STREET, EAST OF WATERMAN AVENUE AND
5 NORTH OF CENTRAL A VENUE, DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF, AND
TAKING EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.
6
7
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was duly adopted by the Mayor and
8 Council of the City of San Bernardino at a it regular meeting thereof, held on the20th day of
9 October
, 2008, by the following vote, to wit:
20
21
22
23
24
25
Q~ , 1. h _ CJ...wJc..
Rachel Clark, City Clerk
The foregoing Ordinance is hereby approved this ;l / '~ay of Oc tober
,2008.
CKJ. MO
of San Bernardino
r
-
26 Approved as to form:
JAMES F. PENMAN
27 City Attorney
~
")
~
28
I
.\EMPENO\Ordinances\EmergencyShcltcrs.Urgency Ordinance 10.16-08. wpd
9
MC-1288
EXHIBIT A
CHAPTER 19.08
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS
19.08.020 PERMITTED, DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED AND
CONDITIONALLY PERMITnm USES
The following list represents those primary uses in the manufacturing/industrial zoning districts
which are Permitted (P), subject to a Development Permit (0) or a Conditional Use Pennit (C):
TABLE 08.01
INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS LIST OF PERMITTED USES
MC 888 12/6/93
LAND USE ACTMTY CH OIP IT.. m IE
1. Accessory structures/uses typically appurtenant to a D D D D D
principally permitted land use activity;
2. Agricultural Production-crops; D D
3. Agricultural Services; D D D
4. Assembling, cleaning, manufacturing, processing, D DJ D D
repairing or testing of products including automotive
related (except dismantling) and welding and excluding
explosives, conducted entirely within an enclosed structure
except for screened outdoor storage areas;
5. Assembling, cleaning, manufacturing, processing, repair of D D
products, research, storage, testing or wholesale land uses
(except explosives) with a portion of the operation (other
than storage) occurring outside of the enclosed structure:
A. Outside land uses in the CH and IH districts within
ISO feet of a residential land use district; C C
6. Concrete batch plants, processing of minerals and C C
aggregate and other related land uses, not including
extraction activities;
7. Crematory; D D D
8. Dwelling unit for a full-time security guard and family; D D D
9. Educational Service, including day care; 0 D 0 C
10. Emer2encv Shelters ...f'
II. EntertainmentlRecreational Uses:
~ A. Adult Entertainment C C
B. Auditoriums, Convention Halls and Theaters C C
f:\EMPENO\Ordinances\Emergeolo.") Shelten Induitrial Districts with E overla)" lo-16-08.doc
Me-l288
LAND USE ACTIVITY CD OIP IL IH IE
C. Miscellaneous Indoor; and D C D D
D. Miscellaneous Outdoor C C C C
12. Financial; D D
13. Fuel Dealers; C C D
14. Funeral ParlorsIMortuaries; D D D
IS. Gasoline Service Stations; D D D
16. HeliportslHelipads; C C C C C
17. Impound Vehicle Storage Yards (with or without towing) C C D
18. Membership organizations, including religious facilities, D D D
meeting halls, and fraternal lodges;
19. Mining/Extraction, including aggregate, coal, gas, metal C
and oil;
20. Mobile Home Dealers (sales and service); D D D
21. Offices/Services (administrative and professional); D D D
22. Outdoor contractor's, lumber, and rental yards and storage D D D D
areas for building supplies;
23. Outdoor Horticultural Nurseries; D D D D
24. Parking Lots; D D D D D
25. Personal Services; D D' D'
26. Pipelines (As defined by Section 19.20.030[12][E] or as C C C C C
superseded by State or Federal law);
27. Public utility uses, distribution and transmission D D D D D
substations and communication equipment structures;
28. PublishinglPrinting Plants; D D D D
29. Railroad Yards; D
30. Recycling Facilities; (In compliance with Section
19.06.030[2][P])
31. Research and Development, including laboratories; D D D D
32. Retail Commercial; D D' D'
33. Salvage and Wrecking (dismantling) yards; C C
34. Salvage and Wrecking Facilities (completely within an C C C
enclosed structure);
35. Social Service Centers; C'
36. Swap Meets; C C C C
37. Towing Services; D D D
38. TransportationlDistribution; D D D
39. Truck Stops; C C
40. Veterinary Services/ Animal Boarding; D D
41. Warehousing and Wholesaling, including self-service D D D
-.... mini-storage; and
F;\EMF'ENO\Ordinances\EmergenC)' Shelten Industrial Districts 'witb E overlay lo-l~8.doc
KC-1288
LAND USE ACTIVITY CD OIP II. m IE
42. Other
A. Antennas, Satellite and Vertical; D D D D D
B. Cleaning/Janitorial; D D D
C. Copy Centers/Postal Service CenterslBlueprinting; D D D
D. Equestrian Trails; P P P P P
E. F ences/W ails; D D D D D
F. PolicelFire Protection; D D D D D
G. Single-Family Residential P P P P P
(Existing - MC 823 3/2/92); and
H. Temporary Uses (Subject to [T] Temporary Use Pennit) T T T T T
'Except auto related.
~Pennitted in the Emer2encv Shelter Overlav District in the II. District OUTSuant to Chaoter 19.10-E._
, Incidental to a primary use, and contained within a primary structure (15% max.).
'Commission recommends to Council for final determination.
Other similar uses which the Director finds to fit within the purpose/intent of the zones, in compliance
with Section 19.02.070(3).
III
III
-
F:\E:\1PEN<J.ordinanccs\[rncrgcnq' Shelters Industrial Districts 'With E onda)" 1~]6-08.doc
KC-1288
EXHIBIT B
CHAPTER 19.10-E
EMERGENCY SHEL TER OVERLAY DISTRICT
19.10-E.OI0 PURPOSE
The ouroose of this chaoter is to provide for an area within the IL. Industrial Light land use
district. as referenced in Table 08.01 of Chapter 19.08. where emergency shelters. in accordance
with Government Code Section 65583. are allowed as a oennitted use without a conditional use
oermit. or other discretionarY permit. Recoenizinl!: the need for available and affordable sites for
establishment of emerl!:encv shelters uses outside the traditional locations in residential and
cornmercial districts. the Emerl!:encv Shelter Overlay District orovides an area within the IL
district for new emergency shelters to be intel!Tated with light industrial uses and existinl!: social
services in the area. The oumose of the desil!Ilated boundaries (area of aJl1llicabilitv) is to
maximize the ootential for coooeration and svnerl!:V of emergency shelters and social services in
the Emerl!:encv Shelter Overlav District.
19.10-E.020 AREA OF APPLICAIULITY
The Emerl!:encv Shelter Overlav District shall aoolv to the IL. Industrial Lil!:ht land use district
lYing east of Waterman Avenue. south of 3rd Street and north of Central Avenue. All land use
rel!:ulations and develooment standards for industrial uses in theIL District as soecified in Chaoter
19.08 shall remain in effect. The effect of the Emerl!:encv Shelter Overlav District shall be to
derme the area of aoolicability where emerl!:encv shelters shall also be permitted with the aporoval
of a buildinl!: oennit. and to add I!:eneral and soecific development standards for emerl!:encv
shelters within the IL land use district.
19.10-E.030 GENERAL PROVISIONS
I. Emerl!:encv shelters located within the Emerl!:encv Shelter Overlav District shall be
develooed and ooerated accordinl!: to the land use rel!:Ulations. development standards and
desil!:ll l!:Uidelines for the IL District in this Chapter 19.10-E and in Chapter 19.08
Industrial Districts.
2. Emergencv shelters shall be permitted with the aooroval of a building permit within the
Emerl!:encv Shelter Overlav District as specified in Table 08.01 in Chapter 19.08.
F:\E~PENO\Ordin.nteS\EmergeneyShelten Chap 19.1o..E . t()"l~.doc
Me-I288
19.10-E.040 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
I. The followinl! standards shall mnlv to the develonment of SDecific emerl!encv shelters
within the Emerl!encv Shelter Overlav District:
A. EMERGENCY SHELTERS
Emerl!encv shelters. nrovidinl! temnorarv housinl! and suvport services to homeless
nersons. shall be nermitted in the Emerl!encv Shelter Overlav District of the n...
Industrial Light land use district. subiect to the staDrlards in this Section. As social
services with residential components. emergency shelters are also conditionallv
nermitted in several residential and commercial land use districts and throughout the
n... Industrial Lil!ht land use district. The followinl! standards shall be required for
develonment or establishment of emergency shelters in the Em~encv Shelter
Overlav District:
(!) The maximum resident capacity shall be 50:
(2) The maximum lemrth ofstav shall be 6 months:
(3) The minimum site area shall be one acre:
(4) The site shall be located no more than 1.000 feet from a public transit ston:
(5) No emergency shelter shall be established on any site less than 500 feet from any
existinl! sinl!le-familv residence. K-12 school. nark. lieuor store or other business
with an Alcoholic Beverage Control license to sell alcohol for off-site
consumntion. or adult business per Section 19.06.030 (2)( A)( 1 ):
(6) No emerl!encv shelter shall be established on any site less than 300 feet from the
site of another emergency shelter:
(7) Off-street narking shall be nrovided at a ratio of one space ner 1.000 seuare feet of
gross floor area. or one space for each employee on the larl!est shift plus one space
for each agency vehicle nlus three visitor spaces. whichever is l!1'eater:
(8) Fencing and exterior lil!htinl! conforminl! to the develovment standards of Chapter
19.20 shall be required to ensure the security of site residents:
(9) A security and manal!ement nlan shall be reeuired to demonstrate adeauate nlans
and capability to onerate the emerl!encv shelter in a safe and effective manner.
includinl! comnlete descriptions of the following:
(a) Fencing. lightinl!. video cameras. and any other nhvsical imnrovements
intended to provide or enhance security for residents and staff:
F:\EMPE~O\Ordin.nc:a\EmUlencyShdten Chap 19.16-[ - 10-t6-08.doc
HC-l288
(b) Stamm! DIms. includim! the aualifications and resoonsibilities of all staff
members and the number and oositions of emolovees on each shift:
(c) Procedures and Dolicies for screenim! of ootential residents to identi(y
individuals who should be referred to medical facilities. residential care
facilities. other service a!!encies or law enforcement:
(d) Plans and Dolicies for dailv ooerations and supervision of residents:
(e) Suooort services to be offered to residents. includin!! life skills training.
counselin!!. referral to other service a!!encies and iob olacement assistance:
(f) Plans to coordinate services of the facility with other homeless service
Droviders in San Bernardino County. to imorove the effectiveness of the
network of a!!encies servin!! the homeless. countywide.
-
F:IEMPENOIOrdin.nceslE........cyShellen Ch.p 19.I~E .1~1~
__} SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION
J
-)
CASE:
AGENDA ITEM:
HEARING DATE:
WARD:
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21
8
September 16, 2008
I
OWNERS:
Faith Temple AP Ministries
840 N. Sierra Way
San Bernardino. CA 92401
909.215.8683
ARCHITECT:
Doug Schultz
570 E. LaCadena Dr.
Riverside, CA 92507
951.686.3344
APPLICANT:
Garnett Newcombe
Human Potential Consultants. LLC
500 E. Carson Plaza, Dr., No. 127
Carson, CA 90746
310.756.1560
.REQUESTILOCATlON:
A request to convert an existing 6,747 square foot church building into a 56-bed homeless shelter
with related support facilities and office space. The project site is located at 840 North Siena
Way, in the RM, Residential Medium Land use district.
CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS:
None
ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS:
o Not Applicable
Iil Potentially Exempt from CEQA, ~15301- Existing Facilities
o No Significant Effects
o Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation MonitoringlReporting Program
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
o Approval
o Conditions
Iil Denial
o Continuance to:
....l
)
'=-')
CUP No. 08.2/
September /6. 2008
Page 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposal is a request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit under the authority of
Development Code S 19.36.050 and S 19.04.020 Table 04.01(1)(1) to establish a 56-bed homeless
shelter. Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 proposes to convert an existing 6,747 sq. ft. church
building into an adult homeless resource center with 56 beds. a kitchen, dining room, common
area, showers, restrooms and offices. The project site is located at 840 North Sierra Way, on the
west side of Sierra Way, approximately 150 feet north of 8th Street in the RM, Residential
Medium land use district ~Attachments A & B).
The applicant proposes a homeless facility that would accommodate homeless men and women,
aged 18 - 59. The proposed interior improvements would include dormitory style bunk beds with
48 beds for men in an area of 1,847 square feet and 8 beds forwomen in an area of350 square
feet. Individual lockers would be provided for storage of personal belongings in the men's area
The remaining floor space would be converted into common living areas, administrative, and
support service spaces. Although the site plan does not show that perimeter fencing would be
installed, the applicant has stated that the proposed facility would be gated, with wrought iron
security fencing, 6 feet in height.
Potential residents would be screened to select only candidates that could benefit from intensive
training in a drug-free environment. The enrichment program would include career readiness
training and independent living skills. Residents would be supervised at all times, and would not
be permitted to bring personal vehicles to the site. The maximum stay would be 6 months. The
proposed facility would be a 24-hour operation with 16 employees, working in three shifts.
Business hours would be Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. The applicant's
detailed program description is attached (Attachment C).
SETTING/SITE CHARACTERISTICS
The project site consists of two parcels, approximately 1/2 acre in total area,. and is developed
with an existing 6,747 square foot church. Abutting the site to the west, north, and south are
residential properties in the RM, Residential Medium land use district. Directly across Sierra
Way to the east, in the RMH, Residential Medium High land use district, there are single-family
residences facing the site. Pioneer Memorial Cemetery is also located to the east in the PF,
Public Facility land use district. Approximately ISO feet to the south, at the southwest comer of
Sierra Way and 8th Street is a site designated by the San Bernardino City Unified School District
for construction of a new elementary school. Construction is planned to begin in 20 II.
BACKGROUND
The DevelopmentlEnvironmental Review Committee (DIERC) first reviewed this proposal on
June 19, 2008. The DIERC expressed concerns about potential incompatibility of the proposed
facility with the surrounding neighborhood. The Police Department expressed strong concerns
about security and management of the facility and its potential impacts on the surrounding
neighborhood, including the future elementary school. The project summary provided with the
application materials was not adequate to address the concerns of the Police Department.
.->
~)
)
'.-..
CUP.\o ()8~:.'
Scprcrnha J I), 2(j()8
Page 3
After the initial review and discussion with the D/ERC, the applicant indicated a willingness to
work with local non-profit social service agencies to plan for coordination of services and
potentially to seek a more suitable site. The applicant also stated that although initially proposed
as a men's facility. the project description and facility plans would be modified to accommodate
homeless women as well. Pending plan revisions and potential selection of an alternative site, the
project vvas continued for revisions. On July 1,2008, the applicant submitted rev'ised plans and a
revised project description and requested that Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 be moved
forward for consideration by the Planning Commission. On July 31,2008, the D/ERC reviewed
tile reVised plans and moved the item to the PlaIU1ing ConU1Jission for a public heai'ing.
There are several non-profit social service agencies in the City of San Bernardino now,
coordinating their services to provide a safety net and a network of resources for assistance and
rehabilitation of homeless individuals. A representative of this coalition attended the first D/ERC
meeting and invited the applicant to join with the other service providers to participate in this
network. The applicant was willing to cooperate, but also stated that Human Potential
Consultants is a for-profit business that would have different operating procedures.
On August 13, 2008, staff from the Planning Division and two representatives from the Police
Department met with the applicant. The Police Department asked questions of the applicant on
the proposed security plan, resident screening criteria, staffing and management. There was a
lengthy discussion of the proposed facility and its potential impact of increased demand for
Police Department services. On September 10, 2008, the Police Department submitted written
comments to state concerns about compatibility of the proposed facility with the surrounding
neighborhood and potential impacts of the project on public safety (Attachment Dj.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
The project is potentially exempt from CEQA under 915301, as a minor alternation to an existing
facility. This exemption is only applicable if approval of the project would clearly not result in
potentially significant environmental impacts. The physical impacts of converting the existing
structure would be very minimal, but the proposed use of the building might create a significant
land use conflict. In that case, the use would not be consistent with the General Plan and would
not qualify for exemption from CEQA due to the potential significance ofland use impacts.
ANALYSIS
Staff has serious concerns about the compatibility of the proposed project with the surrounding
neighborhood. At the D/ERC meetings, the applicant 'explained some of the location criteria
utilized to select the site. The open spaces of Seccombe Lake Recreation Area and Pioneer
Cemetery and the underutilized and vacant commercial properties to the south attracted the
applicant to the subject neighborhood, due to the limited potential for land use conflicts with a
homeless facility. Unfortunately, the applicant was unaware of the new development projects and
redevelopment activities planned for the area that will change current conditions and revitalize
the neighborhood in a way that will probably conflict with a 56-bed homeless facility.
-)
')
')
CLP \u I.iS,.~.
Sl'prL'llzhL''- if; ~1,1!1,'
Pagl' .J
Lincoln II Elementarv School: A new elementary school site is planned only 150 feet south of
the proposed project site, at the southwest comer of Sierra Way and 8th Street. The ground-
breaking for the future elementary school is scheduled for October of 2009. with a projected
constmction schedule of 16 - 18 months. The planned opening date for the school is August
2011. Construction of the new school is required to meet the needs of a growing student
population in the surrounding area. The San Bernardino City Unified School District submitted a
comment letter (Attachment E) that acknowledges the need to serve the homeless population and
does not recommend approval or denial of the project.
Planning staff also recognizes the critical need for assistance for the homeless population.
However, in this case the safety concerns arising from elementary school children walking past
the proposed project site on a daily basis on the way to school and back home again constitute a
potentially serious land use conflict. Daily "foot-traffic" by neighborhood children who mayor
may not be accompanied by adults would create a potential for negative interaction and adverse
impacts on public safety.
Seccombe Lake Residential Village: In recent years, the Economic Development Agency has
been collaborating with private sector partners to create a plan to revitalize the Seccombe Lake
area, including development of a new residential component of the project area, along 7th Street,
between Sierra Way and Waterman Avenue. This redevelopment project will feature distinctive
new residential units and a 52,000 square foot retail village. Significant enhancements to the
Seccombe Lake recreation area are also planned. Congregation of homeless individuals tends to
cause adverse effects such as increased loitering, vandalism, blight, noise, tresspassing, crime,
and property maintenance problems that already exist in the area. Introduction of a new homeless
resource center in the neighborhood would tend to attract more transients to the area. Also, the
proposed 6-foot wrought iron enclosure of the site would project a lock-down appearance that
would not be attractive to potential new residents of the Village.
The Police Department participated in the technical review of the project and has expressed
strong concerns about the potential impact the proposed facility would have on Police
Department resources in the service area. There is currently a high concentration of parolees in
the subject area. and other conditions that already create challenges for the Police Department to
patrol and protect the area surrounding the project site. Based on experience with similar existing
facilities in the City, the Police Department does not recommend approval of a 56-bed homeless
facility at the proposed location. Please see Attachment D for details.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The proposed use is conditional(v permitted within the subject land use district and complies
with applicable provisions of the Deve/opment Code. bllt the project may impair the integrity
and character of the subject land lIse district.
A homeless shelter is permitted in the RM, Residential Medium land use district, subject to
approval of a Conditional Use Permit. As discussed in the Analysis section of the staff report,
there is a high likelihood that the proposed homeless facility would impair the integrity and
J
,)
"'
J
CUP No. 01<-2/
September J 6. 2008
Page 5
character of the surrounding residential neighborhood where the project is proposed. In addition
to the potential security issues surrounding activities of the residents, the institutional nature of
the 56-bed 24-hour facility would not be compatible with typical dark, quiet evening hours in a
residential neighborhood. The proposed 56-bed homeless facility with 16 employees working on
3 shifts would disturb the existing peace and harmony of the surrounding residential
neighborhood in the RM. Residential Medium land use district, especially for the single-family
residences facing the facility.
2. The proposed use is not consistent with the General Plan.
Establishment of the proposed use at the proposed location would not be consistent with Goal 2.2
of the General Plan, which requires promotion of "development that integrates with and
minimizes impacts on surrounding land uses." Also, Policy 2.2.10 states "the protection of the
quality of life shall take precedence during the review of new projects. Accordingly, the City
shall utilize its discretion to deny or require mitigation of projects that result in impacts that
outweigh benefits to the public." These two provisions of the General Plan emphasize the
importance of land use compatibility and protection of the quality of life in existing
neighborhoods. The proposed 56-bed homeless facility would require 24-bour staffing and would
generate increased activity from residents, visitors, and social service staff at all hours. The
intensified activity level proposed for the project site would be a nuisance to adjacent residents
and would degrade the quality of life in the existing neighborhood. These conflicts indicate
inconsistency of the proposed project with the General Plan.
3. Approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use may not comply with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 19.20.030(6) of the
Development Code.
The review of this project has complied with the requirements of Development Code
S 19.20.030(6). The project would utilize an existing structure in an urbanized area Therefore, it
would potentially be exempt from CEQA under Section 15301, for minor alterations to existing
facilities. However, if the project is determined to conflict with the General Plan, then there
would be a potential land use impact requiring further environmental analysis and possibly
mitigation measures to comply with CEQA.
4. There will be no potentially significant negative impacts upon environmental quality and
natural resources that could not be properly mitigated and monitored.
No significant physical impacts to the project site are anticipated. The site is an eXlstmg
developed religious facility, located in an urbanized area. Re-use of the existing building would
not have a significant effect on the natural environment or natural resources. However,
introduction of 56 individuals who are likely to have behavioral problems into the existing
residential neighborhood surrounding the project site could result in significant negative impacts
on the quality of the living environment in the neighborhood.
-:)
-)
J
CUP No. 08-~1
September 16. 2008
Page 6
5. The location. size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed use are compatible
with the existing and future land uses within the general area in which the proposed use is to
be located and will not create significant noise, traffic or other conditions or situations that
may be objectionable or detrimental to other permitted uses in the vicinity or adverse to the
public interest. health. safety. convenience, or welfare of the City.
The proposed project site presents several issues of land use compatibility that would affect the
quality of life in the surrounding residential neighborhood. The 24-hour operating characteristics
of the proposed use would not be compatible with existing and future residential land uses that
generally enjoy quiet at night. The proposed project requires nighttime activity that would
introduce objectionable nuisances of traffic, noise and light in the neighborhood. The project also
presents potential security issues for children at play in the Seccombe Lake recreation area or for
children walking to and from the future Lincoln II Elementary School, only 150 feet from the
project site. These nuisance effects of the project and potential security problems would be
adverse to the public interest, health, safety, convenience and welfare of the City.
6. The subject site is not physically suitable for the proposed type and density/intensity of use.
As discussed in the other findings addressed in this staff report, the intensity of a 56-bed
homeless facility is likely to have negative impacts on the surrounding residential neighborhood.
The 6,747 sq. ft. building on approximately Y, acre is not much larger than the typical single-
family residential properties in the area. Based on the experience of the Police Department with
similar facilities, the site does not have adequate area or other provisions necessary to contain
and avoid potential negative impacts of the project on the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore,
the site is not physically suitable for operation of a 56-bed homeless facility.
7. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities, but the
potential increased demand of the prop()sed project on public services may be detrimental to
public health and safety.
Adequate provisions for public access and public utilities exist at the project site. All necessary
urban services exist in the area, and most services are available to serve the site adequately.
However, as stated in the Police Department memo in Attachment D, the proposed project may
introduce land use conflicts and security problems to the existing neighborhood, which would be
detrimental to public health and safety.
CONCLUSION
The proposed project could provide a valuable service to people in need, but the potentially
significant land use conflicts and public safety impacts of operating the proposed use at the
proposed location outweigh the potential benefits. Due to the potential adverse impacts of the
project on the surrounding neighborhood, as discussed in this staff report, the project does not
satisfy all Findings of Fact required for approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21.
-J
..)
.J
l.~~ ':~ Yo, {,,~'_~,
.
Sl!ptL'mna f f,. :f){j,'\
Page ..
RECO:\I:\IE1\'DA nO1\'
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny Conditional Use Permit ~o. 08-21 based
on the Findings of Fact contained in the Staff Report.
Respectfully Submitted.
r~(~
Valerie C. Ross
Director of Development Services
~-
Aron LIang
Senior Planner
Attachment A Location Map
Attachment B Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elevations
Attachment C Human Potential Consultants, LLC Business Plan
Attachment D Police Department Memorandum
Attachment E Letter from San Bernardino City Unified School District
Attachment F Letter of Opposition From Jesses and Rebecca Gutierrez
J
...)
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO
LOCATION MAP
PLANNING DIVISION
HEARING DATE: 09/16/2008
PROJECT: CUP 08-21
NORTH
\
0-' -r-.' -.
:;';',._7.~,_~'l...'.A"""--- - -- ~ ,.. i '--'"i
"oJ: - :
ij
if)
~
ill
~j
/'oJ
;tj
>
I
- 6-M'~.
) -,
- (C) City of San Bernardino .
....'!!>... "':oft'!~,J.Il.*"
Oc=:J42ft
ATTACHMENT S
~
m
VI
-i
CIO
-i
J:
VI
-i
;ll
m
Uill; ~ ~
jil1!p
"I ~, ~
I,' ~,f>-
1,1 ~ I
IlnUI IJIII ~ I
1'..1111&1"" 2 I
I""'" a' I Z
='Ililil; I ~
P ;;1 1 n
I nil . I ~
----~---
I~
'I!~i
Z!
)
, ,
I
t
i I
, ,
I I
, : !mh ilU,i't"lii "
'~:Iu I ~ ;11 ~
~~IJ I dim! ~
'~UI 11991U! Q
"R I "s'h "'
ihl . illll"l "
~; q d
, - I II I
I I i at i
. . I
. . I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I i
I
II
I !
i I
, I
II
~
..".
"
~
.
.
)> )
I Z
-
-
(0 ,,'.,'
... . .
. . . . .' ...........
................ .
, . . . . ." .........,.
..... ..,........
.,...,., .........
..... ...........
.... . ..........
,. ... ....
..... ............
. '.1. ..I..
~., 1
..
~
"
...
II
"
I : ~
I ~'."
I
,f>-
.
,I .~
-I
I.
II --
...
@ . ...--...
~
i !I
II
~
..
i~
~
...
~
I'F.
1.,,"
II: . ".
..'1 <>
!W24'lMI'v!
<>
V'.,.
---
:II. .
'l.~~'
.~'.'.'."
,..
--
It
N SIERRA WAY- - -It-
s
I
,
J
------1E----
HOMELESS FACIUTY
SAN BERNARDINO
Ii~ I"""
. - I'
. . ACS~.- ,
@ .....::..':i.:...".. III
.?O~",,__-,""_"G" !Il
---
. CM1)__ _C_)_J"7" II
-
_1'OlDIIM. CDfM1MllI
_tc.-..~.
....ll....' Ull:m'
SNlllJlMllDllD,.CAIZ410 CMIIlII,CAII7.
)
)
')
-"
-
~
o
o
~
~
>
z
_"
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
t$
,I il ~
(5 .8
_uo
CIllLD.........
!I
n
I
I
...
.. l.oacClll-l
:I>
I
I
.
"
o
o
.
.
~
il.lEA- =lDIIL1_
I _I.CMDt"-"Bla
...._., '-':11'
lSMl_g,... fMIIIl.CAIIHI
HOMELESS FACIUTY
SAN BERNARDINO
i;z;l
Oft
In
-l
~
o
o
l:
Oft
z
>
~
C\
Oft
l:
Oft
Z
-l
~
>
Z
0000
l
!li11j!l!iI
IIp1ill
= l'llhl
I hl;1
I I Ilfl
'I I
..
..
i.~ pre I -~- 101;01
&. ~ ~~~~_~ I
m. 'IlA. i D.u":~~..,...ulta II,
'. 1.70&.1.41___......_... !II
I --- I
(...) -- ~- (-) _n. I
~
.,--J;
""'.
~;J>" ~.' ':.
-
.Ii .~
.~_. ',-.
. "',
"" :ti
, ..".,.....
~-:l~ .-;! ... ~~
!
,
,
/
/
...->
-~
../#~ .
.,
4.
.... ~ )~- ,
'"
~. . ~
~Jl~~i.'~ ur: :;~.;.
..\..It ~'\'';' '.....:". f"'- J. .tl ,":''' .,
~5Ji,;': .' ".~;~~~k:-' -r.. .
1:Jf'i'~'~ " .!~.ft~~. '.. ' ." ,
, ~~. . . J;lf.:~ ~"'t.;: ,_..... -. <l;,,,~r--,
':a . ~:,,! ,l; ~ '1~'j.I>.>:'~
,J~ . ,'~ ":: .~ ". :. ';. .\' . ,.~
'", "-:~ . '<.:,;:~\ \
~~
'~ ~'"
,,4'
...'Ii
'-~~
.J
="
..J;..
..;;.
',<.,
M
;,;:"
~~:~ .",.:. ..
~!l;.il.<'~ ~.t-
:~,;,~~r~~} f
~~~ J~;~!*~f~-',~:"
.(;. .,....;, _...~;.'!"~,~,..,:;
.~l'~~iu;v~
~\~~l'-':'~_^':f '.-;t-.~'~,-- -t.,::~
~-,,&-.,:;~~~--'=""-'
:c-,?;""":;-" "'-}~-f'
-s
. "'I<~
-}
'1
ATTACHMENT C
HUMAN
POTENTIAL
CONSULTANTS
"Your Link to a Better Future"
.lUll..' ; l). :I)!);-.)
De\dopmenta\ Services Department
300 :\orth "D" Street
San Banardino. C\ 9~..18-000 I
S\ 'BJECT:
Background on Human Potential Consultants and Analysis of the
Proposed Adult Homeless and Resource Center
ABOlT lS
-)
Eqahlished in 1997. Iluman Potential Consultants. LLC I HPC I is certi Ikd hy the I' S,
Small Business ..\dI11ini,trmion as a Small Disad\antaged l3usiness and Stall.inn: the
State c)f Cali fC1I'nia Small Business and Los Angeles County Small Business Enterprisl'.
Headyuarlers in Carsun, CA. HPC was originally founded as an "alternati\e rt'SIHln:e" t,'r
the One-Step Centers throughout Los Angeles County. As a result uf an impec,..hk
reputation throughollt the nation for building local economies through long-term .i"hs
within the ccmlmunities where their respective proje\;(s are located. I-IPC hegailt" ,'~pan,1
Int" the realm "f managing workforce centered projects and outplacement s~nlCes fix
displaced employee,,: Cldministrati\e support stafting sen ices: and adult edm;atiunal and
,)ecupational residential centers.
SDL\IARY DESCRIPTIO:\" OF PROGRAM
The proposed Adult Humeless and Resource Center should nllt be cllnfuscd \\ ith a drug
treatment or drug rehabilitation center. On the other hand. the .\dult Homeless and
Resuun;e Center is a residential training and employmentllppc'rtunit\ that addres,es the
multiple harriers of employment e~pericnccd by adults. \\ho lack cdllcatll1l1 ,md
\{l~~IlIPl1al skill..;
fll'l",. \dult I hlI11ckss and Re,,'urcc Centcr shall pl'l"'idc,, c"mpr,'hcllsi\ c ,'arccr
J~\\.:jOplll~IH ~~n.ic....:, to r~siJt:nb induJing ~h.:~Ii.kmil.'. s'h..:ial and ind....p....lldI.:IH li\ ing
skills. (ar!':~r r\"';h.lill~SS training and oth~r ~lIppOl:ti\...., :'\....ryi(t:s. Th~ unique amalgamati\lI1:"l
..J
500 Uarson Plaza Or;,.. 5uite 127 . Carson, CA 90746 . III 10) 756.1560 . EI31O)756.1561 . info@hpcemploymenl.org
J
HPC ,\nal:si:-. l)fl!lc- Prnpo~~d Adult HOIl1~I~ss &. R~sourc~ C~nler
Page: :!
6 19 2u08
of car~er oriented s~nices arc tailored to each resident's necd: thc skillmi~ture shall
allo\\ each resident to maintain a job.
The C \..'nk!' ~h~!!! rrr~\'ide th~ follo\\'ing sen'ices in a drug free t.'!nironment:
. Social. cmployability and liYing skills training:
. Career counseling and other support services. which are tailored to each resident's
need:
. Academic enrichment. which prepares residents for long-term sustainability In
today's labor market.
The Center shall provide care and supervision to adults (18 - 59 years of age) on a long-
term basis (up to 6 months un continual residency).
ADL L T HOMELESS AND RESOURCE CENTER OPERA no:\s
e)
The Center will consist of 16 total employees of whom six or seven will be case
managers and/or administrative employees working the usual Monday - Friday 8:00 am
to 5:1l0 pm workday, The remaining nine employees will work three shitis a day to
SUPP0l1 the 24-hour operation.
SECURITY
Access to the lobby will be tightly monitored and controlled by staff. An intercom with
an enunciator shall be provided to notify staff that someone is waiting,
The dormitory areas will be constantly monitorede E~terior door alarms \\ illbe provided
to prc\ent the entrance and e~it of anyone.
Technologically advanced security cameras shall monitor the entire e~terior parameters:
additional lighting will illuminate the exterioL
I"TAKE. REGISTRA nON AND El\ROLLMDiT
The number of residents shall not exceed 56 at any line timc and all residents \\ ill be
dropped-off and picked-up by means ofHPCs transportation (.kpartm~nt.:--Io residents
shall be permitted to arrive or depart via their own \ehicle.
The Center shall perform a comprehensive intake evaluation on all aspiring residents. If a
resident is not deemed prepared for intensive academic enridltl1ent. thcy shall discontinue
their participation.
J
..;)
HPC ..\l1al~sis l1flh~ Prop\ls~d Adult Hom~lt:ss & Rc:sourcr;:' C~nler
Pag( ~
6 192008
DORMITORY
TABLE I
Dormiton Contiuuration,
Individuals per room Sq.FI per
Individual
2 people In a room 50 70
3 people In a room 30 90
4 people in a room (dormitory style) 27.5 110
Typical living quarters will provide adequate number of functional. clean. full service
bathrooms such as: toilets/urinals (1: I 0); sinks (1: 10) and showers (I :20). A recreational
room for studying. writing. reading and viewing television shall be provided.
Accessible living quarters shall be provided to persons with a disability in accordance
with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
KITCHE:\/DINING
)
A central kitchen and dinning facility will provide meals and snacks for residents. The
Jining room will be til!'llisheJ with round tables intended to encourage l'lI11ily-style eating
and interactions.
,,)
GARNET""'" NE'v"'::JMBE. CE::
HUMAN POTENTIAL CONSULTANTS, LLC
500 E. Carson Plaza Drive, Suite 127
'\ Carson, CA 90746
..JT 310.756.1560
, F.310.756.1562
www.hpcemployment.org
Summary description of program for the HPC's project, per Mr. Lian9s Request,
Listed below are the additional details/clarifications on the Program.
1. Is there a "wake up call" and a "sleep time" for all 56 residents? Yes.
Table 1. 'Wake up call" and "Sleep" Schedule
I DAILY SCHEDULE
r \10NDA Y .FRIDA Y I SATURDAY SUNDAY
I 6:00 A.\1. - ! 8:00 A.\1. - 8:00 A.M.-
! Wake up I Wake up Wake un
! 10:30 P.\1, - 112:30 P.M,- 12:30 P.M.-
! Lights Our i Lights Out I Lights Out ,
2. Provide a typical daily supervision schedule/activity for a resident
from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (SEE TABLES 2 AND 3)
)
Table 2. Typical Supervision Schedule 6 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Time of Day Case Managers Resident Assistants Administration
1 Shift 1st Shift I 2" Shift 3" Shift '1" Shift .
6:00 A.M. , 3 I 3
7:00 A.M. 3 1
8:00 A.M. 5 3 1
9:00 A.M. 5 3 I 1
10:00 A.M. 5 3 1
II:OOA.M. 5 3 1
12:00 P,M. 5 3 , 1
I:OOP,M. 5 I 3 1 1
2:00 P.M. 5 ! 3 I 1
3:00 P.M. 5 3 I 1
! Shift Chan~e
4:00 P.M. 5 13 1
5:00 P.M. 5 13 1
6:00 P.M. 13
Weekday Daily Supervision Staff Schedule
")
-
...)
J
<J
Table 3. Typical Activity Schedule for Residents
DAILY SCHEDULE
, SA TL 1li)A Y
I 8:00 A.M. - Wake up
18:30. Breakfast
9:30. Resident Meeting
10.1 1:30 . Prograllunmg
112:00 P. M. - Lunch
II 1 :00.3:00. Visiting
4:00. Reflection
I 5 :00 . Dinner
I 6:00 .Recreation
7:00.9:00 -Group Meetings
8:00. Snack
12 :30 - Lights out.
~O"DA Y .FRIDA Y
I 6:00 A.M. - Wake up
I 7:00 . Breakfast
I 8:00 - Resident Meeting
8:30-11 :30 .Programmmg
: 12:00 PM. . Lunch
; 1: 00-4: 00 . Programming
: 4:00 . Reflection
5:00 . Dmner
16:00 -Recreation
7:00.9:00 - Group Meetings
; 8:00 . Snack
I 10:30 . Lights out
I 12:30 A.M (FRIDAY)
. SCXDAY
8:00 A.M. - Wake up
8:30 - Breakfast
9:30 -Resident Meeting
I 10-11:30. Programnung
112:00 P.M. Lunch
I 1:00-3 :00 - Visiting
4:00 -Reflection
i 5:UO -Dinner
16:00 -Recreation
7:00-9:00 - Group Meetings
, 8:00 - Snack
12:30. Lights out
3. Would the Program provide meal times for breakfast, lunch and dinner?
Provide times for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Yes. (See table below)
Table 4. Meal Schedule
MEAL SCHEDULE
~ONDA Y .FRIDA 'I' SATURDAY SUNDAY
6:00 A. M. - Breakfast 8:30 A. M. - Breakfast 8:30 A. M. . Breakfast
12:00 P.~ - Noon Lunch 12:00 P.M. - Noon Lunch 12:00 P.M. - Noon Lunch
I 5:00 P.M. Dinner 5:00 P.M - Dinner 5:00 P.M - Dinner
I 8:00 P.M. Snack 8:00 P.M - Snack 8:00 P.M - Snack
4. Can a resident have a visitor? Yes. (See table below)
Table 4. Visitor Schedule
VISITOR SCHEDULE
MOl\'DAY .FRIDA 'I' SATURDAY TSUNDAY
NO VISITORS 1:00 - 3:00 P.M. 1 :00-300 P.M.
5. Can a resident leave the premises? How?
Yes. Residents will have a Day Schedule that details the purpose for leaving the
premises for DMV appointments, Doctor Visits, additional vocational training,
Work related Activities, Community Resources, etc. Each of these activities are
within each residents customized plan derived from their assessments.
2
-J
6. HPC's transportation department-
A) How many vehi~les available to service all 56 residents?
HPC has 3 vans available to service all 56 residents.
B) Is there a designated emergency vehicle?
No. In those instances of an emergency, HPC's policy is to call 911
C) Would the vehicles be parked on the project site?
One Vehicle will be parked during the day on the project site.
7. Provide detail work hours for the three shifts to support the 24-hour
operation. Starting & ending hours per shift?
Table 2. Detail Work Hours for 3 Shifts to support the 24-hour Operation.
Weekday Daily Supervision Staff Schedule
Time of Dav ! Case ~Ianagers I Resident Assistants I Administrative
J
. :
, Staff
! I Shift 1st Shift 2"' Shift 3" Shift I" Shift
6:00 A.M. : 3 3
7:00 A.M. , 3
, 8:00 A.M. 5 3 1
! 9:00 A.M. 5 3 1
I 10:00 A.M. 5 3 1
II:OOA.M. 5 3 1
i 12:00 P,M, 5 3 1
I:OOP.M, 5 3 1
I 2:00P.M. 5 3 I
, 3:00 P.M. 5 3 1
Shift Chan..
4:00 P.M. 5 3 1
5:00 P.M, . 5 . 3 1
6:00 P.M 3
7:00 P.M. 3
: 8:00 P.M. 3
i 9:00 P,M. 3
10:00 P.M. !3
i II:OOP.M. i3
I Shift Chan..
, 12:00 A.M. ! 3
I 1:00 A.M. 3
2:00 A.M. 3
3:00 A.M. 3
4:00 A.M. 3
, 5:00 A,M. ! 3
16:00 A.M. I 3
8. The Center provides care and supervision to adults on a long term basis
(up to 6 months on continual residency) - Is 6 months the maximum length
of stay?
Yes. An extension may be allowed, on case by case basis.
J
3
J
J
-'
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 08.21
Mr. Liang,
The security plans per your request:
Security and containment of the facility begins with the mindset of security and
awareness by all staff. HPC plans to provide training. Such training includes:
offender discipline, emergency plans, staff integrity and ethics,
accountability and security procedures, offender searches and signs of suicide
and suicide precautions, basic first aid, universal precautions among other
courses.
Twenty-four hour Monitor observation and intervention, use of cameras and are
critically located through out the center to provide for safety of the external
and internal community. HPC has deployed camera placement and use
throughout its current residential facilities. Cameras are strategically placed to
monitor offender activity in areas of concealment from easy pubic view such as
corners and alcoves, entrance, exit, and stairways. For constant observation
and early intervention of suspect behaviors two observations were included in
the estimate. For facility security, there are restrictions on visitation of
family members. Regulations for numbers and types of visitors, days and
number of hours per week of visitation, and conditions for disallowed visits are
defined in the HPC policy and procedure manual.
. \!JHPC HUMAN POTENTIAL CONSULTANTS, LLC
J 'f 'Your link 10 a Better Future'
500 E. Garson Ptaz3 Or.. Suite 127
Carson. Callforma 90 746
T. (310) 756.1560
F. (3101756.1562
www.npcemplOymCnl.org
August 13, 1008
Mr. Aaron Liang
Sr. Planner
Development Services Department
City of San Bernardino
300 North "D" Street
San Bernardino, CA. 92418
RE: Responses to Questions Raised by San Bernardino Police
Deparbnent on July 31, 2008 at the City of San Bernardino,
Development SelVice Deparbnent, Environmental Review Committee
)
Dear Mr. Liang:
Pursuant to the request from the San Bernardino Police Department, Human Potential
Consultants, LLC has provided a' response that is an addendum to our previous
information submitted to the aty of San Bernardino, Planning Department regarding our
Adult Education, Employment and Residential Center (AEERC) site.
Our SecuritY Plan addresses activities such as: site security, discipline/seizure,
disturbance control, facility containment/parking, search and seizure and emergency
evacuation procedures. HPC maintains for all its sites an operations manual that details
specific procedures and policies related to site operations. We have provided some
preliminary detail for our proposed facility site: Adult Education, Employment and
Residential Center (AEERC) at 840 N. Sierra Way, San Bemardino, CA. 92410.
The AEERC includes a program effective security plan that encompasses the installation
and use of six (6) securitY cameras in the following areas: a) Kitchen/Dining Stations,
b) Resident Living Quarters, c) Front Entrance and door, d) Side/Back Patio and door e)
parking area and the f) recreation room.
.",,-"
")
The CV0204DVR (Digital Camera Video Recorder) is s feature packed digital video camera
recording system. This complete system comes with four outdoor cameras that can be
displayed all at the same time (quad view). AEERC has the capability of customizing the
recording and to set a 24- hour recording schedule based on preferences. The DVR may
record continuously during the day, then record only when motion is detected at night.
J
Each camera is equipped with night vision, so that security guards/monitors
can view and record in total darkness. The Digital Camera Video Recorder's list
of features and system operating materials are below.
. 4CH DVR w/ 160GB hard drive
. 4 0/67 Cameras
. 1 DVR Power Adapter
. 4 x 60ft RCA Video/power wire
. 4 Camera Power Adapter
. 5 BNC connectors
. RJ-45 Ethernet Cable
. Software Installation CD
. RCA to RCA Wire (male)
The AEERC will additionally use two Indoor Speed Dome (270x Day/Night) Zoom
cameras. The day/night high-resolution indoor speed dome with a super
Spherical pan/tilt will continuously rotate 360 degrees, records 24 hours with
automatic turn over .of 180 degrees. It has 27x optical and lOx digital zoom
capability, delivering 270x zoom power that captures the finest details. RS-485
Communication channels are available for remote control purposes and may be
programmed for 64 preset precise locations of target areas.
,)
The AEERC utilizes a Biometric Hand Punch - touch Station for facility inaressl
earess contral. computerized by a log system to capture resident sign in/out.
Case managers and guards/monitors use the hand unit to record resident time,
attendance, monitor and control building access and track program activities.
The system provides safeguardS against security threats and eliminates "buddy
punching". The unit is constructed of injection-molded plastic, lightweight with
a silicon rubber keypad and an internal lithium battery to keep time and calendar
in event of a power outage. There is no parking of resident vehicles at this
facility or loitering allowed and the AEERC will provide limited transportation for
common trips and off site storage. The facility will be gated, establishing a
controlled environment for educational and programming purposes. No,
drug/alcohol use is tolerated by homeless residents and surveillance is
maintained through ongoing and continued observation of resident
behaviors, searches, random testing, and is also based on the client
assessment, previous history, and current status in relation to substance abuse.
Overall, our guards/monitors will be uniformed, trained in all matters related to
emergency and disaster procedures outlined in our manuals.
)
AEERC-Conditional Use Permit No, 08-21
Human Potential Consultants. LLC
2
8/1312008
J
The AEERC Emeraency Evacuation Dlan and quarterly emergency drills will be
conducted and are fully documented to include date and time, evacuation path
used, number of staff participants, and visitors involved. The documentation of
the emergency drill will also include the amount of time to complete the drill, and
other pertinent comments. The drill will also include the testing of smoke
detectors. Fire drills will ensure familiarity with exits in an organized manner.
The following summary procedures will be documented and implemented at all
AEERC facilities:
A. Designation of Emergency Drill Coordinators
B. Diagrammed Emergency Drill Plan
C. Emergency Procedures
D. Drill Documentation
The AEERC has a written Disturbance Contral Plan (DCP) in the event of a
major disturbance at one of the AEERC sites. The plan shall include crowd
control procedures, steps for requesting after hours emergency transportation of
resident participants at temporary facilities, assistance from local law
. enforcement and/or emergency agencies as circumstances warrant.
~-)
The following summary procedures are documented and implemented at all
AEERC facilities:
A. Definition of Disturbance
B. Emergency Procedures Implementation and Monitoring
C. Notification Procedures for Disturbances /Intervention
D. Disturbance Resolution and Documentation
A copy of the disturbance report shall be maintained in the facility's central
administrative filing system, and a copy provided to the AEERC Project Manager.
The AEERC, Search and Seizure DOIiCY/Drocedures establish measures to
control the introduction/possession of contraband at the AEERC program site in
order to maintain a safe and secure environment for staff and resident
participants. Control is accomplished through searches of participants and
participant's living and common areas. Possession of contraband as will result in
disciplinary action and confiscation of the contraband.
The following procedures provide specific gUidelines for searches, including the
completion of appropriate reports and accompanying documentation.
)
'-
AEERC-Conditional Use Pennit No. 08-21
Human Potential Consultants. LLC
3
8/1312008
~ A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Unauthorized Property/Illegal Contraband/lllegal Drugs and Controlled
Substance Defined
General Guidelines on Search and Seizure Policy and Authorized
Personnel
Fadlity Search Procedures.
Seizure Definition/Policy
Staff Reporting of Contraband
A copy of the contraband report shall be maintained in the fadlity's central
administrative filing system, and a copy provided to the AEERC Project Manager.
Guidelines pertaining to AEERC Residents' Proa........~ve DiscipliM..Poliev and
basic rules of conduct, and policies that address zero tolerance on alcohol and
. drugs use, fraternization, smoking and personal appearance and hygiene are
outlined on Sections B8 - B12 of the AEERC Handbook. Serious violations of
these rules may result in disciplinary actions that can lead to immediate
discharge from the program.
The AEERC Program shall classify reports of rule violations as Administrative Rule
Violations or Serious Rule Violations.
.J
A. Rule Violations Defined: Administrative or Serious
B. Disciplinary Methods: Counseling or Violation Report
C. Supervising Case Manager Review of Disciplinary Actions
A copy of the rule violation report shall be maintained in the facility's central
administrative filing system, and a copy provided to the AEERC Project Manager.
Human Potential Consultants, LLC has taken time and good faith measures to
ensure proper understanding, education and cooperation for proposed operation
of the AEERC for the benefit of the highly concentrated homeless population in
Ward 1 and Supervisor District 5 and for the city and county of San Bernardino,
California.
Sincerely,
JtuZf~
/ Garnett Newcombe
CEO
~
AEERC-Conditional Use Permit No, 08-21
Human Potential Consultants. LLC
4
8/1312008
City of San Bernardino
Sail Bernardino Police Departmenl
Interoffice Memorandum
ATTACHMENT 0
,~)
To:
Planning Commission
From:
Sergeant Ronald Maass, Central Dislrict Operations Supervisor
Subject:
840 N, Sierra Way
Date:
September 10, 2008
Copies:
-)
As of this date, the San Bernardino Police Department has not received a copy of an
actual Security Plan from Human Potential Consultants (HPC) or their representatives in
regard to the proposed facility at 840 N. Sierra Way. The last information received
referred in general terms to the existence of a plan, referenced in their operations manual.
The response mentioned the use of several security cameras, and referred to staff
members trained as "guards/monitors" who would be "trained in all matters related to
emergency and disaster procedures" as outlined in their manuals. Prior paperwork
provided by the applicants suggest that this training would be provided to all employees,
however, there do not appear to be plans for personnel whose primary function is security
as opposed to "cross-trained" in security related procedures.
We have previously received basic informatiqn as to the nature of the clients intended for
the facility. The basic information simply specified homeless or those in an "at risk"
environment with no history of "extreme" violence, no sexual registrants (PC 290), and
no history of arson. This basic guideline would allow for the inclusion of parolees in a
very high density. The applicants are proposing a 56 bed facility (48 males and 8
females) on a .45 acre site.
Given the paucity of information as to the potential client base, our office attempted to
identify any potential impact a 56 bed adult residential care facility might impose upon
police services to the surrounding community.
The applicants have managed smaller facilities in surrounding communities including
Riverside and Los Angeles County. One of these facilities in Riverside is limited to 24
beds and based upon information we have received suggests that it currently has 17
residents, all of whom appear to be parolees.
J
Our office also conducted a survey to identify and compare facilities within the city of
basically comparable size and generalized client base. There are no similar facilities
within the city at this time of a similar long-term residential nature. In the past, there have
been several converted apartment complexes that were opened as residential transition
TilE sap!) I~ (O~e,lrn'ED TO PRO\'lDING:
PR()(;RES:,I\"E 'JL'.\LITY P( >I.ICE SER\'ICE;
\ :'.\1"-: L:::\\'IRO:\~IE!'\T TO 1\IPR()\'E '1'1-11-.: <JL.\L1TY OF LIFE;
\ REDLTTIO:\ I;"; CRnlE TIIROCGH PROBLE~I Rr:COG!'rnO>-i :\,'\:D PROBLEM SOJ.\'I:-4G
Page 2
",,)
facilities for parolees. In each inslance, calls for service surrounding these facilities nOled
a distinct increase.
The neighborhood surrounding the proposed facility at 840 N. Sierra Way incorporates a
very high proportion of residential housing including small apartment buildings and
single-family homes. Many of the surrounding residents have expressed extreme
concerns regarding the nature of this facility and its proximity to their residences and
businesses.
There are plans to construct a new elementary school within one block of this proposed
facility. A second elementary school is 5 blocks west and another 5 blocks to the east. In
addition Seccombe Lake Park is also one block south of this proposed facility. These
public locations attract a high degree of juvenile foot traffic.
Taking all of these factors into consideration, the Police Department is very concerned
about the potenlial negative impact on police services, which would draw officers away
from the ability to provide timely police service to the surrounding community. The
introduction of a facility that would potentially generate additional calls for service on an
annualized basis, not to mention the anticipated additional calls for service resulting from
clients associated with the facility in the surrounding community, would have a
delrimental impact on police services to the existing residents and businesses.
.)
}
.--)
)
~
f
'''..,.,..-
07.e3'~ee8 14:18
'3516531154
HPC
ATTACHMENT E
-.-
SAN BERNARDINO CIIT
UNIFIED ScHOOL DISTRICT
Arturo Delgado, Ed.D.
Superintendent
Judy D. Vv'hite, Ed.D., Deputy Superintendent
June 25, 2008
To Whom It May Concern:
The San Bernardino City Unified School District is in support of Homeless Programs that are
designed to provide comprehensive support to homeless limilies. Accordins to our homeless
liaison, Mrs. Vickie Lee, we have served 1,717 homeless stUdents &sofluDe 20, 2008. The
current programs in San Bernardino have been more limited to temporaxy shelter, food and
clothins. We are finding that many families have established patterns of chronic homelesaness
and are in need of intensive rehabilitation.
There have been questions about whether the approval of a homeless program located in the
targeted area would be a problem for the future development of schools. The IK:hoo1 currently
identified as the Lincoln II Project is being reviewed for an area near there. The ground-
bTeaking is scheduled for the Fall of2009, with a projected completion of 16-18 montha. The
planned opening date for the school is August of2011. '.
It is our understanding that Human Potential Consulting Inc. will focus on the rehabilitation of
our homeless community members. Our facilities depanment can provide additional infonnation
or concerns about the location.
Sincerely,
jJ, .fl.L;~. cJh:t;
JUDY D. WHITE
Deputy Superintendent
JDW:x1
Deputy Superintendent
m Nor1ll F Slreet. San Bemerdino. CA 92410. (8Oll) 314-1471. Fax (109) 885-8392. judy."'''''. I ~ued.k12.ClI'"
^)
l
')
'."",,~..
A TT ACHMENT F
RE: Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21
Ward No. I
Dear Plarming Commission:
We are writing to oppose the request to convert the church building located at 840 North
Sierra Way into a homeless shelter. This is a residential area with families who struggle
to keep their families safe everyday. We do not need a homeless shelter here.
We empathize with the plight of the homeless. but we also realize that not all homeless
people go by the rules and regulations required by the shelter and will not be admitted
into the shelter. This is when they become a problern to our neighborhood. This area is
plagued with shelters/homes for parolees, drug abusers and child molesters. We do not
need another "shelter" in our area.
We feel that this project would only bring more transients and homeless people to our
neighborhood. Our neighborhood has had many problems with these people. They hang
out in the empty field behind our back yard, at Gene' s Liquor Store on the comer of 9th
Street and Sierra Way, at Secombe Lake and in the Pioneer Cemetery. They not only
hang around but many sell drugs, drink and start fights. With regard to the field behind
our house we have seen them use drugs, urinate and defecate in broad daylight, this while
we are sitting outside trying to enjoy the afternoon. Our neighbors have children and
they have to see this too. Thank goodness for our police department who diligently
watch out for us, but they can not always be here.
We have lived in this home for 35 years. We have seen it go from a nice community of
working class people to place of crime, drugs and gangs. We do not feel safe to go for a
walk in the park or e"en walk to the store anymore. We would like to be able to have
friends and family over and enjoy our home and back yard like we used to. We would
like to be able to take a stroll around our neighbor again with being afraid.
Please listen to our letter of opposition and reject the proposal. Thank you for your
consideration.
Sincerely,
Jessie and Rebecca Gutierrez
872 North Lugo Avenue
San Bernardino, CA 92410
909-889-9611
,,-;2!')-7-2008 05:43P FROM:
TO:la6b4912188
EXHIBIT 3
-
CITY OF SA.N BERNARDINO
Development Services Department, Planning Division
300 North "D" Street, 3rd Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Phone (909) 384-5057 . Fax (909) 384-5080
Web address: www.sbcity.org
APPLICA nON FOR APPEAL
APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE (check one)
o Development Services Director
o Development/Environmental Review Committee
.m Planning Commission
Case number(s): C end; +, 0(\ ~ '- U.S e
A Po8-07
No. ()g-2.1
ProJect address: ~IfD Nor-Iii S;"~urCf Wit'! S-",(\ A411a1ckll.t> .cA
/ ,
Appellant's namc:_Hu.rnCl^f.Hen +, 0./ r O(\S u l-hrf\+"', LLC ~o\-+ ~ \~V\I\.'oe-
Appellant's address: 5tlD E. CA-t2.SIJ/IJ Ylaz..,.,. De. .~I2.. 7 G..stlN JC4~D7lfh
'? I D '7 ,-", .- I s-' 0
AppclJant's phone: 2. J .,
Appellant's e-mail address:~ 1 ,,<2. 0..: C c."" b... @ dtJi, C.0.71
Contact person's name: C,/H!..tJrI.."Tr Ng "J(..omb.e.
Contact person's address: 5 00 E. Co. y s. ,) f\J '"1' I A Z.ff
Contact person's phone: 5 I 0 '7.>0..' ~b D'
Contact person's e-mail address:JIfu.uJC..........bt. ~ ' C fJYI1
A '( ~ 1'f 0 {'f () _ 2 'l z.. - "l - C.0&l 0
1:> e. ;#. /2.. 7 G. ,. s'dtl . {'If
,
Pursuant to Section 19.52.100 of the Development Code, an appeal must be filed on a City application form
within 15 days following the final date of action, accompanied by the appropriate appeal filing fee,
Appeals are nonna11y scheduled for a dctennination by the Planning Commission or Mayor and Common
Council within 30 days of the filing date orthe appeal. You will be notified, in writing, ofthe specific date and
time of the appeal hearing.
OFFICE USE ONLY
"'" __ fi'fiiZ C, 'Z ~
Received by:. ~L /'
""",,'r /'
..~ ~ ~Jr~~'-'I7~ n
' --., - '.-./' \
1"c:J" .Cl' ;=1
~ ,5',"", I\I/'/Q)
; ,<:..,;.::) 11104
'~'_, r.;
'"IOl) - ? - 2008 05 : 44P FROM:
TO: 18664912108
p: 1/1
REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR AN APPEAL
"._'
Specific action being appealed and the date of that action: 01-1 }l"lIe tnbl (' 5, 200 g " ~ e. ~
~ BoAna1JruJ5 7 ()f"Ii fI [DlriY" $5.0'1 de.r-.e..d tl ~~. +'t\ I
o - ..l\-z:t("\1-S L I Cl llurl vi\! .A. c,Yy>J.;+,'c"'../ rM:+ . up Ah.tlJ.821)
'-\-nl)~j)AA.+e.. {] ~/)m..;l2-SS ~~ \.Je" a-l- <:(.IfD' N, Si~'I"{a [).la,) $0.", &t(\aj!./);l'Id fA
q2...l.f'O i.
ActionsoUgh.t:~,~ c..1'~'1 d Ou. (1e.; I c;'notL ld YlUNsc..-1l,e 71afoJ/Jll1{
~~ 1/"9,.0,''> d(){1ia~ Qt Cu? No, CJg-ZI (J~ o,vLM-f .'
y'Y\a('l ViI~"" h 4: I If<\ u. l tz..1\ -h ,LIt" s U ffl.cLI f-, M f- a- CuP.
Additional information:
_ Signature of appellant~1z jt;"1I -).iu/rl'~"-L..
Date: / jll f I &J
2
11104
'...",
L ^ 'II
C E N T E R
213 386 S08S 11/l!Il/~UIl 11l:DIi lIaL1 1'. Wl/U1D
[~rN: ~ ;J :81]l ~ ."ooum_A"':XIIIBlT 4
LOS ANGELES, CALIfORNIA 90005
TELEPHONE: 213/385-2977
FAX: 213/385-9089
G:-r-v 0:: 3At'~ BERNARDif\:C
DEVELOPMENT SERVICE~
")=P.':,;::'T~,~t:t-i-;-
F'TlII1: PWlic Comsel
~~
mE PUBLIC INTEREST LAwomCE OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNtY AND BEVERLY HIU.S BAR ASSOCIATIONS
FACSIMILE COVER LEITER
DATE: November 26, 2008
PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING 16 PAGE(S) (WIllCR INCLUDES THIS
COVER):
TO:
Rachel Clark, City Clerk
James F. Penman, City Attorney
FU#: 909-384-5158
909-384-5238
FROM:
Remy De La peza
REMARKS:
ATfACHED IS A LETl'ER IN SUPPORT OF THE APPEAL SUBMIlTED BY HPC ON NOVEMBER 20,
2008_ WITH THIS LETfER, WE REQUEST NOTIFICATION OF THE HEA1lING DATE ON WHICH THIS
APPEAL WILL BE HEARD.
The information contained in this Iilcsimile message is privileged and confideotial. It is intended only for the use of
the individual named above. If the recipient of this liIl:simiIe is an individual or entity other than thallllUlled above,
any nse, dissemination, dis1ribution or repmdw:tioo is strictly prohibiled. If you have received this commnnicatioD
in error, please notitY us by telephone and return the original to US via U.S. Postal Service, Thank you.
-
FnJIII: PWlic Gomsel
"",""<7""""""
TAN\' Ii. .M. AClCER
C-'-
"""THANAHSCHEI.l.
"CBS T.....
llANO S. APIJl....
;A:;;"':l'l..~"""'._LiJ'
,.-..,.,.., 0.- ..0.... LiJ'
00l""""",
"''':lID'l'-.1I''''LiJ'
'-'d~ .1l1.lP.OO5.Jll
i.iOiibANonr
holl.w...a.LlJ'
llANIEl.aNNI!R-
""-"""".......LiJ'
PHllJP 5. 000l(
~Il~
........
DY~A.~
"'-' ' L.LP
MAllX H.
bJiYEVANS UP
.......T.........."""'LiJ'
MICHAEL I. JllMN!.CWiI
Pflbioln..... g..J'ImMn UP
wtlJ.W.l. PW:"U!NEiAUM
n.c...o<_ "-""'-...
lAl..IJl.I!NCElLCiOLOW.N
~~~
~~~
1M- ......lJ.P
CAItOLE E. HI\NDlD.
~i'UmIIL..."n.-W'
i:lIlNl<<.TCH
~~
~(lBIioUP
OA'(l"O,~
~~
J..s.MlJ.P
EDWARD P.I.AZARUS
AkinG.ftll>s.-.H_~FoIdllP
'JEROME 1. UMNE
,.......<-'"
DAVID P. UJlA
o-.b.. r:..
"""""",,^I\O"'
~~_UP
ID8&llT A. MEYER
looriollI...-UI'
TH5QOOIl.EN. MIL.L.Eao
"""^"""UP
CHlI5TOPHERA Ml.JllJ'H'r
D1llEClV
RONALD ~ NESSIM
~f.N~ ~n..u.L--..
~~~~I1F1aa1J.P
~;;:i;'i}t!.ODEll-
'lJEILLOHANl..ON
....-'"
..vtl.llA:l.I W. OXLEY'
'~~"""LiJ'
W'tManB~u.P
""'" PO"""
~'-......
Marn-II F--llP
WlLL~l: ~lCIGtlVEJr;-
=WKiN~UP
~t.I51r......
~~_L1J>
~' ~llP
H. RUBENS
. ...... Ii-:- LlJ'
.. 1WSS1!U.
~':-s.\M~1K.
~L~
~~W'
~tt1.-'UP
o-~c:wm
~,";a,'df...&.
~1UIL11~LU'
~SIlJlDJ'ELD'"
Wi" tI 0- LLP.
PA SINC1A1Il
~lINIOER
~Mdio..."""IIR-.-U.P
""""^"-.~
v...FNKid~_L1J>
MICHAEL H. STEIN
..-..~
lllUAlUl S'l'MNOE"
""."-""
RANtW.L J. SUNSHINE.
LA..- y~s..ur.a.ilI...-tLU
OI"'ID~MTl
...... ...
PAlAW. I!NE'r,JIL-
~.z...w...t,..".a-allJ'
GAU..WJG~ TII1E
Kmta MlIcIIiII R-. UP
~A~:'"t-Fio!IlGo-to
MAlUCS. WALJ.ACE:
s-.. T__"!Jim
WBSllTS. WOLFB
~~~
Whiul1<'_UP
. <EtllmH ZIm.EN
~~~~...:.
~~w.
~_..,"- c...-~Menolw
..""'"'"'-
;tUI ,,1m lIUllll
ll/;tll/~uua 14;DII
lt~aJ "'.~/UIICII
~
LA" CBlfTl1.
nil! PIJBlJC IN'1UJiST LAW Ql'PlCE OF TIiE l.O6 ANGEL!S COUNTY AJilDI\IM!IU..YHlW MJ.~11CNi
The SoIJIbma C.Womfa AflI1!ue t4l1w I..awpm' ~ fDrCMllUPa thod.=r 1...
~lE1'BIEBcMlI'
M.o\PJ[N:5.Z0HN"
""'-
...........LiJ'
S1EJItiI!NE. P1.CX!rr'
;:::..~-
_r._
.....,
z.--......UI
WATTIfEW'T. HUB,1Nr!"
T_
..-...IilB,..,.UP
_0 VElA
.........,ao
l'A1JLL.RU!2Sl.}IL
~1I/~11~
November 26, 2008
VL4 FACSJMILE to (909) 384--5158 fl1fd (909) 31l4-52J8
Rachel Clark, City Clerk
300 N. "D" Street
2nd Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92418
James F. Penman, City Attorney
300 N. "D" Street
6th Floor
San Bernardino, CA 92418
Re: Human Potential Consultants, LLC application for l:Onditional use
permit to operate a homeless shelter at 840 N. Sierra Way, San Bernardino,
CA 9Z401
San Bernardino City Council Meeting
Honorable Councilmembers,
Public Counsel submits this letter on behalf of Human Potential
Consultants, LLC ("HPC"), lower-income and homeless residents of the City of
San Bernardino; and Orgllni7.alions whose mission it is to serve the needs of this
population. On November 5, 2008 the City of San Bernardino Planning
Commission denied HPC's application for a conditional use permit ("CUP") to
operate a homeless shelter. HPC seeks an appeal of this decision and approval of
CUP No. 08-21. This letter is submitted in support of that appeal.
L Backgronnd on Public Counsel and its Community Development
Project & HOPE Unit
Public Counsel is the public interest law firm of the Los Angeles County
and the Beverly Hills Bar Associations. Public Counsel is dedicated to advancing
equal justice under the law by delivering pro bono legal services to individuals
with lower and no-incomes as well as the organizations which serve them. The
Commtmity Development Project ("CDP") is one of seven Public Counsel
projects, or areas of practice.
Within CDP, the Housing Opportunities, Preservation and Enfon:emen1
("HOPE") Unit specializes in the promotion of affordable housing production and
MAIl.: P.O. BOX.l6900. LOS ANOEUS, CA. 900760900. Tm.: 213.385.2977 p.u:, 21'.)8S.908til_ WWW.PUBUCCOUNSELORO
'7b_ is DO ___ justire thIIJ oquJjustita"
fnllll: !'ublic l:otIJsel
i!1~ lllIb llUlll:l
11/~/~ 14;bl
.iI!l!lI 1'. WlI/Ulll
Page 2 oflS
preservation using State and local laws. Specifically, the HOPE Unit advocates
for local land use policies to produce and preserve affordable housing and for
compliance with various State laws, including, but not limited to, housing element
law, density bonus law, and second unit law.
II. Facts and Procedural Background
Since 1997 HPC has been providing a variety of programs and services to assist with
employment preparation, vocational training, and job placement for individuals facing
extraordinary challenges to re~tering the workplace. In ~ HPC began providing housing in
addition to its existing job training services. Currently, HPC manages and operates homeless
residential centers throughout Califomia, serving veterans, persons with disabilities, and persons
on parole and/or probation. In its Los Angeles County facilities alone, HPC has served over
1,800 participants.
On Mav 27. 2008 HPC's application for a CUP to convert an existing church building at 840 N.
Sierra Way into a 56-bed homeless shelter with related support facilities and office space was
deemed complete by the City.l The shelter would provide housing for adults ages 18-59 years,
with supportive services that include, but are not limited to, individualized case lIIlIlIageJ1lent
services, and life and employment skills development. Additional services include drug and
alcohol education, anger management, money management workshops, and refena1 services for
those residents in need ofGEDpreparation and/or vocational training. Residents may reside at
the shelter up to 6 months.
On September 16. 2008 CUP No. Q8-21 was on the Planning Commission agenda and set for
public hearing. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission deny the CUP based on the
Findings of Fact contained in their similarly dated staff report. This item.was continued without
a staff presentation or a public hearing upon staff's request to addresS the applicant's assertion
that SB 2 would preclude the City wm denying the project. .
On October 21. 2008 the pl~nn;ng Commission held a public hearing on CUP No. 08-21. Staff
recommended that thePl~nningCommission'close the public hearing and deny CUP No. 08~21 .
based on the September 16, 2008 staff report and the additional Findings of Fact in the October
16, 2008 staff report. The City Attorney requested a continuance to allow for preparation of the
Written Fintlings and Conclusion based on the evidence presented to the Planning Commission at
this hearing and the written record consisting of materials submitted to the Commission by the
applicant (HPC), City staff; and members of the public.
On November S. 2008 the Planning Commission denied CUP No. 08-21 based on the adopted
Findings and Conclusion.
The adopted Conclusion of the Commission states "that the proposed project would impair the
integrity and character of the surrounding residential neighborhood where the project is
proposed. Therefore, the Commission concludes that the necessary findings to approve
1 Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 19.01.020- Table 04.01, shomeless facility is 8 permitted use with an
approved conditional use permitln ZOnes RM, RMH, and RH
rrom:~lic ~l
:.!1l1 lIlIb llUllll
11/~tl/~U~ l~;DI
"~iI!U I'.UU~/Ull1
Page 3 oftS
Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21 cannot be made.'.2 This conclusion is based, amongst others,
on the reasoning that:
. "the proposed project.. .does not share the characteristics of an emergency shelter";
. providing housing for parolees/probationers presents a public safety concern;
. an emergency shelter is incompatible with suttOlmding land uses, namely a nearby
domestic violence shelter and a proposed elementary school; and
. the proposed shelter would alter the character of the surrounding neighborhood.
On November 20. 2008 HPC filed an application for appeal to the City Council of the Planning
Commission's November 5. 2008 denial of CUP No. 08-21 pllISWli1t to San Bernardino
Municipal Code Section 19.52.100.
In. California Law Prohibits the City from Denying mc's Proposed Homeless
Shelter. Govt. Code ifi5589.S
California Senate Bill 2 ("SB 2"), effective Janwuy 1, 2008, requires California
jurisdictions to engage in more detailed analyses of emergency shelters and transitional and'
supportive housing in ~eir next housing element revisions; regull:l1eS zoning for these facilities;
and broadens the scope of the Housing Accountability Act to. include emergency shelters and
transitional and supportive housing. In SB 2, the California legislature recognized that
homelessness is a pressing statewide problem and more emergency shelters are neCessary to
meet the housing and residential service needs of the homeless population. SB 2 was enacted in
order to encourage the construction of emergency shelters and to prevent jurisdictions from
blocking the development of such shelters based on NlMBY -ist attitudes that fail to take into
account planning forthe community's needs.
To this end, SB 2 amended California Government Code Section 65589.5 ("the Housing
AccOlmtability Act'') to require jmisdictions to allow emergency shelters, transitional housing
and supportive housing to locate within their borders. The revised Section 65589.5 specifies that
there are ouly five narrow situatiODS in which ajurisdiction can legally disapprove an emergency
shelter, transitional housing development or supportive housing development. These five
exceptions, discussed in more depth below, apply to;
. (I) jmisdictions that have met their need for the type of project in question;
(2) projects that willbave a specific adverse effect on public health or safety;
(3) projects that must be denied to comply with federal or state law;
(4) projects located onland zoned for agriculture orresoum:'preservation;and
(5) projects thaI conflict with bOth the zoning ordinance andthc; general plan in
jurisdictions 1hat have adopted an updated and compliant hOusing element.
The subsequent portions of this memo will confirm that (a) the Housing Accountability
Act applies in this case; (b) the City cannot avail itself of any of the exceptions; and (c) the City
is therefore required under applicable law to approve HPC's CUP application.
2 November 5, 2008 Finding'l and Conclusion of the Commission in the Matter of Conditional Use Permit No. 08-21
("Findiog'l and Conclusioo"), page5
tTOIIl; I'LOlic !;otIlsel
i!1~ ~1I11 tlUlltl
11/i!II/i!UUII l~;all
"au t".UUD/Ulb
Page 4 of15
, """"~
A. The Housing Accountability Act Applies in This Case Regardless of the City's
Attempts to Reclassify the CUP- Govt. Code f65S89.5(d)
SB 2 amended the Housing Accountability Act to (1) add emergency shel~ to the list
of protected housing and (2) to clarify that the definition of housing development project
includes both transitioDal housing 4 and supportive housingS as well.
1. The Proposed Shelter Cannot be Classified as a Social Service Center-
H&S Code U50801(e), 50801.2
Until adoption of the Urgency Ordinance establishing an Emergency Shelter Overlay
District on October 20, 2008, the City of San Bernardino's Municipal Code ("the Code") did not
define emergency/homeless shelter.6 To date, the Code still does not provide definitions of
transitional or supportive housing. N; a result, developers must revert to the State law
definitions of these uses. By not providing these definitions in its .Code, the City imposes a
severe hardship on developers, constraining the development of these types of housing. !he City
does, however, provide a definition for social service centers. The Code states that a social
service center is:
A building or buildings used for recreation, educational, cuitural, or
religious activities operated by nonprofit grOups or agencies that are open
to the' public. Related uSes may include food, service, childcare facilities,
job training programs, after school programs, medical clinics, and other
similar uses or activities. Residential facilities may be established as pan
of the use. Drug and alcohol recovery facilities (outpatient or residential)
may be a component of the social service use. MC 1106 II/I/OI
The CUP at issue here was submitted for a ''homeless facility", not for a "social service.
center." Under State law, an emergency shelter is defined as "housing with minim~) supportiYll_
services for homeless persons that is limited to occupancy of six months or less by a homeless
person." H&S Code ~S0801(e). Since HPC's shelter, as proposed, would provide minimal
supportive services to homeless persons and occupancy Would be limited to 6 months 7, it clearly
meets the definition of an emergency shelter. Furthermore, according to HPC, it was informed
by the City Planning Division arOlmd April 2008 that it did not meet the definition of a social
, Defined as "housing witb miDIma1 supportive services for homeless persons that is. limited to ~ of six
montbs or less by a bomeless person." cat. H&S Code ~S0801(e). .
4 Defined as "housing witb supportive services for up to 24 months that is exclusively desiguated and tmgeted for
recently homeless persons. TrlU1Sitional housing includes Self-sufficiency development services, wi1Il !be uItimaIe
goal of moving recently homeless persons to permanent housing as quickly as possible, and limits rems and service
fees to an ability-to-pay furmuIa n:asonably CODSistenl with the United States Deporrment ofHoosing and uman
Development's requirements for subsidized housing for low-income persOns." Cat. H&S Code~50801.2.
'Defined as "housing witbno limit on length of stay, that is occupied by the taIgetpopulation as defined in
subdivision (d) of Section 53260, and lbat is linked to on or olI-site services that assist the supportive housing
resident in retaining housing, improving his or her healtb status, and maximizing his or her ability to live and, when
possible, worlc in tbe community." Cat. H&S Code ~S0675.14(b).
"Municipal Code Section 19.02.050 was amended on October 20,2008 to define emergency shelter pursuant to CaI.
H&S CodeS0801(e).
7 June 19,2008 HPC letter to City, page 2; September 16,2008 SlaffReport, page 2
Frlllil:PIDlic Comsel
213 386 8088
11/26/2008 14:58
II22D l'.lIIIII/018
Page 5 of15
service center. The City has itself referred to the proposed shelter as all oftbe following in prior
staff reports: homeless shelter, homeless facility or emergency shelter.8 Additionally,
Background Facts 1.3 and 1.4 of the November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion discuss the
existing homeless shelters in the City and the City's recently euacted urgency oroinance
establishing the Emergency Shelter Overlay District 1bese facts would not be relevant to an
application for a social service center.
Furthermore, because HPC is neither a nonprofit group nor an agency, it is not qualified
to establish a social service center and does not fit within the City's Code requirements for this
use. Based on all of the factors outlined above, including the City's own admissions in its staff
reports, HPC's proposed shelter cannot be classified as a social service center.
2. The Proposed Shelter FaIls UDder the Housing Accountability Act-
Govt. Code !i65589.5(d)
Regardless of what the City chooses to ,call the proposed shelter, the Housing
AccOuntability Act would still apply because the shelter clearly qiiaIifies as an emergency
shelter. As discussed above, m>C's shelter would provide mi,,;ni~1 suppOrtive seryices to
homeless pt:rsons, including case inanagement; drug 8I1d alcohol education, job placement, and
foundational life skills training covering a variety of issues that residents may be facing. These
services are t!lrgeted at developing self-sufficiency skills and assisting the residents to transition
into permanent bousing.9 Additionally, the shelter's occupancy would be limited to 6 months.
In light of these characteristics, the proposed shelter falls within the criteria fQr emergency
shelter. As stated in Govt. Code ~65589.5(d), emergency shelters are covered by the Housing
Accountability Act and must be approved unless one of the five stated exceptions is met. .
B. The City May Not Avail Itself of Any of the Exceptions UJlder the Homing
Accountability Act- Govt. Code f65589.5(d)(l)-(5)
In denying m>C's CUP application, the City has attempted to make a nwnber of
arguments. First; the City attempts to escape from under the Housing Accountability Act
altogether by reclassif'y'iilg the shClter as a social service center.1o Second, the City appears to
claim that the proposed homelesssheiter fits within two of the five narrow exceptions. In an
attempt to qualifY under subsection (dX2) of the Housing Accountability Act, the City appears to
claim that the shelter would have a specific adverse impact on public health and safety that
cannot be avoided or mitigated. Additionally, in its attemptto qualify under subsection (dX5),
the City claims that the proposed shelter is inconsistent with both the City's general plan and its
zoning ordinance. However, as will be detailed below, the findings adopted by the Planning
· Sepcember 16,2008 Staff Report; October 16, 2008 StaffRopon; October 21,2008 Phuming Commission Agenda,
F.!e 3; November 5, 2008 P1auning Commissioo Agenda, page 3. ..
HPC's proposed sheI.... could also fall under 1he Stale definition of tnmsitional housing. which is also covered by
the Housing ACC<lWIlability Act.
10 November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #2 ("'I"" Commission finds that Ibe proposed project. ..does not
share lhe characteristics of an emergency shelter as set funh in [CaJifumia law]."); #52 ("Sectioo 19.04.030(2)(1)
of the Development Code requires social services to conform to the residential density standard oflhe IIIlderlyiDg
land use designation...); and #5.3 ("Furthermore, Section 19.04.030(2)(1')(9) of the Development Code requires a
one-acre minimum site area to establish a social service in a residential land use district.)
Fmlll:Public Comsel
213 3B5 SOBS
11/26/2008 14:5S
1220 P.DD1/016
Page 6 oft5
Commission on November 5, 2008 are not legally sufficient for the City to qualify under any of
the five narrow situations that Section 65589.5 requires for denial of this type of housing. The
City is, therefore, clearly precluded from denying HPC's CUP application.
Government Code Section 65589.5( dX I) applies only if the jurisdiction has adopted a
revised and compliant housing Clement and met or exceeded its need for emergency shelters.
This exception does not apply in this case because the City has neither adOpted a revised housing
element nor has it met its need for emergency shelters. Government Code Section 65589.5(dX2)
is discussed in more detail below and applies only if the project would have "a specific adverse
impact on public health or safety and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or
avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development financially infeasible."
Although the City attempts to invoke this exception in its findings, it does not apply in this case
for the reasons discussed at length below in Sections JII-B-2 & B-3. Govermnent Code Section
65589.5(d)(3) applies only if denial of a project is necessary for the jurisdiction to comply with
state or federal laws. No such state or federal laws necessitating denial of this project are
referenced in the Findings and Conclusion. Government Code Section 65589.5(d)( 4) applies
only if the project "is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is
surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agriculturaI or res()UICe preservation'
purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the project."
This exception does not apply in this case because the land in question is not zoned for
agriculturaI or resource preservation. Finally, Government Code Section 65589.5(d)(5) is
diScussed in more detail below and applies only if the project ''is inconsistent with .both the
jurisdiction's zoning ordinance and genetal plan land use designation as specified in lUIy element
of the geDera1 plan as it existed on the date the application was deemed complete, tlIIdthe
jurisdiction has adopted a revised housing element in accordance with Section 65588 that is in
substantial compliance with this article." (emphasis added) Similar to exception (d)(2), this
exception is not applicable in this case, despite the City's assertions. for the reaSons discussed at
length below in Sections JII-B-I, B"3, and B-4. .
1. The City Does Not Have a Compli8Dt Housing Element and Therefore
CaDDot Rely on the Inconsistency Exception of the Housing Accountability
Act- Govt. Code ~558!J.5(d)(5) .'
As detailed in Sections ill-B-2 through B-4 below, the City claims that the proposed
shelter is inconsistent with its land use designations and general plan. Even if that were the case,
State laW-only permits a City to deny a shelter based on incons.istency findings if the City has
adopted a revised housing element in substantial compliance with the law. Specifically, this
exception states that a local agency can disapprove an emergency shelter if:
The development project or emergency shelter is inconsistent with both the
jurisdiction's zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified
in any element of the general plan as it existed on the date the application was
deemed complete, and the jurisdiction has adopted a revised housing element in
accordance with Section 65588 that is in substantial compliance with this article.
(Govt. Code ~65589.5(d)(5)) (emphasis added)
.'-~
Fr...,.: Pub Ii c Clu1se 1
213 3Bl:i SUBll
11/'D/'UU~ lb:UU
irati 1'. UU~/LI1~
Page 7 of1S
Because the housing element is an integral part of every jurisdiction's community planning
process and its general plan, an emergency shelter cannot be denied as inconsistent with the
general plan if the jurisdiction does not have a housing element that is fully compliant with state
law. Government Code Section 65588(b) specifies the housing element revision schedule for
local governments within the jurisdiction of the Southern California Association of Governments
as June 30, 2006. This date was later changed to June 30, 2008 with the ~ of the
California Department of Housing and Community Devel~ent ("HCD") I. The record clearly
shows the City has not adopted a revised housing element 1 , and this is verified by HCD's online
Review Status list. 13 Until the City reviews and revises its housing element, it cannot, in good
faith, evaluate whether the proposed emergency shelter is actua1ly inconsistent with the general
plan. Section 65589.5(d)(5) makes it clear that the City cannot rely on zoning inconsistency to
deny a shelter if, as in this case, it has an outdated housing element that is not compliant with
Section 65588.
The City may believe that it is permitted to deny the shelter because it adopted an
urgency ordinance on October 20, 2008 amending the Code to provide an overlay zone in which
emergency shelters can be located by right. However, this belief disregards the City's
obligations to comply with !!20! Government Code Section 65583 ("Housing Element law") and
the Housing AccOlmtability Act. SB2 amended both statutory schemes. With. respect to
Housing Element law, the City's adoption of the urgency ordinance appears to be an attempt to
address the SB 2 amendment requiring that the City have at least one zone with sufficient
capacity to accommodate the City's need for emergency shelters and where emergency shelters
are permitted without a CUP or other discretionary action. Govt. Code ~65583(a)(4). However,
contrary to the City Attorney's assertions in the October 17, 2008 staff report that the urgency
ordinance may ''placeD the City in substantial compliance with Senate BiD 2", the City has
neither complied with Housing Element law nor the Housing A-ccountability Act. The
development standards adopted as part oftltis urgency ordinance in fact severelv constIain the
ability to develop emergency shelters in the overlay district. Specifically, as a result of the
I,OOO-foot public transit stop distance requirement and the 500-foot sepandion requirement from
existing single-family homes and other uses, approximately 90".4 of the sites in the overlay
district are unavailable for emergency shelter development. Therefore, the emergency ordinance
is likely insufficient to assure compliance with the SB 2 amendments to the Housing Element.
And, adoption of the emergency ordinanr.e does not somehow negate the City's failure to adopt a
timely Housing Element. Regardless, the issue here is the City's compliance with the Housing
Accountability Act (as amended by SB 2). As discussed above, the City does not have a revised
housing element and therefore, cannot rely on the inconsistency findings exemption contained in
Section 65589.5(d)(5) of the Housing Accountability Act to deny HPC's proposed shelter.
II The State agency IeSpOIISibIe for administering housing element law and reviewing local housing elements
12 See O<:tober 16,2008 Staff Report Re: CUP No. 08-21, page 2: Oelober 17. 2008 StaffReportRe: Urgency
Ordinance 10 Permit Emergency Shelters, page I; October 21, 2008 Letter from Henry Empeno, Sr. Deputy Senior
Attorney, 10 Remy De La Peza, Public Counsel, Re: Human Potential Coosultants, LLC- Application for
Conditional Use Permit.
" http://www.hcd.ca.govlbpdlhrclplm.he/
".'.""~
From: Pub lie Counsel
213 3811 lIUlIll
11/~1I/~U11 1D:UU
1I<!~ t'.UUl:l/~lb
Page 8 oflS
2. The Proposed Homeless Shelter Is Not Actually Inconsistent with Current
Zoning Ordinance or General Plan Land Use Designations- Govt. Code
fi65589.5(d)(5)
a. Density is Not Inconsistent with Cunent Zoning Ordinance or General
Plan Land Use Designations
Even if the City was permitted to rely on inconsistency findings under Section
65589.5(<1)(5), the proposed shelter's density is not inconsistent with the current zoning
ordinance or general plan land use designations. Finding 5.1 states that although HPC agreed to
reduce the number of residents from 56 to 36, "even that number would be at the extreme high
end of the density allowed" and "[t]he ac1ual intensity of the use would be even greater, given
the staffing requirements." However, the City specifically stated in its October 16, 2008 staff
report that the equivalent density for a site approximately the size of 840 N. Sierra Way in the
RM zone "would be 6 units, which would accommodate a range of20-36 residents." In teSpOnse
to this concern, HPC agreed to reduce the number of its residents from 56 to 36, consistenl with
the City's stated October 16,2008 density requirement 14 Furthermore, the City relies
inappropriately on Municipal Code Section 19.04.030(2)(1') to invoke the requirement that social
service centers must "conform to the residential density standard of the underlying land use
designation, and to have a level of intensity compatible with the residential district surrounding
the site."IS As clarified in Section ill-A-l of this letter, the proposed shelter cannot be classified
as a social service center; therefore, Municipal Code Section 19.04.030(2)(T) does not apply and
cannot be used as a basis to deny the CUP.
b.Lot Size Requirement Does Not Apply to This Site
Even if the City was permitted to rely on inconsistency findings under Section
65589.5(d)(5), the one-acre lot size requirement does not apply to this site. The one-acre .
minimum site area requirement16 that the City cites in Finding 5.3 is only applicable to social
service centers. As clarified in Section III-A-I of this letter, the proposed shelter cannot be
classified as a social service center. It is improper for the City to assert that the proposed shelter
should now be classified as a social service center despite the fact that the application was
submitted for a "homeless facility", and the City has repeatedly referred to it as a homeless
shelter, homeless facility, or emergency shelter in all of its previous staff reports. Therefore, this
lot size requirement is inapplicable to HPC and cannot be used as a basis to find inconsistency.
c.Proposed Shelter Would Not Alter Character of the Existing
Neighborhood
Even if the City was permitted to rely on inconsistency findings under Section
65589.5(d)(5), there is no evidence in the record to indicate that the proposed shelter would alter
the character of the existing neighborhood. Finding 5.4 states that the proposed shelter would be
inconsistent with the general plan because "[ e ]xis1ing homes in the immediate vicinity of the
,. November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #5.2
" November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #5.2
" Municipal Code Section 19.04.030(2)(I)(9)
""-.
~nllll: l'lA>1ic l:otI1sel
l!111 1I1lD llUllll
llfj!llfj!UUIl lD:Ul
H!:~U t'.UiU/lJi~
Page 9 of 15
proposed project are single-fami1y residences." Although there are existing single-family homes
nearby, properties in the immediate vicinitY represent minimal single-fami1y residences. The
parcels immediately adjacent to the proposed site include the fQIlowing uses: four (4) vacant
parcels (all zoned RM) to the south and southwest; Celebration City Lutheran Church to the
west; Pioneer Memorial Cemetery and another adjacent cemetery to the east Additionally,
permitting a homeless shelter in a residential zone is not Wlprecedentcd in the City. Central City
Lutheran Mission at 1254 North G Street is zoned RM. The abovementioned Frazee Community
Center, zoned RS, provides emergency shelter for 22 homeless men at a facility across from two
schools, a child development center, and a neighborhood park. The City is acting arbitrarily in
finding that HPC's proposed shelter would alter the character of the residential neighborhood
when no such findings were made for the abovementioned shelters, all of which are also located
in the City's residential zones.
d.lmpacts of the Proposed Shelter Would Not Outweigh Benefits to the
Public
Even if the City was permitted to rely on inconsistency findings under Section
65589 .5( dX 5), any impacts of the proposed shelter would not outweigh its public benefits.
Finding 5.4 states that, because of the general plan inconsistency discussed above, "the City sball
utilize its discretion to deny or require mitigation of projects that result in impacts that outweigh
benefits to the public." As indicated in the most recent regional homeless COWlt, the City of San
Bernardino is home to 1.915 homeless uer1lOns.17 This represents 26.1 % of the entire County
homeless population, making the City home to the largest proportion of the County's homeless.
Although the City states it currently has 265 beds in its existing homeless shelters, and an
additional 164 beds under constructionl8, it is important to note that (I) one of these sheltersl9
(68 beds) is closed2o and (2) five of these facilitiei1 (112 beds) are domestic violence shelters.
With only 197 beds actually currently available, and over 36% of these beds restricted to
domestic violence shelters, there remains a significant unmet need for housing for the City's
homeless. In addition to taking another 36 homeless persons off the street, the proposed shelter
would serve homeless from the City of San Bernardino and would also provide extensive
services (e.g., intense CllSe management, pre-employment preparation, career guidance, job
placement) to facilitate reintegration. HPC's proposed shelter would be the only one in the City
providing this combination of supportive services and housing for homeless persons. Thus,
because of its failure to adopt a revised housing element, the City is not permitted to rely on the
inconsistency exception contained in Section 65589.5(d)(5) to Qeny HPC's proposed shelter.
Even if it had a revised housing element, there is insufficient evidence in the record to support a
finding ofland use inconsistency.
17 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Comprehensive Report, page 2l.
11 November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion 111.3
19 Salvalion Anny, 746 W. Fifth Slreel
20 l'umJant 10 conversation between Liz Roubidoux and Sa\va1ion Anny in October 2008.
21 80ih Veronica's Home sites; Option House; Time for Change Foundation; and New House
~nJl!l: 1'tJb11 c lllInsel
j!J;:1 ~llb llUllll
ll/j!~/j!UUll lb;Uj!
1Ij!j!U 1". U111 Ul ~
Page 10 oftS
3. The Proposed Emergency Shelter Would Not Have a Specific Adverse
Impact on Public Health and Safety That Caunot Be Avoided or Mitigated-
Govt. Code ~589.5(d)(2)
a. Findings Do Not Establish Specific Adverse Impact on Public Health or
Safety
To establish that the proposed shelter would have a "specific, adverse impact upon the
public health or safety," the City must have found "significant, quantifiable, direct, and
unavoidable impact[s], based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards,
policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.'.22 Govt.
Code 965589.5(dX2). There is simply no evidence in the record to indicate that the City bas
found significant, quantifiable public health or safety impacts based on identified standards. Not
only does the City fail to identify significant, quantifiable impacts, it also fails to identify written
public health or safety standards against which such impacts were measured. The City has
clearly, therefore, failed to demonstrate that the denial of the CUP is consistent with
965589.5(d)(2).
In Findings 3.1 through 3.4, the City contends that the housing of parolees or
probationers at the proposed shelter constitutes a public safety concern. lithe City intends to
claim that there is a significant adverse impact on public safety that cannot be avoided, it must
present plausible evidence that the presence of parolees/probationers in this shelter will actually
make the area harder to police. The mere potential for additional parolees/probationers living in
this area does not make the area patently harder for police to service without considering any
other factors such as the nature of the shelter in question.23 The only evidence given is previous
experience with "a 24-unit facility" and a "14-umt apartment parolee/probationer facility. n24 The
City does not provide any description of these facilities or of their opemtion, giving no basis for
assuming they are actua1ly analogous to HPC's proposed shelter. The City's sparse findings
regarding the previous facilities give no indication that those facilities were as well planned and
as well equipped as HPC to prevent a significant burden on police resources and public safety, as
demonstrated by HPC's Security Plan and other security policies. Regardless, the City still fails
to present significant, quantifiable impacts as required by 965589.5(d)(2).
While it may be tempting for the City to simplyasswne, without evidence, that parolees
in every setting are highly likely to commit crimes, the law does not afford the City leeway to
make such assumptions without presenting supporting evidence and considering the specifics of
this facility and its particular programs and procedures. Otherwise, the City's argument seems to
be that it is not conceivably possible, regardless of planning or precautions, to run a shelter that
houses some parolees without significantly endangering public safety. Such an argument is
unsupported and directly contradicts the legislative intent of SB 2.
12 This subsection Iiutber .tale. thal "[i]nconsisIl:ncy wilh lbe zoning ordinance or gmeral plan land use designation
sball not coastitute . specific, adverse impact upon the public heallb or safety."
23 November 5, 2008 FiDdiDgs and COIWlusion #3.2 (''lhere is already. high com:en1l'8lion of paroleeslprobationers
in lbe area"); #3.4 ("the Commission has concerns regarding the security at the proposed fiIcility if; as 8JlPClIIS to be
lbe case, all or. substantial portion oflhe residents would be paroleeslprobations").
" November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #3.3
''''~....J
~~OD:~ljc Uounsel
Ll~ ~ l:!lJtll:!
11/~tl/~ lb:U~
,,~ ....Uli1!:/lJll:1
Page 11 of 15
--"-";"-
Rather than relying on the experiences with two dissimilar facilities, the City should have
considered HPC's two similar shelters in Los Angeles County.2S Neither of these shelters has
caused a significant increased burden on the police force in their respective communities.
Evidence based on a similar shelter with similar procedures and pl8cticcs run by the same
organization is far more relevant than the experiences with two unrelated facilities. Furthermore,
HPC's Security Plan addresses site security, discipline, disturbance control, facility containment,
search & seizure, and emergency evacuation procedures, as outlined in its August 13, 2008 letter
to Aron Liang, City Planning. Without relevant and specific information on which to base the
conclusion that the residents at the proposed shelter will have an adverse impact on the
community's public safety, this finding is unwammted. Even if the City fOlmd a specific,
adverse. quantifiable impact on public health or safety, there is no evidence that such findings
are based on objective standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the
application was deemed complete.
b.City Has Not Made Required Finding Under Section 6SS89.S(d)(2) and
Any Potential Impacts of Shelter Would be Mitigated or Avoided
AdditiQnally, even if the City had presented evidence establishing that the proposed
shelter would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, the City must also
have found that "there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific
adverse impact without. .. rendering the development of the emergency shelter financially
infeasible." Govt. Code ~6S589.s (d)(2). The adopted Findings and Conclusion fail to make this
required finding.
Even if the City bad made the required finding, HPC has provided the City with
sufficient information which either mitigates or eliminates any potential safety concerns.
Specifically, although HPC is not at liberty to discriminate against or refuse services to non-
violent parolees, it does not service violent offenders. This fact extremely mitigates any concern
that the residents would present a safety risk to the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, in
response to the City's safety concerns with probationers/parolees residing at this shelter in light
of prior experiences with other facilities, HPC has expressed its intent and desire to work very
closely with the City's Police Department and other local service providers. As referenced
above, on August 13.2008, HPC submitted responses to the City's safety concerns.
Additionally, all staff receive training on how to oversee and monitor the activities of
residents and how to enforce residential center rules and regulations. This training is ongoing via
training curriculwns provided by the American Correctional Association, which specializes in
training residential monitors working with various homeless and residential centers. Further
details on HPC's personnel trainina is available and can be provided to the City.. In response to
Finding 3.s and the City's concern with discharging residents who may be under the influence of
banned substances, HPC has a clearly established procedure of providing a referral to an
appropriate facility as well as ammging for the transportation of the resident to the referral
location. Lastly, HPC docs not operate a day laborer program, and therefore, any concerns with
the unsupervised release of residents as part of this pmported program are completed eliminated.
Z5 BridgebllGk 11- 1718 W. Vernon Ave, LosADgeIes; US Vets Initiative-4JI6E. Compton Ave, Compton
,~
frorn:Public Gounsel
213 38fi llDBB
11/211/;tUll8 1 b: U I
lraD 1'. Dl~/U111
Page 12 ofl5
Thus, because it has failed to identify specific, q"RntifiAhle health and safety impacts that cannot
be mitigated, the City cannot rely on Section 65589.5(d)(2) to deny HPC's CUP.
4. The City's Land Use Conflict FmdiDgs llR Insaflicieat to Allow Deoial of the
Shelter - Govt. Code !i!i65589.5(d)(2), (5)
The City's Land Use Conflicts F;ndi.,~ are insufficient to allow it to deny the shelter
under Section 65589.5(d)(2) or Section 65589.5(d)(5). The City states the proposed projett
would have "adverse impacts on neighboring land uses... that could not be avoided with the
adoption of the ameliorative measures the applicant was able and willing to adOpt.'.27 However,
no specific, quantifiable findings of adverse impacts on public health or safety based on
objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions on the date
the applicant was deemed complete have been made. Additionally, Section 65589.5(d)(2)
specifically states that land use inconsistency does not constitute a specific, adverse impact on
the public health and safety. As discussed in further detail below, any proposed impacts on
Option House and Lincoln II Elementary School can be avoided.
As discussed above in Section m-B-l, the City's failure to adopt arevisedhousing
element precludes it from denying the shelter based on general plan or land use inconsistencies.
Regardless, as discussed below, any potential land use conflicts are avoidable; therefore, the City
fails to establish grounds for denial based on its Land Use Conflicts Findings.
a.Shelter Would Not Have Unavoidable Adverse Impacts on Option House
The City cites the proximity of Option House, a domestic violence shelter, to the
proposed shelter as grounds for a land use conflict.28 eased on the relevant findings, it appears
that the City believes that the residents of the proposed shelter will pose a threat to the safety of
Option House residents, though this is never specifically stated. The proposed shelter will not
house any violent offender parolees or probationers, and, because HPC is not eligible to provide
services for sex offenders, these individuals will not be participants or residents of the proposed
shelter. Additioually, any safety concerns as they relate to the residents of Option House are
mitigated by the fact that the proposed shelter would operate under a specific schedule requiring
participants to be at meals, meetings or programming from 6 am to 6 pm Monday through
Friday. This regimented schedule, in addition to HPC's security efforts, extremely mitigates and
possibly eliminAtes the possibility of these individuals coming into contact with residents of
Option House. Fwthermore, Section 65589.5(d)(2) specifically states that land use inconsistency
does not constitute a specific, adverse impact on the public health and safety.
b.Shelter Would Not Have Unavoidable Adverse Impacts on Planned
Lincoln II Elementary School
The only land use conflict asserted by the City with regards to the planned Lincoln II
Elementary School is that "undesirable contacts between students waIking by the facility and
u November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #4 el seq.
27 November 5,2008 Findings and Conclusion #4
"November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #4.1-4.4
'-
Frm:Public Comsel
213 386 SOBS
11/28/200B 16:0B
I22D P.OI4iD~S
Page 13 of15
residents of the facility likely would occur.>>29 Based on this assertion, it appears that the City
believes it is "undesirable" to potentially have elementary school children intemcl with or walk
by homeless individuals. However, Frazee Community Ceoter at 1140 Mill Street, zoned
Residential Suburban (RS), cummtly provides emergency shelter to 22 homeless men in a
facility directly across from two schools, a child development center, and a park. A new
elementary school is planned to be constructed directly to the south of this existing shelter.
Finding 4.5 makes an tmfounded and discriminatory assumption that homeless persons
would somehow improperly interact with children wa1king to school, in addition to singling out
this particular shelter and treating it differently from other similar shelters in the City. This is
precisely the type of discrimination that the Housing Accountability Act and SB 2 were enacted
to deter. Furthermore, in its own comment l~o on this matter, the San Bernardino Unified
School District did not assert any unavoidable safety impacts of the proposed shelter on the
school. Rather, its letter highlights the City's need for more intensiv~ rehabilitation, of the kind
HPC would provide, to address chronic homelessness.
In addition, the proposed shelter would provide housing for homeless persons already on
the streets of the City. By housing these individuals, the opportunities for interaction with the
public in general is already greatly reduced. Furthermore, the proposed shelter would operate
under a specific schedule requiring participants to be at meals, meetings or programming from 6
am to 6 pm Monday through Friday. This regimented schedule extremely mitigates and possibly
eliminates the possibility of these individuals being outside of the shelter when school children
are present.
Regardless, as the findings allude, HPC has proposed to include a sunset clause or date of
expiration in the CUP.3! It is both common practice and legally enforceable for jurisdictions to
place an expiration date as a condition for approval of a CUP. On October 8, 2008 HPC offered
to terminate use of the site as a homeless shelter upon the completion of'the proposed elementary
school and to provide a new use, as permitted by the Code. that would best serve the community.
There is no question that the expiry of use of the shelter at the time of the school's completion
would eliminate any potential land use conflict.
'The City's position that it cannot approve the CUP because it cannot guarantee the:futurc
use following the expiIation of the a;p32 is misguided. Because the CUP would have a sunset
clause limiting the validity of the CUP to avoid any conflict with the school, the subsequent use
of the property would have to be a use that is permitted under current zoning ordinances without
a CUP. The approval of a CUP with a sunset clause will have no legal effect whatsoever on the
future use of the property following the expiIation of the CUP. While HPC has expressed its
wiJHng>>_o to work with the City to help ensure an appropriate use follows the expiration of the
CUP, the City's land use ordinances ultimately ensure that an appropriate use will follow.
Because of these reasons and because Section 65589.5(dX2) specifically states that land use
29 November 5, 2008 Fiudiog.> and Conclusion #4.5
,. September 16, 2008 Staft'Report, Anaclnnent E (June 25, 2008 leller from Judy D. White, San Bernardino City
Unified School District Deputy Superintendent)
" October ]6. 2008 PlanniDg Division Staft'Report, page ]: November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #4.6
32 November 5, 2008 Findings and Conclusion #4.6
.....
""'" LV' LVVV .I' .I'" '"
I ........'...." "...",,"'........ \L'.I1 .IV" I VVI
"v, "VV" "L
Page 14 oflS
inconsistency does not constitute a specific, adverse impact on the public health and safety, the
City has no basis to deny the CUP on future use 1lI'0unds .
Finally. the City is also severely limited in its ability to deny the shelter based on school
impacts because California law already provides a mechanism for mitigation of school impacts-
see, e.g. Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995.
IV. The Law Requires the City Council to Grant HPC'I CUP to Operate a Homeleu
Shelter Without Impoling UllftlIIon.ble Conditiolll and/or Ratrictlolll
As highlighted above, the City has an overwhelDUng and unmet need for housing and
services for its 1,915 homeless residents. The City's existing shelters do not even come close to
providing enough beds to house its homeleSll. By denying HPC's proposed shelter, essential
housing and services are being elimin~ted from the community.
The Planning Commission's decision on November 5, 2008 was in violation of State law.
State law, including the Housing Accountability Act as amended by SB 2, promoits the City
from denying a homeless shelter under the City's CIIIICIIt fjntlings. Not only are the City's
findings facially insufficient to establish grounds for denial of the proposed shelter, but the City
has also failed to adopt a revised housing element consistent with State law.
"=,~.
As explained above, HPC's proposed shelter cannot be classified as a social service
center. Clearly, the shelter- whether classified as an emergency shelter or transitional housing-
falls under the protections of the Housing Accountability Act As shown in Section III of this
memo, the City does not have any basis to deny the shelter because it cannot avail itself of MY of
the exceptions to the Housing Accountability Act. Because of its failure to adopt a revised
housing element, the City is not permitted to rely on the inconsistency exception contained in
Section 65589.5(d)(S). Even if it bad a revised housing element, there is insufficient evidence in
the record to support a finding ofland use inconsistency. Fwthennore, because it has failed to
identify specific, quantifiable health and safety impacts based on objective, identified written
public health or safety standards, the City cannot rely on Section 65589.5(dX2) to deny HPC's
CUP.
Therefore, the law requires tile City Council to approve HPC's CUP to operate a
homeless shelter without imposing lIlIreasonable conditions and/or restrictions on its Operation.
By approving the CUP, the City Council will not only bring the City's actions into compliance
with State law, but 'Will also materially address the needs of the City's homeless ~idents. HPC
respeotfully requests that the City Council approve its CUP application to operate a homeless
shelter at 840 N. Sierra Way.
Respectfully Submitted,
~~~
Attorney
Equal Justice Works Fellow
---
"Y" ~V' ~VVV J.JV'"
. "'......." "'....""".... \~.../ ..vJ~..,,~
....... J" "J ,. J
Page 15 oflS
Community Development Project-
HOPE Unit
Public Counsel
cc: Dr. Garnett Newcombe, CEO Human Potential Consultants, LLC
� v
aq
a
9
j
1�1.
M
Fie
San Bernardino County
2007 Homeless Census aod Survey
Connprehensive P A R T FAY
Community Action Partnership
of Sari Bernardino County
r
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Table of Contents
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary....................................................................................................................1
Methodology............................................................................................................................1
The Number of Homeless Persons in San Bernardino County...............................................2
A Profile of Homelessness......................................................................................................4
Summary...............................................................................................................................11
Introduction...............................................................................................................................12
Project Purpose and Goals......................................................................................................13
HomelessCensus Findings.....................................................................................................15
Number of Unsheltered Homeless People............................................................................15
Number of Sheltered Homeless People................................................................................18
Total of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homeless .....................................................................20
Jurisdictional Breakdowns.....................................................................................................21
Mapsof Census Results.......................................................................................................25
CensusMethodology................................................................................................................29
StreetCount..........................................................................................................................29
Shelter and Institution Count.................................................................................................30
Homeless Census Challenges..............................................................................................31
AnnualEstimation .................................................................................................................33
Homeless Survey Findings......................................................................................................35
Demographics.......................................................................................................................35
Characteristics of Homelessness..........................................................................................42
DisablingConditions .............................................................................................................44
The Chronically Homeless....................................................................................................48
Reasons for Homelessness..................................................................................................50
Accessing of Government Assistance and Homeless Programs..........................................54
Sourcesof Income................................................................................................................57
Alcoholand Drug Abuse .......................................................................................................59
DomesticViolence ................................................................................................................60
Medical Care and Health Conditions.....................................................................................61
urveyMethodology.................................................................................................................63
Planning and Implementation................................................................................................63
SurveySampling...................................................................................................................63
DataCollection......................................................................................................................64
DataIntegrity.........................................................................................................................65
Survey Challenges and Limitations.......................................................................................65
Overall Summary for the Continuum of Care Application ....................................................66
AppendixI: Census Instrument...............................................................................................67
Appendix II: Survey Instrument...............................................................................................68
Appendix III: General Survey Profile Results.........................................................................70
Appendix IV: Survey Profile Results by Veteran Status ......................................................85
Appendix V: Survey Profile Results by Substance Abuse..................................................100
ii
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Table of Contents
Appendix VI: Survey Profile Results by Youth Age 13 —21................................................115
Appendix VII: Survey Profile Results by Those with Mental Illness ..................................127
Appendix VIII: Survey Profile Results by Length of Homelessness.................................142
Appendix IX: Definitions ........................................................................................................160
iii
f
t
t
E
f
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Table of Figures
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Comparison of 2003 and 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Enumerations.......................................2
Figure 2: Comparison of 2003 and 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Enumerations by Supervisorial
District..........................................................................................................................................................2
Figure 3: Homeless Point-In-Time and Countywide Annual Estimation, 2007............................................................4
Figure 4: Race or Ethnicity of Respondents................................................................................................................5
Figure5: Respondents by Gender..............................................................................................................................5
Figure 6: Percentage of Respondents who are Chronically Homeless.......................................................................6
Figure 7: Primary Reasons for Homelessness............................................................................................................9
Figure 8: Where Respondents Were Most Recently Living at the Time They Became Homeless............................10
Figure 9: Number of Unsheltered Homeless People in 2007....................................................................................15
Figure 10: Number of Unsheltered Homeless People in 2003....................................................................................16
Figure 11: Total of All Unsheltered People, by Gender,Adult or Youth,and Family Status in 2007...........................17
Figure 12: Point-in-Time Sheltered Occupancy, by Gender and Individual or Family Status......................................18
Figure 13: Sheltered Census by Gender and Individual or Family Status...................................................................18
Figure 14: Number of Homeless Persons Counted in Reporting Emergency Shelters...............................................19
Figure 15: Emergency Shelter Occupancy, by Gender and Individual or Family Status.............................................19
Figure 16: Number of Homeless Persons Counted in Reporting Transitional Shelters...............................................19
Figure 17: Transitional Housing Occupancy, by Gender and Individual or Family Status...........................................20
Figure 18: Homeless Census Population Total by Setting and Family Status.............................................................20
Figure 19: Homeless Street Count Census Population Total by Census Tract...........................................................25
Figure 20: Homeless Street Count Census—Southwest Focus..................................................................................26
Figure 21: Homeless Street and Shelter Population Total by Census Tract...............................................................27
Figure 22: Homeless Street Count Census Population Total by Supervisorial District................................................28
Figure 23: Homeless Point-In-Time and Countywide Annual Estimation....................................................................34
Figure24: Age of Respondents...................................................................................................................................35
Figure 25: Gender of Respondents.............................................................................................................................36
Figure 26: Race or Ethnicity of Respondents..............................................................................................................36
Figure 27: Who Respondents Live With......................................................................................................................37
Figure 28: Number of Reported Children Age 0-5.......................................................................................................37
Figure 29: Number of Reported Children Age 6-12.....................................................................................................38
Figure 30: Number of Reported Children Age 13-17...................................................................................................38
Figure 31: Number of Reported Children in Foster Care.............................................................................................38
Figure 32: If Respondents'Children Are Old Enough,Are They In School?...............................................................39
Figure 33: Veteran Status 2003 and 2007...................................................................................................................39
Figure 34: Discharge Status in 2007...........................................................................................................................40
Figure 35: Educational Attainment 2003 and 2007 .....................................................................................................40
Figure 36: Respondent in Foster Care.......................................................................................................................41
iv
E
I
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Table of Figures
Figure 37: Where Respondents Were Most Recently Living at the Time They Became Homeless............................41
Figure 38: How Long Respondents Have Been Homeless Since They Last Lived in a Permanent Housing
Situation.....................................................................................................................................................42
Figure 39: In the Last 12 Months, Number of Times Respondents Have Been Homeless, Including This Episode
ofHomelessness .......................................................................................................................................43
Figure 40: In the Last 3 Years, Number of Times Respondents Have Been Homeless, Including This Episode of
Homelessness ...........................................................................................................................................43
Figure 41: Where Respondents Are Currently Most Often Living At Night..................................................................44
Figure 42: Respondents Who Are Currently Experiencing Mental Illness or Depression............................................45
Figure 43: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Using Mental Health Services if Experiencing Mental
Illness.........................................................................................................................................................45
Figure 44: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Experiencing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder(PTSD)...45
Figure 45: Are Respondents Currently Experiencing a Physical Disability?................................................................46
Figure 46: Are Respondents Currently Experiencing HIV/AIDS or Related Illnesses?..............................................46
Figure 47: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Experiencing Chronic Health Conditions........................47
Figure 48: Are Respondents Currently Experiencing a Developmental Disability?.....................................................47
Figure 49: Percentage of Respondents who are Chronically Homeless .....................................................................48
Figure 50: Chronically Homeless Population by Gender.............................................................................................49
Figure 51: Chronically Homeless Population by Ethnicity...........................................................................................49
Figure 52: Number of Co-occurring Disabling Conditions Among Chronically Homeless...........................................49
Figure 53: Services/Assistance Used by the Chronically Homeless(Top 5 Responses)..........................................50
Figure 54: Primary Reasons for Homelessness..........................................................................................................50
Figure 55: Circumstances That Are Preventing Respondents From Living In Permanent Housing
(Top 5 Responses) 52
Figure 56: Number of Months on Section 8 Housing Waiting List...............................................................................52
Figure 57: Employment Status of Respondents in 2003 and 2007.............................................................................53
Figure 58: Reasons For Not Being Employed(Top 5 Responses)..............................................................................53
Figure 59: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Receiving Any Form of Government Assistance
(Top 5 Responses).....................................................................................................................................54
Figure 60: Reasons Respondents Provided For Not Receiving Any Government Assistance(Top 5 Responses).....55
Figure 61: Services or Assistance Respondents Report Using(Top 5 Responses) ...................................................55
Figure 62: Awareness of San Bernardino County 211 Help Line................................................................................56
Figure 63: Have You Ever Used the Help Line?..........................................................................................................56
Figure 64: Total(Gross) Monthly Income From All Government Benefits...................................................................57
Figure 65: Total Gross Monthly Income From All Other Sources................................................................................57
Figure 66: Other Sources of Income(Top 5 Responses)............................................................................................58
Figure 67: Percentage of Respondents Who Indicated They Were Currently Experiencing Alcohol Abuse...............59
Figure 68: Percentage of Respondents Who Indicated They Were Currently Experiencing Drug Abuse...................59
Figure 69: Percentage of Respondents Who Were Experiencing Substance Abuse and Are Currently Receiving
SubstanceAbuse Counseling....................................................................................................................60
v
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Table of Figures
Figure 70: Respondents Currently Experiencing Domestic/Partner Violence or Abuse(By Gender)..........................60
Figure 71: Percentage of Respondents Who Have Needed Health Care and Been Unable to Receive It Since
BecomingHomeless..................................................................................................................................61
Figure 72: Where Respondents Usually Get Medical Care(Top 5 Responses) .........................................................62
Figure 73: Number of Times in the Past Year Respondents Have Used the Emergency Room For Any Treatment..62
vi
2007 San Bernardino Homeless Census and Survey Acknowledgements
Project Donors and Sponsors
Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County
City of Barstow City of Chino City of Colton
City of Fontana City of Hesperia City of Ontario
City of Rialto City of San Bernardino City of Victorville
Town of Apple Valley
San Bernardino County San Bernardino County San Bernardino County
Department of Behavioral Department of Public Health Human Services System
Health
San Bernardino County San Bernardino County Children's Fund of San
Workforce Development Veterans Affairs Bernardino County
Department
City of San Bernardino Housing Authority of San Pacific Life Foundation
Redevelopment Agency Bernardino County
Acknowledgements
The considerable talents and efforts of many individuals helped to assure the success of this endeavor.
Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County(CAPSBC)would like to thank the many
service providers who assisted in the administration of surveys, facilitated the process of homeless peer
enumeration by recruiting census workers,and opened the doors of their facilities to host training
sessions,deploy census workers,or distribute surveys.Finally, CAPSBC would like to thank the
community volunteers,homeless census and survey workers,as well as the survey respondents,whose
efforts are reflected throughout the findings of this report.
vii
i
2007 San Bernardino Homeless Census and Survey Acknowledgements
Project Committee
Patricia L. Nickols Lloyd Dixon
Community Action Partnership Community Development and Housing
Naomi D.Norman Kurt Wilson
Community Action Partnership City of San Bernardino
Rowena Concepcion Gary Morris
Community Action Partnership San Bernardino County Human Services System
Major Russell Fritz Dr.Mildred Henry
Salvation Army Provisional Accelerated Learning(PAL) Center
Isaac Jackson Bill Moseley
Department of Behavioral Health Department of Veterans Affairs
Chris Mardis
San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors
Applied Survey Research
Project Directors Analysts and Researchers
Peter Connery Laura Connery Holly Maclure
Kelly Pleskunas Shannon Fulton Monica Morales
Ken Ithiphol Kristin Ozawa
Tracy Keenan Javier Salcedo
Jillianne Leufgen Deanna Zachary
Hope Malcom Maltz Susan Brutschy,President
Viii
r
2007 San Bernardino Homeless Census and Survey Acknowledgements
Training Centers, Deployment Sites, and Survey Distribution Centers
Community Action Partnership of San Vista Guidance Center
Bernardino County
Morongo Basin Mental Health VARP,Inc.
New House,Inc Operation Break Through
Central City Lutheran Mission Inland Behavioral Health Services
Salvation Army Frazee Community Center
High Desert Homeless Services Inland Valley Recovery Services
Desert Manna Ministries Mary's Mercy Center
Foothill Family Shelter New Dawn Residential Care
New Hope Village United States Veterans Initiative
Community Outreach Services Knotts Family Agency
San Bernardino County Department of Aging and San Bernardino County Department of
Adult Services Behavioral Health
San Bernardino County Superintendent of San Bernardino County Department of Veterans
Schools Affairs
San Bernardino City Police Department
Photographs courtesy of Gabriel Acosta,Spencer Grant and Yahara Quezada
ix
I
i
s
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Homelessness is often cited as one of the most prominent indicators of our nation's social and economic
condition. Over the past 25 years, the number of people who are homeless has increased. Two trends are
largely responsible for this rise in homelessness: the growing shortage of affordable housing and the
increase in poverty.' Often homelessness is a result of circumstances that force people to choose between
housing and other basic needs.2 In an effort to generate valid qualitative and quantitative data regarding
the issue of homelessness in San Bernardino County, the Community Action Partnership of San
Bernardino County (CAPSBC) contracted Applied Survey Research (ASR) to conduct the 2007 San
Bernardino County Homeless Count.
A similar study was conducted in San Bernardino County in 2003 with ASR as the lead researcher.At the
core of the data collection methodology is the importance of homeless and formerly homeless persons
participating in the data collection efforts. Between November 2002 and February 2007, there was a 39%
increase in the number of homeless residents found in San Bernardino County. This executive summary
provides an overview of the process,the results, and comparisons with the previous study.
Methodology
Two strategies were used to collect the data for this study: a
point-in-time count and a comprehensive qualitative
assessment via homeless peer interviews. This methodology
is recommended by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD), and has been successfully
implemented in several counties across California, including
Los Angeles, Mendocino, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, and
Monterey Counties,and in the HUD case study of the City of
Atlanta, as well as Fulton and DeKalb counties in Georgia.
At the core of this research methodology is the conviction
that homeless persons should be integrated into the research effort by their participation on census and
survey data collection teams, as they possess first-hand knowledge of the places where homeless
individuals are likely to be found. It is believed that a homeless census and survey effort would not be
successful without the assistance of these individuals. Previous homeless enumeration efforts in other
communities have proven the reliability and integrity of this approach and our research teams included
trained homeless workers and volunteer service providers as well.
The first component of the project, a peer-oriented, point-in-time count of street and sheltered homeless,
was accomplished by canvassing 244 census tracts throughout San Bernardino County in the early
morning hours of February 27`h and 28`h, 2007. Data gathered by ASR for the shelter count involved the
reporting of occupancies from shelters and institutions — emergency shelters, transitional housing
Coalition for the Homeless.2006.Why are People Homeless?Fact Sheet#1.Washington,DC:National Coalition for the
Homeless.
z Ibid.
1
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
III
programs, and hotels and motels that accept vouchers. These occupancies were reported the nights before
the census began.
The second component of the project consisted of comprehensive one-on-one interviews conducted by
trained homeless workers and service providers. A total of 697 homeless San Bernardino County
residents were interviewed from early March to early April,2007. All research activities relied heavily on
homeless residents and service providers in the data collection phase for both outreach and data quality.
The results of the survey were then used to create a qualitative profile of the County's homeless
population. This methodology is in compliance with the 2006 HUD recommended street and shelter
survey methodology. It should be noted that like other homeless surveys, the respondent sample was not
truly random, since there is insufficient data about the target population to develop a truly random
sampling methodology.
The Number of Homeless Persons in San Bernardino County
The 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey counted 6,111 homeless people on streets
within the 244 tracts, and counted an additional 1,220 homeless people in emergency shelters,transitional
housing, people using vouchers, and those in domestic violence shelters. Rehabilitation facilities reported
having 145 homeless people. County hospitals and jails could not be reached to get a count of the number
of homeless in those facilities. The final result of the 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and
Survey is 7,331 persons,which excludes the rehabilitation,jails,and hospital figures.
Figure 1: Comparison of 2003 and 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Enumerations'
Total Year of Study
2003 San Bernardino County Homeless Census 5,270
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census 7,331
'Please note,the 2003 San Bernardino Homeless Census methodology was different than the methodology employed in the
2007 Homeless Census and is reviewed on the following page.
Figure 2: Comparison of 2003 and 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Enumerations by
Supervisorial District'
District 2003 Enumeration 2007
District 1 1,078 1,420
District 2 503 741
District 3 1,052 1,893
District 4 396 880
District 5 2,241 2,264
Overall Total 5,270 7,198
'Please note,the 2007 enumeration total does not include 133 persons reported in County-wide Domestic Violence shelters.
Because these are confidential locations,they have not been assigned to any district.
2
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
In reviewing the findings of the 2003 and 2007 enumerations, it is important to note key methodological
changes:
1) In 2003, County voting districts were the unit of analysis used to count the number of homeless
on the streets of San Bernardino County. In 2007,Geographical Information System(GIS)census
tract maps were used as the unit of analysis. GIS maps are more accurate than voting district
maps,and help ensure an unduplicated count of the County's homeless.
2) In 2003, an informant count was used to supplement information on known whereabouts of the
homeless. In 2007, an informant count was not used, as it may have resulted in a duplicated
count.
3) In the 2003 figures, persons in cars, vans, RVs/campers, those in encampments, and those who
gender could not be identified were not reported separately. These figures are reported separately
in the 2007 report.
4) In 2007, the HUD-reportable numbers do not include people in rehabilitation facilities, hospitals
or jails due to HUD's more narrow definition of who is considered homeless for the point-in-time
count. These numbers will be reported separately;and
5) Finally, the 2007 census uses a new formula to calculate the annual estimate of homeless people
in San Bernardino County, so the annualizations from previous years are not directly comparable
to those for 2007. This new formula provides greater compliance with HUD approved formulas.
The 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Survey yielded data regarding the frequency and length of
homeless episodes, which were used to calculate an annual estimate of the number of people who experience
homelessness in a year.
This new HUD-recommended formula produced an annual +
estimate of 17,551 persons who were homeless some time
during 2006. Based on the 2006 population estimates from the
State of California Department of Finance,this annual estimate
of homelessness represents approximately 0.9% of San
Bernardino County's total population of 1,978,923 people.3
This annual estimate is consistent with other research
findings. The California Research Bureau estimates that
approximately 361,000 people are homeless in California at
any one time (approximately 1% of the general population),
and estimates the total number of people who experience homelessness over the course of a year to be
between one and two million people, or between 3% and 5% of California's general population.4
According to a 2002 study done by the National Coalition for the Homeless, approximately 3.5 million
people,or about I%of the U.S.general population, experience homelessness in a given year.
3 State of California,Department of Finance,Race/Ethnic Population with Age and Sex Detail,2000-2050.
4 Foster,Lisa K.and Snowdon,Patricia.Addressing Long-Term Homelessness:Permanent Supportive Housing.California
Research Bureau.August 2003.
3
I
I
f
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
Figure 3: Homeless Point-In-Time and Countywide Annual Estimation,2007
20,000 17,551
15,000
10,000 7,331
5,000- M -
0
Point-In-Time Count Annual Estimation
All qualitative data about homelessness in this report were derived from direct surveys of a sample of
homeless persons. As with all surveys of this nature, results are potentially biased by memory recall issues,
though our review of the data does not indicate this was a significant issue. Additionally, for critical profile
interest areas such the prevalence of disabling conditions, the research design relied on self-described and
self-defined responses.This is an approved method in homeless qualitative profiling due to the limitations in
connecting homeless persons to their clinical profiles,if they exist.
A Profile of Homelessness
Of the 7,331 homeless people identified in the 2007 point-in-time count, 17% were in shelter facilities
and 83% were considered unsheltered. This highlights the importance of combined street-based and
shelter-based enumerations,versus shelter-centered only enumeration efforts.
• Approximately 31% (1,887) of the homeless street population was living in vehicles (cars,
campers,vans,etc.).
• Demographically, the population is diverse: the largest percentage of homeless survey
respondents were Caucasian (45%) while 22% were Hispanic/Latino, 24% were African
American, 2% were American Indian or Alaskan Native, 2% were Asian or Pacific Islander,
and 5% identified with other or multiple racial or ethnic groups. The two largest age groups
were 41-50 years old(31%)and 31-40 years old(27%).
According to the State of California Department of Finance population estimates, Caucasians comprise
27% of the total population of San Bernardino County, and Hispanic/Latinos comprise 53% of the total
population. African Americans comprise 11% of the population, while Asian/Pacific Islanders comprise
7% of the County's population. Therefore, African Americans (24%) and Caucasians (45%) were
significantly over-represented in the survey, and Hispanic/Latinos (2%) were significantly under-
represented as compared to the general population of San Bernardino County. Asian/Pacific Islanders
(2%)were also under-represented in comparison.
4
I
III
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
i
Figure 4: Race or Ethnicity of Respondents
60% 52.8%
44.7%
40%
0
26.7/0 24.4% 21.8%
20%
10.6%
° °
2.0% 0.7% 2.0% 7.3/0 5.1/0 1.8%
0%
Caucasian African American Hispanic/Latino American Asian/Pacific Other/Multi-ethnic
Indian/Alaskan Islander
02007 San Bernardino Homeless Survey(N=692)
02007 San Bernardino General Population(N=2,016,466)
San Bernardino County General Population data source: State of California,Department of Finance,
Race/Ethnic Population with Age and Sex Detail,2000-2050.
In the 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Survey, females were slightly over-represented in the
survey population at 36%, as compared to the female homeless population of San Bernardino County of
30%. Males were slightly under-represented in the survey population at 63%, as compared to the male
homeless population of San Bernardino County of 70%. Approximately 1%of the survey population were
transgender.
Figure 5: Respondents by Gender
°
80/0 63.1% 70.1%
60% !'
40/o 35.8%
o �iyt. 29.9%
I
20%
0%
Male Female
E 200 San Bernardino Homeless Survey 02007 San Bernardino Homeless Census
Note: Numbers for the survey results do not total 100%,due to 1.0%of the respondents identifying themselves
as transgender.
Numbers for San Bernardino Homeless Survey:Male=435, Female=247.
Numbers for San Bernardino Census(Shelter and Street Count)Results:Male=2,292, Female=979.
5
i
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
The Chronic Homeless
A profile of the chronically homeless was obtained from the data gathered from the homeless survey. The
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development defines a chronically homeless person as:
An unaccompanied individual with a disabling condition who has been:
1. Continually homeless for one year or more; or
2. Has experienced four or more episodes of homelessness within the past 3 years.
It should be noted that"a disabling condition" includes physical, mental and developmental disabilities, as
well as alcoholism, drug addiction, depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), HIV/AIDS, or a
chronic health condition. Of the 697 homeless survey respondents, approximately 38% (267 respondents)
can be considered chronically homeless. This figure is higher than the one reported in the 2007 Annual
Homeless Assessment Report (AHAR) to Congress, which compiled data from 2005 HUD applications of
all the Continuums of Care.That report found that 23%of all homeless people are chronically homeless.'
Figure 6: Percentage of Respondents who are Chronically Homeless
100%
75% 62%
50% 38%
26%
0%
Yes No
N=697
5 U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development,Office of Community Planning and Development,The Annual
Homeless Assessment Report to Congress,2007.
6
Ii
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
i
The Daily Condition of Homeless Persons — Survey Results
Frequency of Homelessness
• Approximately 50%of homeless survey respondents indicated they had been homeless only once
within the past 12 months.
• Nearly 16% of homeless survey respondents had been homeless six or more times in the past 3
years.
Length of Homelessness
• Approximately 45%percent of all respondents had been homeless for one year or more.
• Of those, 18%of respondents indicated they had been homeless for more than three years.
Usual Sleeping Arrangements
• Twenty-six percent (26%) of survey respondents indicated their usual nighttime sleeping
arrangement was outdoors.
• Over 22%indicated they usually spent the night in transitional housing, emergency or other types
of shelters.
• Eleven percent(11%)of the respondents stayed in a car,van,or camper.
• Approximately 15% said their usual sleeping arrangements were in a garage, backyard storage
structure,or a place other than the outdoors not meant to be used as shelter for human beings.
• An additional 7%slept in an abandoned building.
Unemployment
• Approximately 88%of the homeless were unemployed at the time of the survey.
• The three leading causes of unemployment were not having a permanent address (34%), no
transportation(32%),or not having a phone(29%).
Access of Government Assistance
• Approximately 46% of survey respondents received government assistance. Over 54% indicated
they received no government assistance through General Assistance, Food Stamps, WIC,
SSI/SSDI,CalWorks,Medi-Cal/Medi-Care, Social Security or Veteran's Benefits.
• The most common benefit that was accessed by respondents was Food Stamps(25%).
7
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
• Of those respondents not receiving government
assistance, the most common reason they did not -
think they were eligible(25%).
Children and Families
• Almost 23% of respondents reported having
children.
• Nearly 5% of all survey respondents reported
living with their children, while an additional 1%
indicated they were living with their spouse and children.
• Of those with children under the age of 18, approximately 32%of respondents indicated they had
children in foster care.
• Almost 20%of respondents lived with other homeless family or friends.
Domestic Violence
• Approximately 14% of female respondents and 6% of male respondents reported they were
currently experiencing domestic violence.
• Approximately 9% of all respondents indicated they were currently experiencing domestic
violence.
Disabling Conditions
• Overall, approximately 73% of survey respondents indicated they were experiencing a disabling
condition. For the purposes of this survey, a disabling condition was identified as a physical
disability, developmental disability, mental illness, depression, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder,
alcohol or drug use, HIV/AIDS,or chronic health problems.
• Approximately 26%indicated they were experiencing a physical disability.
• Almost 34% of respondents reported they were experiencing alcohol abuse, while 35% indicated
they were experiencing drug use.
• Nearly 26% of respondents were experiencing mental illness, while approximately 42% were
experiencing depression and 13%were experiencing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder(PTSD).
8
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
The Primary Reasons for Becoming Homeless
Overall, survey respondents most frequently cited loss of job or unemployment or alcohol or drug use as
the primary event or condition that led to their current episode of homelessness; these causes were named
by approximately 24% of respondents in 2007. It should be noted that this response is a subjective self-
analysis and it is not possible to determine objectively which condition preceded the other. Other common
causes of homelessness were argument with family or friends (10%), incarceration (6%) or
family/domestic violence (4%). Approximately 10% of respondents indicated there were other primary
reasons for their homelessness that were not listed on the survey.
Figure 7: Primary Reasons for Homelessness
Percent of Total
Response i02007
Lost job' 28.4% 23.7%
High cost of housing/rent2 17.5% --
Alcohol or drug use 17.1% 23.5%
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave3 2.8% 9.9%
Incarceration 7.1% 5.8%
Family/domestic violence4 2.3% 4.4%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or reused property5 -- 4.1%
Mental health issues 1.7% 3.9%
Housing eviction2 3.5% --
Disability2 3.3% --
Don't know/declined to states 0.3% 3.2%
Landlord raised rents -- 3.0%
Illness or medical problems 1.4% 2.5%
Divorced or separated 4.9% 2.0%
Lost of parentldeath2 1.3% --
No transportation/care 0.5%
Runaway/left home2 0.4% --
Gambling problems -- 1.6%
Hospitalization/treatment programs 0.6%
For being Lesbian,Gay,or Bisexual - 0.6%
Hurricane Katrina5 -- 0.4%
Got too old for foster care 0.4% 0.4%
Other natural disaster/fire/floods -- 0.4%
Other 7.0% 9.7%
Total 100.0% 100.0%
N=1,375 N=689
'This response was re-worded from"Unemployment"to"Lost job"in 2007.
2This response was omitted from the 2007 survey.
9
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
3This response was re-worded from"Conflict with Family"to"Argument—friend or family asked you to leave"in 2007.
°Response option was re-worded in 2007 from"Family Violence"to"Family/Domestic Violence."
5New response option added in 2007.
6This response was re-worded from"Health/Medical Costs"to"Illness or medical problem"in 2007.
Figure 8: Where Respondents Were Most Recently Living at the Time They Became Homeless
San Bernardino
County
71'9% ❑San Bernardino County
Los Angeles County
❑Riverside County
❑Other County in CA
■Out of State
Los Angeles County
Out of State Riverside County 10.6%
6.6% Other County in CA 6.3%
4.5%
N=695
10
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Executive Summary
Summary
The 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey
revealed a diverse population with many different needs. The
prominence of women and homeless families with children
demonstrates that the County's homeless population is varied and
changing. The dramatic effect that homelessness has on families and
children is clear, and correlations to future complicated case
management issues are apparent. With unemployment and
alcohol/drug abuse cited as the two primary cause of homelessness in
2007, it appears that economic and substance abuse issues are
paramount obstacles for the homeless to overcome.
Overall, the results of this study show that homelessness has increased
39% in San Bernardino since 2003. This increase is significant and is
inconsistent with results from other communities in the area. Los
Angeles, Riverside, Orange, and San Diego Counties all experienced slight or significant decreases in
their point-in-time homeless counts. Though many services providers are working hard to provide
services and support for the homeless population, the County still struggles with an increasing homeless
population. With 83% of the homeless being unsheltered, it is clear that a great effort is needed to serve
the growing needs of the County's homeless.
As the characteristics and needs of the homeless population continue to evolve,the importance of
measuring such characteristics and needs heightens.This community-wide research effort,and the results
presented in this report,hold the potential to assist San Bernardino County in the acquisition of additional
funding for homeless services,as well as to help service providers craft and refine programs that truly
reflect the needs of the dynamic population they serve. It is also hoped that this report will contribute to
San Bernardino County Continuum of Care's efforts to end homelessness.
11
2007 San Bernardino Homeless Census and Survey Introduction
Introduction
During the period of February 27`h and 28`h 2007,
Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County 'Gti '
(CAPSBC), in conjunction with Applied Survey Research
(ASR), conducted the 2007 San Bernardino County
Homeless Count. ASR is a non-profit social research firm
based in Watsonville, California, with extensive
experience in homeless enumeration and research. At the
center of ASR's research plan is the importance of
homeless and formerly homeless persons participating in
the data collection efforts.
Due to the large size of San Bernardino County, it was necessary to conduct the enumeration over a
period of two days. On February 27`h, enumeration teams were deployed from the City of San Bernardino,
Yucca Valley, and Twentynine Palms. The following day, enumeration teams were deployed from the
City of San Bernardino, Victorville, Barstow, Upland and Big Bear Lake.
The data presented in this report will provide information to support County and Statewide efforts to
mitigate and end homelessness and provide invaluable data regarding the number and characteristics of
homeless persons in San Bernardino County.
The findings of this report will be presented to the County Board of Supervisors, and will be shared with
city governments, the community of service providers, as well as the general County population. These
results are intended to help improve current homeless management policy and empower all agencies and
groups to more effectively develop services and programs to serve the County's homeless population.
Additionally, this data will support evaluation of current strategies, as well as the development of new
approaches by Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County (CAPSBC) as well as the
Continuum of Care as they address homelessness within their communities.
12
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Project Purpose and Goals
Project Purpose and Goals
In 2001, the United States government adopted a national goal to move toward ending chronic
homelessness in ten years.b Furthermore, the U.S. Congress required that state and municipal
governments receiving federal funds under the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act must conduct
a biennial, regular point-in-time count of their homeless populations. For these reasons, and most
importantly, because of Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County's desire for more
accurate and useful data, Community Action Partnership and its municipal governments undertook this
homeless census and survey.
The 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Project Committee identified several important project goals:
• To increase public awareness of homeless issues and generate support for constructive solutions;
• To improve the ability of policy makers and service providers to plan and implement services that
meet the needs of the homeless;
• To preserve current federal funding for homeless services and to enhance the ability to raise new
funds.
The results of this research will assist service providers, policy makers, funding sources, and local, state,
and federal governments in better understanding and planning for the needs of the homeless population by
examining current statistics in various geographical contexts. It is hoped that the 2007 San Bernardino
County Homeless Census and Survey will help policy makers and service providers more effectively
develop services and programs to serve the County's homeless population.
The data presented in this report provide an updated view of the homeless population in San Bernardino
County. The census and survey data will help CAPSBC further understand likely causes and contributing
factors of homelessness, and thereby, develop the best possible strategies to address remedies and
mitigating efforts.
Operational Definition
As a basis for this study,the McKinney-Vento definition of homelessness was used:
1. An individual who lacks a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence, and
2. An individual who has a primary nighttime residence that is:
a. A supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living
accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing
for the mentally ill); or
b. An institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be
institutionalized; or
6 The White House Domestic Policy Council,New Freedom Initiative:A Progress Report,Chapter 3,2004.
13
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Project Purpose and Goals
C. A public or private place not designated for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping
accommodation for human beings.
This definition does not allow for those marginally housed, "doubled-up" or "couch surfing" (more
specifically, those who "float" from location to location). Community Action Partnership of San
Bernardino County may also want to discuss new or revised strategies to gather more data in future
studies on various homeless sub-groups. In particular:
• People inhabiting inaccessible structures unfit for human occupation
• Youth populations
Additionally, other studies have shown the prevalence of homeless persons living on private property.
This is an area that should be assessed in future homeless enumeration efforts.
14
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Homeless Census Findings
To accurately enumerate the County's homeless population,a point-in-time census was conducted of:
1. Unsheltered homeless people, including those found on streets, in vehicles, in makeshift shelters
(such as tents),and encampments;
2. Sheltered homeless people occupying emergency shelters,transitional housing,domestic violence
shelters, and using hotel/motel vouchers and;
3. Homeless people occupying short-stay institutions such as hospitals, residential rehabilitation
facilities,and jails(although HUD does not include these people in the point-in-time count.)
Number of Unsheltered Homeless People
The point-in-time street count was conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday, February 27th and 28`h, 2007
from approximately 5:00 am to 9:00 am. Census enumerators canvassed all 244 U.S. census tracts in San
Bernardino County.
There were 3,137 persons found on the street (including those reported by park rangers), 250 persons in
cars, 1,637 persons in vans or RVs, and 1,087 persons in encampments counted within the 244 tracts
during the point-in-time street census. In addition, 1,220 persons were counted in the point-in-time shelter
census. The total of the street count and final shelter count is 7,331 homeless persons. For the purposes
of the street count portion, a family was defined as a single person or a couple with at least one child
under the age of 18. Please note,"Total Undetermined Gender" includes those whose gender could not be
determined, as well as people living in vehicles,encampments or parks.
Figure 9: Number of Unsheltered Homeless People in 2007
Homeless Individuals
Individual
Individual Individual Undetermined Individual
Male Female Gender Youth total
1,815 549 265 1 298 1 2,927
Homeless Families
#of Family
Units Males Females Youth Sub total
45 45 49 73 1 167
People Homeless Individuals in Vehicles,Encampments or Parks
#of People in #of People in #of People in . .
Cars Vans/RVs Encampments Park Rangers Sub total
250 1,637 1,087 43 1 3,017
Total of All Unsheltered Individuals and Families
Undetermined
Males Females Gender Youth Total
1,860 598 3,282 371 1 6,111
15
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Figure 10: Number of Unsheltered Homeless People in 20031
Homeless Individuals
Individual Male Individual Female Individual Youth total
2,133 718 104 2,955
Homeless Families
#of Family
Units Males Females Youth Sub total
160 128 163 1 284 1 575
Total Homeless Persons Counted
Total Male Total Female Total Youth Sub total
2,261 881 7 388 3,530
'Note:This count included those homeless reported by informants.This"informant count"was not included in the 2007
methodology.
During the course of the street count, enumerators counted cars, vans, RVs, and other types of vehicles
with what appeared to be sleeping occupants. Enumerators also counted actively occupied homeless
encampments. There have been few, if any, studies on typical sizes of homeless encampments. The
definition of an encampment for the purposes of this study was one or more makeshift structures for
living, including(but not limited to)tents,tarps,cardboard,or crates actively being occupied by homeless
persons. Out of concern for the privacy of the homeless community and the safety of the enumerators,
census workers were instructed not to approach vehicles or to enter encampment areas. Instead, when
they could not clearly count the number of occupants,enumerators were asked to just note on their census
tally sheet how many vehicles or encampments they discovered.
During the 2007 street census enumerators counted 201 cars, 925 vans or RVs and 405 encampments. To
calculate the number of homeless persons in those cars,vans/RVs, and encampments, empirical data from
the 2007 San Bernardino County Survey were used to generate a "multiplier." This was done by asking
survey respondents who reported staying in cars, vans, RVs, or encampments how many people typically
stayed there, producing an average number of people for each of these sleeping locations. The multiplier
for cars was 1.2424, for vans/RVs it was 1.7692, and for encampments it was 2.6842. These multipliers
were applied to every car, van/RV, or encampment identified, resulting in the numbers reported
previously.
16
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
The graph below illustrates the distribution of the demographics from the street count:
Figure 11: Total of All Unsheltered People, by Gender,Adult or Youth,and Family Status in 2007'
Individual Men 29.7%
Individual Women 9.0%
Individual Youth 4.9%
Undetermined Gender 4.3%
People in Families 2.7%
People in Cars 4.1%
People in RV's/Vans 26.8%
People in Encampments 17.8%
Reported by Ranger 0.7%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
N=6,111
'Note:The individual men and individual women categories do not equal 100%due to the large number of homeless of
unknown gender.
Nearly 31% of those individuals identified during the street count were living in a car, RV or van, while
18% were living in an encampment. Individual males accounted for 30% of those identified during the
street count,while individual females accounted for 9%of those identified during the street count.Almost
5% of those living on the street were individual youth under 18. Nearly 3% of those identified were in
families.
17
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Number of Sheltered Homeless People
Shelter Count Results
The number of homeless persons occupying emergency shelters, transitional housing, domestic violence
shelters, and institutional housing were enumerated in conjunction with the street count. While the
number of people in rehabilitation facilities, hospitals and jails is also reported separately, HUD does not
include them in the point-in-time count. They are instead reported as important supplemental
information.
A total of 1,220 people were counted in the point-in-time shelter census in 2007. This is a slight decrease
from 2003, when 1,242 people were counted in the point-in-time shelter census. It must be noted that the
2007 figure does not include homeless persons reported in rehabilitation facilities, hospitals and/or jails.
These persons were included in the 2003 shelter count.The following tables are a breakdown of the point-
in-time shelter count by gender and familial status.
Figure 12: Point-in-Time Sheltered Occupancy,by Gender and Individual or Family Status
Homeless Individuals Homeless Families
Single Single Single Single Male in Female in Youth in
Male Female Youth Undetermined Subtotal Family Family Family Sub total TOTAL
2007 390 186 33 0 609 42 195 374 611 1,220
Figure 13: Sheltered Census by Gender and Individual or Family Status
75%
50%
32.0% 30.7% 35.4%31.2 0/
25% 5.2% 16.0°/ � a!
�c
2.7% 3.4%
0%
Homeless Individuals Homeless Families Total
■Men ■Women 0 Youth
N=1,220
The following tables further illustrate the results of the shelter count by the type of shelter facility. The
numbers in the tables below are subsets of the 1,220 total sheltered homeless.
18
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Emergency Shelter Results
As shown in the following table, a total of 807 people were housed in emergency shelters or used
vouchers during the point-in-time enumeration in 2007. This is an increase from 2003, when 295 people
were reported as housed in emergency shelters. Nearly 61% of those counted in emergency shelters were
in families, while approximately 39%were individuals.
Figure 14: Number of Homeless Persons Counted in Reporting Emergency Shelters
Homeless Individuals Homeless Families
Single Single Single Single Male in Female in Youth in
Male Female Youth Undetermined Subtotal Family Family Family Sub total TOTAL
2007 179 114 24 0 317 38 155 297 490 807
Figure 15: Emergency Shelter Occupancy,by Gender and Individual or Family Status
75%
50% 0 39.8%
36.8/0 33.3°/
0 22.2% 19.2%
25/0 14.1
0%
Homeless Individuals Homeless Families Total
■Men ®Women ElYouth
N=807
Transitional Housing Results
A total of 413 homeless persons were housed in transitional housing facilities in 2007. This is a decrease
from 2003, when 650 people were reportedly housed in transitional housing facilities. The majority of
those counted in transitional housing facilities were individual men (51%) and 19% were youth in
families.
Figure 16: Number of Homeless Persons Counted in Reporting Transitional Shelters
TOTAL Homeless Individuals Homeless Families
Single Single Single Single Malein Female in Youth in
Male Female Youth Undetermined Subtotal Family Family Family Sub total
2007 211 72 9 0 292 4 40 77 121 413
19
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Figure 17: Transitional Housing Occupancy,by Gender and Individual or Family Status
75%
62.1%
50%
27.1%
25% 17.4% 18.6% 20.8%
9.7%
2.2% 1.0%
0%
Homeless Individuals Homeless Families Total
■Men ■Women 13 Youth
N=413
Total of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homeless
The total number of homeless (unsheltered and sheltered) from the point-in-time count was 7,331. This
count represents approximately 0.4% of San Bernardino County's total population of 2,016,466 people.'This
figure is similar to recent national reports, which cite the total point-in-time estimate of homeless persons as
less than 0.3%of the entire U.S.population.'The following charts illustrate the total by setting(unsheltered
versus type of shelter) and family status, by street versus shelter occupancy, and by demographic
distribution.
Figure 18: Homeless Census Population Total by Setting and Family Status
People
Setting Individuals Families people Total
Unsheltered 5,944 167 6,111 83.4%
In emergency shelter facilities 317 490 807 11.0%
In transitional housing facilities 292 121 413 5.6%
Totals 6,553 778 7,331 100.0%
%of Totals 89.4% 10.6% - 100.0%
7 State of California,Department of Finance,Race/Ethnic Population with Age and Sex Detail,2000-2050.
8 U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development,Office of Community Planning and Development.The Annual
Homeless Assessment Report to Congress.February,2007.
20
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Jurisdictional Breakdowns
Unsheltered and Sheltered Homeless Census Population Total, by City or Area
People
People in Encampments or
Reported Jurisdiction Individuals Families
Adelanto 10 11 5 26 0.4%
Apple Valley 55 20 9 84 1.1%
Barstow 107 43 34 184 2.5%
Big Bear 32 10 11 53 0.7%
Bloomington 9 0 37 46 0.6%
Chino 69 0 48 117 1.6%
Chino Hills 35 4 24 63 0.9%
Colton 117 21 164 302 4.1%
Crestline 5 0 2 7 0.1%
Domestic Violence Shelters 36 97 0 133 1.8%
Fontana 148 33 414 595 8.1%
Grand Terrace 13 0 20 33 0.5%
Hesperia 129 21 146 296 4.0%
Highland 95 4 13 112 1.5%
Joshua Tree 38 14 107 159 2.2%
Loma Linda 36 51 11 98 1.3%
Montclair 88 2 39 129 1.8%
Needles 24 5 16 45 0.6%
Ontario 331 60 140 531 7.2%
Rancho Cucamonga 48 14 60 122 1.7%
Redlands 63 44 51 158 2.2%
Rialto 94 4 35 133 1.8%
Running Springs 3 0 0 3 0.1%
San Bernardino 1,397 178 340 1,915 26.1%
Twentynine Palms 42 7 44 93 1.3%
Twin Peaks 6 0 0 6 0.1%
Unincorporated 283 36 896 1,215 16.6%
Upland 46 10 8 64 0.9%
Victorville 113 87 102 g7,3312 4.1%
Yucaipa 25 3 107 1.8%
Yucca Valley 27 11 134 2.3%
Total 3,524 790 3,017 100.0%
21
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Unsheltered Homeless Census Population Total, by City or Area
People
Reported People in Encampments or
Individuals Jurisdiction . .
Adelanto 10 0 5 15 0.20
Apple Valley 53 3 9 65 1.1%
Barstow 78 0 34 112 1.8%
Big Bear 28 2 11 41 0.7%
Bloomington 9 0 37 46 0.8%
Chino 65 0 48 113 1.8%
Chino Hills 35 4 24 63 1.0%
Colton 95 11 164 270 4.4%
Crestline 5 0 2 7 0.1%
Fontana 148 13 414 575 9.4%
Grand Terrace 13 0 20 33 0.5%
Hesperia 101 13 146 260 4.3%
Highland 95 0 13 108 1.8%
Joshua Tree 37 0 107 144 2.4%
Loma Linda 36 12 11 59 1.0%
Montclair 88 0 39 127 2.1%
Needles 24 5 16 45 0.7%
Ontario 331 28 140 499 8.2%
Rancho Cucamonga 48 0 60 108 1.8%
Redlands 62 0 51 113 1.8%
Rialto 94 4 35 133 2.2%
San Bernardino 976 23 340 1,339 21.9%
Twentynine Palms 41 0 44 85 1.4%
Unincorporated 283 36 896 1,215 19.9%
Upland 46 0 8 54 0.9%
Victorville 74 10 102 186 3.0%
Yucaipa 25 3 107 135 2.2%
Yucca Valley 27 0 134 161 2.6%
Total 2,927 167 3,017 6,111 100.0%
22
s
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Sheltered Homeless Census Population Total, by City or Area
People
Jurisdiction of
Adelanto 0 11 11 0.9%
Apple Valley 2 17 19 1.6%
Barstow 29 43 72 5.9%
Big Bear 4 8 12 1.0%
Chino 4 0 4 0.3%
Colton 22 10 32 2.6%
Domestic Violence Shelters 36 97 133 10.9%
Fontana 0 20 20 1.6%
Hesperia 28 8 36 3.0%
Highland 0 4 4 0.3%
Joshua Tree 1 14 15 1.2%
Loma Linda 0 39 39 3.2%
Montclair 0 2 2 0.2%
Ontario 0 32 32 2.5%
Rancho Cucamonga 0 14 14 1.1%
Redlands 1 44 45 3.7%
Running Springs 3 0 3 0.2%
San Bernardino 421 155 576 47.2%
Twentynine Palms 1 7 8 0.7%
Twin Peaks 6 0 6 0.5%
Upland 0 10 10 0.8%
Victorville 39 77 116 9.5%
Yucca Valley 0 11 11 0.9%
FTotal 597 623 1,220 100.0%
23
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Comparison - Unsheltered and Sheltered Homeless Census Population Total by City or
Area, 2003 and 20071
Total People Total People Percent
2003 Jurisdiction ii
Adelanto 49 26 -23 -46.9%
Apple Valley 81 84 3 3.7%
Barstow 387 184 -203 -52.5%
Big Bear 19 53 34 178.9%
Bloomington 245 46 -199 -81.2%
Chino 33 117 84 254.5%
Chino Hills 3 63 60 2,000.0%
Colton 154 302 148 96.1%
Crestline 65 7 -58 -89.2%
Domestic Violence Shelters -- 133 133 --
Fontana 102 595 493 483.3%
Grand Terrace 6 33 27 450.0%
Hesperia 220 296 76 34.5%
Highland 160 112 -48 -30.0%
Joshua Tree 62 159 97 156.5%
Loma Linda 39 98 59 151.3%
Montclair 28 129 101 360.7%
Morongo Basin 236 -- -236 --
Needles 39 45 6 15.4%
Ontario 332 531 199 59.9%
Rancho Cucamonga 260 122 -138 -53.1%
Redlands 347 158 -189 -54.5%
Rialto 237 133 -104 -43.9%
Running Springs -- 3 3 --
San Bernardino 1,605 1,915 310 19.3%
Twentynine Palms 14 93 79 564.3%
Twin Peaks -- 6 6 --
Unincorporated -- 1,215 1,215
Upland 76 64 -12 -15.8%
Victorville 226 302 76 33.6%
Yucaipa 129 135 6 4.7%
Yucca Valley 116 172 56 48.3%
Total 5,270 7,331 — 39.1%
24
f
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
I
i
Maps of Census Results
Figure 19: Homeless Street Count Census Population Total by Census Tract
3 i
,.. r
Adelanto
Legend
• ice ..- �
Homeless Street Count(by Census Tract)
•
10 or fewer people
*
7�
Chino Fontaiid
Ontario Redlands
"'ASR
hxrA..cd vw.o.�ev.�M'wrccnf�IlC:a+aar«u.a;,s lxb.+Mny � ..
25
S
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Figure 20: Homeless Street Count Census—Southwest Focus
_, • e5ye it
c
•
rt
*
fa • •
Uplaiid
• • • • 0
LZ
Ofir M � �-...._._•. i�or`•� � 1F ++°-.ems •
Legend ...._-,
+ , Homeless Street Count{by Census Tract
• 10 or few*,pe cp,�e
�7-1rJD
i:?.f»,„.ei.x«. ;ft+ww+u>�4S:�MiLU Su 31r.urkaz,t.w Ay G� y�3a�-i_a 1:Fge�Nwn AllYfurzk �5 ...'1 �i ASYt4 � .....
.M•3.-e3 w�N 3N a.+t9rta<>.I KYa NiA�:-1�&,1�,L)NrxH f.
26
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Figure 21: Homeless Street and Shelter Population Total by Census Tract
Legend
S�-*ter
R metess Strut Count{by Census Tract)
1C or fearer perxple
1C- C
-C_c.
FC-icc,
®: 3ema biro Cov,
Barstow
Adel
s 4
VU d a(ueo �sertt tte Par»is
e, a
A
°r m C
m a,
a.ay _::Suzan,'".:{f?..,:arl 4twS.avtw:.+xr8r.•ct..uf,Ishmx..rus:iic.;.a.r.YK..,.or.ais lrna. 0 •:s <t vales
.krv3•ropf^ankh ila owefu.'e<f yql+: xAx;n t I:I.rt.Mey I
27
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Findings
Figure 22: Homeless Street Count Census Population Total by Supervisorial District
Legend
A Shepe
County Supervisorial'district
�...._..... Distnct 2
Distrxt 4
I , Distrxt 1
District 5
DiA kt 3
Sara Beindrdino County
DIStTtGt 1 f.,#}Ytfit:�;42t�
(
1
� +�dpF.�tlltFtA
€icJ4tuuifR �`^_.
District 2
Count:
741
ty �n :S
thr� District 5
District 4 Count:
Count: 2,264
880
MU...44.x,.. 0091— a t Iu aWft AS
Aaar '#OW 4rnar�rcrOK lakr.aksti.
28
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Methodology
Census Methodology
The census methodology had two components, a street count and a shelter and institution count. The
street count results were combined with the shelter and institution count to produce a single point-in-time
count of the San Bernardino County homeless.A more detailed discussion of these components follows.
Street Count
A primary goal of the 2007 San Bernardino County �:`�`, tr-�
Homeless Census was to generate quantitative data
regarding the number of County residents who were
homeless at a given point in time, as well as an estimate
of the number of County residents who experience
homelessness annually. A critical component of the
census methodology was the recruitment, training, and
deployment of homeless individuals, whose intimate
knowledge of the street was considered critical to
effective outreach. This group of people possessed first-hand knowledge of places homeless individuals
were likely to be found. It is believed that a homeless census would not be successful without the
assistance of these individuals. Previous homeless enumeration efforts in other communities have proven
the value of homeless participation in producing a reliable and accurate count.
There were 156 homeless guides and service provider volunteers that conducted the street count on the
morning of February 27`n, 2007, and 190 homeless guide and service providers that conducted the street
count on the morning of February 28`x'. Homeless guides referred by local service providers were paid
$20.00 for completing a two hour training session the week prior to the census, and $10.00 per hour for
participating in census activities. Census teams were provided with clipboards and Geographical
Information System (GIS) census tract maps of the areas to which they were assigned, pencils, and a
review of the census training documents. Homeless guides who provided their own transportation were
reimbursed for their gas mileage.
On the census days, 244 census tracts were enumerated. No direct contact with research subjects was
made during the census enumeration, due to the need to be efficient and safe. To avoid potential
duplication of unsheltered and sheltered homeless, it was imperative to enumerate in a narrow timeframe
when sheltered and unsheltered homeless do not co-mingle. For this particular census, the early morning
hours before shelters opened and released their occupants from the previous night was chosen to avoid
potential duplication. Visual-only enumeration strategies were employed. Streets, roads, and highways of
the selected tracts were traveled by foot, car, or bike and subjects were counted and tallied according to
these observed categories:
29
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Methodology
Individuals •
• Adult Male • Adult Male • Vehicles(cars,vans,RV's,campers)
• Adult Female • Adult Female • Encampments
• Youth(under age 18) • Youth(under age 18) • People in parks reported by park ranger
• Undetermined
genderlage
Teams were deployed from multiple sites across the county on February 27`h and 28 '. Homeless workers
gathered at the sites at 5:00 AM for area assignments, supplies, and a brief training review. Workers
returned to their deployment sites prior to 9:00 AM. Upon their return, teams turned in their census tally
forms and were debriefed by the deployment captains. Observational comments and the integrity of the
enumeration effort were reviewed and assessed.
Unlike the 2003 census, the 2007 census included the use of law enforcement helicopters which aided in
the ability to enumerate hard to reach locations, such as area washes and ditches in and around San
Bernardino, and high desert locations with limited road access. Youth teams were also deployed in the
San Bernardino and Victorville areas to enumerate the number of homeless youth in the County. Because
this population tends to congregate after the morning enumeration, teams of youth were deployed in the
afternoon hours to known locations such as malls, parks,and transportation centers where homeless youth
could be found.
Shelter and Institution Count
The homeless occupancy of emergency shelters, transitional shelters, hotel/motel voucher programs,
hospitals, residential rehabilitation facilities, and jails were collected for the night prior to the census.
While HUD does not include the people in hospitals, residential rehabilitation facilities, and jails in the
reportable numbers for the point-in-time count,they are reported separately in this report because they are
important supplemental information for the community and service providers.
Data Collection
The shelter count was conducted using a list of all known shelter operators in San Bernardino County as
provided by Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County. Shelter facilities reported their
occupancies for the nights prior to the census to Applied Survey Research. Shelters and programs
reported people in households with dependent children as families.
Shelter Types
Different types of shelters and institutions participated in the 2007 San Bernardino Homeless Census.
Among them were:
• Emergency shelters
• Transitional housing programs
• Transitional Assistance Department(those using vouchers)
30
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Methodology
Homeless Census Challenges
Challenges
There are many challenges in any homeless enumeration,
especially when implemented in a community as diverse as
San Bernardino County. While homeless populations are
usually concentrated around downtown emergency shelters
and homeless service facilities, homeless individuals and
families can also be found in suburbs, commercial districts,
and outlying county areas that are not easily accessible by
enumerators. The following subset of homeless populations
are challenging to enumerate due to various reasons:
• Chronically homeless persons who have difficulty accessing social and health services.
• Persons living in vehicles who relocate every few days.
• Persons who have children and stay "under the radar" because of the difficulty of having a family
on the street and around the general homeless population.
• Homeless youth,who tend to keep themselves less visible than homeless adults.
• Persons living in overcrowded shared residences or rental units above safe occupancy levels.
• Undocumented immigrants.
• Homeless people who sleep in unfit structures out of public view.
Census Undercount
The homeless census methodology was conservative, and therefore most likely resulted in an undercount
of homeless without U.S. citizenship, some of the working homeless, families, and street youth. While
this HUD approved visual homeless enumeration is academically sound, it may have some inherent biases
and shortcomings. Even with the assistance of dedicated homeless service providers and currently or
previously homeless census enumerators, the methodology cannot guarantee 100% accuracy. Many
factors may have contributed to missed opportunities, for example:
• The unseasonably cold and rainy weather on enumeration days.
• For the employed homeless, there is frequently a pre-dawn movement to get to jobs. These
individuals may not have been identified as being homeless.
• Homeless individuals often occupy abandoned buildings and other structures unfit for human
habitation. The resources for the 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey
project could not cover an inspection of all such structures.
• Homeless youth tend to "couch surf' from one location to another, making their identification
difficult.
31
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Methodology
• Likewise, homeless families with children will more likely seek opportunities to"double-up" and
"triple-up" in housing with family or friends, rather than sleep on the street, in vehicles, or
makeshift shelters,thus making their identification difficult.
• It can be difficult to identify homeless persons who may be sleeping in vans, cars, or recreational
vehicles.
Based on the reasons listed above, this conservative approach was necessary to preserve the integrity of
the data collected. Although the census was most likely an undercount of the homeless population, the
methodology employed, coupled with the homeless survey data, was the most comprehensive approach
available.
32
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Methodology
Annual Estimation
A point-in-time estimate of homelessness does not reflect
the number of persons who experience homelessness
throughout the year. With data from the census and
survey, an estimate of the number of persons experiencing
homelessness can be made. Using the data from the 2007
San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey,
ASR used the annualization formula detailed by the
Corporation for Supportive Housing9 to calculate an
annual estimate of the number of homeless people in San _
Bernardino County over the course of a year. The
calculations used to project an annual estimate of homelessness are based on two very basic assumptions:
1. The information gathered in the homeless survey is indicative of responses that would have
been given at any other time during the year and is reasonably representative of the general
diversity of the study area's homeless population.
2. The point-in-time census count is reasonably indicative of a count that would have been
obtained at any other time during the year.
Service providers have supported these assumptions by indicating that the demand for services has stayed
relatively consistent over time. Additionally, the gross number of homeless accessing services apparently
does not fluctuate to a great degree, although the proportion of sheltered versus unsheltered homeless
does vary with the seasons.
Estimates of the number of people who experience homelessness in a given year are important for
planning purposes and for federal HUD reporting requirements. Because many homeless experiences are
relatively short-term (less than a year), it is important to account for this phenomenon when determining
the annual demand for homeless services.
Given the size of the survey sample (697) the statistical reliability of the projections, the undercount
inherent in any homeless census, as well as the use of a HUD-approved annual estimate calculation,
CAPSBC and Applied Survey Research has determined that this methodology was the most complete and
accurate of all available approaches.
Three factors were used to determine the annual estimate:
A=The point-in-time count of currently homeless people(found in the street and shelter count).
B=The number of currently homeless people who became homeless within the last 7 days;and
9 Burt,Martha and Wilkins,Carol.Estimating the Need:Projecting from Point-in-Time to Annual Estimates of the Number of
Homeless People in a Community and Using this Information to Plan for Permanent Supportive Housing.Corporation for
Supportive Housing.March 2005.
33
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Census Methodology
C =The proportion of currently homeless people who have experienced a previous homeless episode
within the past 12 months.
The equation for calculating the annual estimate: A+ [(B*51)*(1-C)]=Annual estimate
For San Bernardino: 7,331 +[(315.233*51)*(1 —0.364296)]= 17,551.14 z 17,551 people
This annual estimate represents 0.9% of the study area's general population, and is consistent with other
research findings. The California Research Bureau estimates that approximately 361,000 people are
homeless in California at any one time (approximately 1% of the general population), and estimates the
number of people who experience homelessness over the course of a year to be between one and two
million people, or between 3% and 5% of California's general population.10 According to a 2002 study
done by the National Coalition for the Homeless, approximately 3.5 million people, or about 1% of the
U.S.general population,experience homelessness in a given year.
Figure 23: Homeless Point-In-Time and Countywide Annual Estimation
20,000 17,551
15,000
10,000 7,331
5,000
0
Point-In-Time Count Annual Estimation
10 Foster,Lisa K.and Snowdon,Patricia.Addressing Long-Term Homelessness:Permanent Supportive Housing.California
Research Bureau.August 2003.
34
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Homeless Survey Findings
The following section provides an overview of the findings generated from the 2007 San Bernardino
County Homeless Census and Survey. The survey results are used to define the qualitative characteristics
of the overall population. Approximately 697 surveys were administered from early March to mid-April.
Missing values have been intentionally omitted from the survey results, and all survey results display
valid percentages only. Therefore, the total number of respondents for each question will not necessarily
equal the total number of surveys. A copy of the survey instrument, as well as a complete list of survey
questions and responses, can be found in the Appendices.
Demographics
In order to measure the diversity of homeless residents in San Bernardino County, respondents were
asked to answer several demographic questions pertaining to their age, gender, ethnicity, and military
service.
Age
Approximately 31%of survey respondents were between 41 and 50 years of age, with the second largest
age segment being 31-40 years of age(27%).Approximately 19%were between 22 and 30 years old, and
14%were between the ages of 51 and 60.
Figure 24: Age of Respondents
50%
a
40 0 27.1% 31.3%
30%
18.9%
20% 13.8%
10% 0.7% 16% 4.5%
0%
13-17 years 18-21 years 22-30 years 31-40 years 41-50 years 51-60 years Over 60
years
N=689
Gender
Among survey respondents, there were more males than females, with males accounting for nearly 63%
of the total. The distribution of gender in the study areas is shown in the following figure, along with the
results from the 2007 San Bernardino Homeless Census.
35
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 25: Gender of Respondents
80% 70.1%
63.1
60% '
er5
40% 35.8% 29.9%
20%
0% "
Male Female
02007 San Bernardino Homeless Survey 02007 San Bernardino Homeless Census
Numbers for San Bernardino Homeless Survey:Male=435,Female=247.
Numbers for San Bernardino(Street and Shelter Count)Census Results:Male=2,292, Female=979.
Ethnicity
Demographically, the survey population is diverse. The largest percentage of homeless survey
respondents were Caucasian (45%), while 22% were Hispanic/Latino, 24% were African American, 2%
were American Indian or Alaskan Native, 2% were Asian or Pacific Islander, and 5% identified with
other or multiple racial or ethnic groups.
According to the State of California Department of Finance population estimates, Caucasians comprise
27% of the total population of San Bernardino County, and Hispanic/Latinos comprise 53% of the total
population. African Americans comprise 11% of the population, while Asian/Pacific Islanders comprise
7% of the County's population. Therefore, African Americans (24%) and Caucasians (45%) were
significantly over-represented, and Hispanic/Latinos (22%) were significantly under-represented as
compared to the general population of San Bernardino County. Asian/Pacific Islanders (2%) were also
under-represented in comparison.
Figure 26: Race or Ethnicity of Respondents
60% 52.8%
44.7%
40%
26.7% 24.4% o
21.8/o
20%
0 0 0
2.0% 0.7% 2.0% 7.3/0 5.1/0 1.8%
0%
Caucasian African American Hispanic/Latino American Asian/Pacific Other/Multi-ethnic
Indian/Alaskan Islander
11112007 San Bernardino Homeless Survey(N=692)
02007 San Bernardino General Population(N=2,016,466)
San Bernardino County General Population data source:State of California,Department of Finance,
Race/Ethnic Population with Age and Sex Detail,2000-2050.
36
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Family Status
Many respondents (44%) indicated they were living alone at the time of the survey. However, 5% were
living with their child or children, 9% were living with their spouse or partner, and an additional 1 were
living with their spouse or partner and child or children. Twenty-percent (20%) of respondents indicated
they were living with a family member (other than a spouse or children) or a friend, and 19% of
respondents indicated that they are living with "other" people. For this survey, the term "other" refers to
people who are not friends or family members of the respondent. This was a large percentage of
responses,and in part reflects the challenges of self-defining social relationships in a homeless context.
Figure 27: Who Respondents Live With
100%
75%
50% 44%
20% 19%
25% 9%
5%
0%
Alone Child/children Spouse/partner Family Other
member/friend
N=680
Children
In 2007,nearly 23%of the respondents indicated having children living with them or not. In 2003, nearly
209 survey respondents indicated having 464 children under age 18 living with them. In 2007, 81 survey
respondents indicated having 188 children under age 18 living with them. The following charts are a
breakdown of children reported by age group.
Among respondents who indicated that they were currently living with children between the ages of 0 and
5, 53 respondents reported having 83 children.
Figure 28: Number of Reported Children Age 0-5
Respondents#of Children #of Reported
Total children reported was
1 31 31
calculated by multiplying the
2 19 38 number of respondents by the
3 1 3 number of children they
5 1 5 reported(e.g. 17 respondents x
2 children each = 34 children).
6 or more 1 6
Totals 53 7 83
37
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Among respondents who indicated that they were currently living with children between the ages of 6 and
12,43 respondents reported having 79 children.
Figure 29: Number of Reported Children Age 6-12
#of Children #of Respondents Total Children Reported
1 23 23
2 12 24
3 4 12
4 2 8
6 or more 2 12
Totals 43 79
Among respondents who indicated that they were currently living with children between the ages of 13
and 17, 19 respondents reported having 26 children.
Figure 30: Number of Reported Children Age 13-17
Respondents#of Children #of
1 15 15
2 1 2
3 3 9
Totals 19 26
Foster Care
Respondents were asked if they had any children in foster care. Of those with respondents with children,
29% had children in foster care. Thirty-nine respondents reported having 88 children in the foster care
system.
Figure 31: Number of Reported Children in Foster Care
Respondents#of Children #of .
1 12 12
2 15 30
3 6 18
4 3 12
5 2 10
6 or more 1 6
Totals 39 88
38
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Child Education
When respondents with children were asked if their children were in school (if the children were between
the ages of 6 and 17), 80% indicated their children were in school. Nearly 20%stated their children were
not attending school.
Figure 32: If Respondents'Children Are Old Enough,Are They In School?
100%
80%
75%
50%
25% 20%
0% i I I I
Yes No
N=45
Military Service
In 2007, nearly 83% of the survey respondents had never served in any type of military unit.Nearly 14%
indicated that they had served in the regular military(Army,Navy,Marines, or Air Force),2%had served
in the National Guard, and an additional 1% had been enlisted in the Military Reserve. These results are
similar to the 2003 survey, when nearly 85% of the respondents indicated they had never served in any
type of military unit.
Figure 33: Veteran Status 2003 and 2007
100% - 85.0% 83.0%
76%
50%
25% - 15.0% 17.0%
0%
Non-veteran Veteran
0 200(N=1,701) 02007(N=683)
39
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 34: Discharge Status in 2007
100%
75% 63.5%
50%
25% - 17.4%
7.8% 5.2% 3.5% 2.6%
0% -T M I MMMMMa----I
Honorable General Other than Dishonorable Other Don't know
honorable
N=115
Educational Attainment
Nearly 35% of the respondents had a high school diploma in 2007, compared to 33% in 2003. Almost
17%of the respondents had some college experience in 2007,an increase from 7%in 2003.
Figure 35: Educational Attainment 2003 and 2007
75%
50% 41.6%
34.5% 33.1%35.2%
25% 16.7% 11.3%
4.4%4.7% 6.9°/. 5.1% 1.9%1.9% 0.8%1.9%
0%
t p m
" O O O W p� V w O O =
E LC
10 'p Y V O U M O t U > R fA t
Vl N N V V w M O 7 N
E d d M
J = m Q
■2003(N=1,700) 0 2007(N=684)
40
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Foster Care
In 2007, 13%of respondents indicated they had been in foster care within their lifetime.This is slightly
higher than 2003,when almost 12%of respondents indicated being in foster care within their lifetime.
Figure 36: Respondent in Foster Care
100% 88.4% 87.1%
75%
hew
50%
25% 11.6% 12.9%
0% i1"
In Foster Care Not in Foster Care
E 200(N=1,685) *2007(N=680)
San Bernardino County Residency
Approximately 72% of survey respondents indicated they had been living in San Bernardino County at
the time they became homeless. Eleven percent(11%)had been living in Los Angeles County, while 6%
had been living in Riverside County at the time they became homeless. Five percent(5%)had been living
in another county in California, and almost 7% were living in another state when they became homeless.
This response indicates that the majority of homelessness originates in San Bernardino County, but 28%
of the homeless in the County are from outside its borders.
Figure 37: Where Respondents Were Most Recently Living at the Time They Became Homeless
San Bernardino
County
71.9%
-� � � *San Bernardino County
■Los Angeles County
O Riverside County
*Other County in CA
■Out of State
Los Angeles County
Out of State Riverside County 10.6%
6.6% Other County in CA 6.3%
4.5%
N=695
41
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Characteristics of Homelessness
Characteristics of homelessness vary greatly among respondents. While many respondents were
experiencing homelessness for the first time, or had been homeless for just a few months, others had been
homeless repeatedly or for extended periods of time. Characteristics such as usual nighttime sleeping
arrangements, the use of government assistance or treatment programs, and causes for homelessness
differed from respondent to respondent.
Length of Homelessness
Over 18% of respondents had been homeless for one to two years, while less than 18% had been
homeless for more than three years. Over 15% of survey respondents had been homeless for four to six
months,while less than 15%had been homeless for one to three months.Nationally,31%of the homeless
population has been homeless for two years or longer." Over half(55%)of San Bernardino homeless had
been so for less than one year.
Figure 38: How Long Respondents Have Been Homeless Since They Last Lived in a Permanent Housing
Situation
40%
30%
20% 14.7% 15.3% 14.9%
18.4% 17.9%
10.5%
10% 8.4%
0%
Less than 1 1-3 months 4-6 months 7-11 months 1-2 years 2-3 years More than 3
month years
N=680
Recurrence of Homelessness
When asked how many times they had been homeless in the past 12 months, approximately 64% of
respondents indicated that they been homeless only once (their current period of homelessness). Some
respondents indicated that this was their second (11%) or third (7%) episode of homelessness in the past
twelve months,and an additional 12%had been homeless six or more times in the past year.
11 The Urban Institute,Homelessness:Programs and the People They Serve,Findings of the National Survey of Homeless Assistance
Providers and Clients:Summary Report,Department of Housing and Urban Development,December 1999.
42
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 39: In the Last 12 Months, Number of Times Respondents Have Been Homeless, Including This
Episode of Homelessness
80%
63.6%
60%
40%
20% 11.0% 10.4%
7.0% 3.2% 3.2%
1.6%
0%
1 time 2 times 3 times 4 times 5 times 6 times More than 6
times
N=689
Figure 40: In the Last 3 Years, Number of Times Respondents Have Been Homeless, Including This
Episode of Homelessness
60%
50.3%
40%
20% 12.6% 15.8%
9.4% 5.3% 4.3%
2.3%
0%
1 time 2 times 3 times 4 times 5 times 6 times More than 6
times
N=692
43
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Usual Nighttime Accommodations
Homeless respondents were living in a wide variety of locations. Most commonly, respondents were
living outdoors (26%). Nearly 8% of respondents were staying in a place not normally used for sleeping,
in a transitional shelter, or an "other" location that was not listed as a survey response. Nearly 7% were
sleeping in an abandoned building, a hotel or motel, or staying in an emergency shelter. Some
respondents were sleeping in another shelter(6%)or an automobile(5%).
Figure 41: Where Respondents Are Currently Most Often Living At Night
Response
Outdoors/streets/parks 26.3%
A place not normally used for sleeping 8.4%
Transitional housing 8.3%
Other 8.3%
Abandoned building 7.3%
Motel/hotel 7.3%
Emergency shelter 7.1%
Other shelter 6.2%
Automobile 4.8%
Camper 3.8%
Unconverted garage/attic/basement 3.5%
Encampment 2.8%
Backyard or storage structure 2.8%
Van 1.9%
Public facilities 1.5%
N=689
Disabling Conditions
Mental Health
It is commonly believed that many homeless residents experience poor mental health or depression.
Approximately 26% of survey respondents reported experiencing mental illness at the time of the survey.
Additionally,42%of respondents indicated they were suffering from depression.
44
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 42: Respondents Who Are Currently Experiencing Mental Illness or Depression
60%
42.0%
40%
26.3%
20%
0%
Mental Illness Depression
N=670 N=678
Of those respondents who indicated they were experiencing mental illness,33%reported receiving mental
health services at the time of the survey.
Figure 43: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Using Mental Health Services if Experiencing
Mental Illness
80%
66.9%
60%
40% 33.1%
20%
0%
Receiving Mental Health Services lot Receiving Mental Health Services
N=172
Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
Figure 44: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Experiencing Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD)
100% 84.1%
75%
50%
25% 12.5%
3.5%
0%
Experiencing PTSD Not experiencing PTSD Declined to State
N=666
45
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Physical Disability
Approximately 27%of the respondents were currently experiencing a physical disability.
Figure 45: Are Respondents Currently Experiencing a Physical Disability?
100%
70.3%
75%
50 0 0 26.3%
0
° 3.4%
0%
Experiencing Physical Not experiencing physical Declined to state
Disability disability
N=678
HIV and AIDS
Homeless survey respondents were asked if they were experiencing HIV, AIDS, or any related illnesses.
About 3%of the survey population stated they were experiencing HIV or AIDS or related illnesses.
Figure 46: Are Respondents Currently Experiencing HIV/AIDS or Related Illnesses?
100% 91.9%
75%
50%
25% 3.0% 5.1%
0% - 0 .
Experiencing HIVlAIDS Not experiencing HIV/AIDS Declined to state
N=664
46
k
t
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Chronic Health Conditions
Approximately 18% of homeless survey respondents indicated they were experiencing chronic health
conditions at the time of the survey.
Figure 47: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Experiencing Chronic Health Conditions
100% 78.9%
75%
50%
0 17.8%
25% 3.3%
0%
Experiencing chronic health Not experiencing chronic Declined to state
problems health problems
N=673
Developmental Disability
A developmental disability is a chronic condition that significantly limits a person's ability to speak, hear,
walk, learn or perform fundamental tasks. Nearly I I% of respondents report having a self-defined
developmental disability.
Figure 48: Are Respondents Currently Experiencing a Developmental Disability?
100% 84.0%
75%
50%
25% 11.3% 4.6%
0%
Experiencing developmental Not experiencing Declined to state
disability developmental disability
N=670
47
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
The Chronically Homeless
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development defines chronic homelessness as:
An unaccompanied individual with a disabling condition who has been:
a. Continually homeless for one year or more; or
b. Has experienced four or more episodes of homelessness within the past 3 years.
For the purposes of this study, a "disabling condition" can be defined as a physical or mental disability
(such as mental illness or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder), alcohol or drug addiction, HIV/AIDS, chronic
health conditions or a developmental disability. Of the 697 homeless persons interviewed, approximately
38%(267 respondents)can be considered chronically homeless using the above criteria.
The chronically homeless survey results were then used to project approximately how many people
experience chronic homelessness in San Bernardino County at a given point in time. It is estimated that
on any given night, San Bernardino County has a chronically homeless population of approximately
2,386. This figure is higher than the latest statistics from HUD's Annual Homeless Report to Congress12,
which states that nearly 23%of all homeless people are chronically homeless.
Figure 49: Percentage of Respondents who are Chronically Homeless
80%
61.7%
60%
38.3%
40%
20%
0%
Chronically Homeless Not chronically homeless
N=697
12 U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development,Office of Community Planning and Development.Tlw Annual
Homeless Assessment Report to Congress,February 2007.
48
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 50: Chronically Homeless Population by Gender
80% 68.3%
60%
40% 30.2%
20%
0%
Men Women Transgender
N=265
Figure 51: Chronically Homeless Population by Ethnicity
80%
60%
44.5%
40% 25.6% o
21.8/°
20%
1.5% 2.7% 3.0%
0%
Caucasian African Hispanic/Latino American Asian/Pacific Other/Multi-
American Indian/Alaskan Islander ethnic
Native
N=266
Figure 52: Number of Co-occurring Disabling Conditions Among Chronically Homeless
80%
60%
40%
22.5% 25.5%
17.6% 13.5%
20% 10.1%
6.0% 4.8%
0%
1 disability 2 disabilities 3 disabilities 4 disabilities 5 disabilities 6 disabilities 7 or more
disabilities
N=267
Note: Disabilities include physical or mental disabilities,depression,alcohol use,drug use,and chronic health conditions.
49
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 53: Services/Assistance Used by the Chronically Homeless(Top 5 Responses)
60% 48.3%
40% - 29.3% o
24.3/0 21.3% 18.6%
20%
0%
Free Meals Food pantry Not using Emergency Shelter day
services shelter services
N=263
Reasons for Homelessness
In addition to understanding the characteristics of the homeless population, it is important to understand
the causes of homelessness. This is an important distinction because of the obvious interrelationships of
many of these issues. Homeless survey respondents self-reported a number of reasons for their condition.
It should be noted again that these are self-defined reasons and do not necessarily reflect the order of the
events leading to their homelessness.
Primary Causes
Survey respondents were asked to determine what they thought was the primary event or condition that
led to their homelessness. The most cited reasons, provided by over 24% of respondents, was the loss of
their job or alcohol or drug use. Some respondents indicated that their homelessness was due to a friend
or family member asking them to leave (9%), incarceration (6%), or another reason not listed as a
response on the survey(9%).
Figure 54: Primary Reasons for Homelessness
Percent of .
Response 0i 00
Lost job' 28.4% 23.7%
High cost of housing/rent2 17.5% --
Alcohol or drug use 17.1% 23.5%
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave3 2.8% 9.9%
Incarceration 7.1% 5.8%
Family/domestic violence4 2.3% 4.4%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or reused property5 -- 4.1%
Mental health issues 1.7% 3.9%
50
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Housing eviction2 3.5% -
Disability2 3.3% --
Don't know/declined to states 0.3% 3.2%
Landlord raised rents -- 3.0%
Illness or medical problems 1.4% 2.5%
Divorced or separated 4.9% 2.0%
Lost of parent/death2 1.3% --
No transportation/care 0.5%
Runaway/left home2 0.4% --
Gambling problems -- 1.6%
Hospitalization/treatment programs 0.6%
For being Lesbian,Gay,or Bisexual - 0.6%
Hurricane Katrinas -- 0.4%
Got too old for foster care 0.4% 0.4%
Other natural disaster/fire/floods -- 0.4%
Other 7.0% 9.7%
Total 100.0% j 100.0%
N=1,375 N=689
'This response was re-worded from"Unemployment"to"Lost job"in 2007.
2This response was omitted from the 2007 survey.
3This response was re-worded from"Conflict with Family"to"Argument—friend or family asked you to leave"in 2007.
°Response option was re-worded in 2007 from"Family Violence"to"Family/Domestic Violence."
New response option added in 2007.
sThis response was re-worded from"Health/Medical Costs"to"Illness or medical problem"in 2007.
Obstacles to Securing Permanent Housing
Besides understanding why a person became homeless, we also want to understand what the difficulties
are to re-securing permanent housing. When respondents were asked what factor or factors they thought
were preventing them from securing permanent housing, 53% cited unemployment or no income as a
major obstacle to securing housing, and 48% said they couldn't afford rent. No money for moving costs
and lack of transportation were also cited as preventing respondents from securing permanent housing.As
indicated by the responses, the absence of financial resources is the biggest obstacle to securing
permanent housing for the respondents in this survey.
51
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 55: Circumstances That Are Preventing Respondents From Living In Permanent Housing
(Top 5 Responses)
80%
60% 53.0% 47.8%
40% 29.7% 23.1% o
19.0/o
20%
0%
Unemployment/no Can't afford rent No money for No transportation Bad credit
income moving costs
Multiple response question with 694 respondents offering 1,555 responses.
Section 8 Housing
Nearly twelve percent(12%) of respondents were on the Section 8 Housing waiting list. Over half(52%)
of those respondents had been on the waiting list for one month, while 16%had been on the list from two
months to one year. Nearly 11% had been on the waiting list for 49 months or more (approximately 4
years).
Figure 56: Number of Months on Section 8 Housing Waiting List
80%
60% 51.6%
40%
20% 15.6% o 0 10.9%
7.8/0 9.4
/0 4.7%
0%
1 month 1-12 months 13-24 months 25-36 months 36-48 months 49 months or
more
N=64
Employment Status
Loss of employment or unemployment was cited as the most common cause of homelessness,
contributing to the homelessness over half (53%) of respondents. Therefore, it is not surprising that
reported levels of employment among respondents were low. An overwhelming majority of respondents
(88%) indicated that they were not currently employed at the time of the survey. Approximately 12%
were employed either full-time or part-time.
52
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Figure 57: Employment Status of Respondents in 2003 and 20071
100% 87.6%
80% 69.0%
60%
40%
20% 8.0% 8.7% 4.0% 3.8%
0% �.
Unemployed Employed part-time Employed full-time
0 200(N=1,678) 02007(N=692)
'In 2003,an additional 4%of respondents indicated they were self-employed,while 11%indicated they were
disabled. Nearly 4%identified their employment status as`other."
Causes of Unemployment
Of those unemployed, the two leading causes of unemployment were lack of permanent address (34%),
and a lack of transportation (32%). Many respondents cited not having a phone (29%), or an alcohol or
drug issue(24%)as a reason for unemployment.
Figure 58: Reasons For Not Being Employed(Top 5 Responses)
80%
60%
40% 33.9% 32.1% 29.3%
24.3% 23.5%
20% t 0 0 0 E _E
0%
No permanent No No phone Alcohol/drug Need clothing
address transportation issue
Multiple response question with 605 respondents offering 1,898 responses.
53
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Accessing of Government Assistance and Homeless Programs
Government assistance and homeless programs work to enable the homeless community to obtain income
and services, which helps them to start living independently. Many homeless people do not apply for
these programs,or do not feel they qualify for aid.
Government Assistance
Survey respondents were asked if they were receiving any type of government assistance at the time of
the survey. Government programs include Food Stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social
Security Disability Insurance(SSDI), General Relief, Medi-Cal,Veteran's benefits, and Cash Aid(TANF
and CaIWORKS). In San Bernardino County, 25% of respondents receiving aid reported receiving Food
Stamps, while 9% were receiving Medi-Cal/Medi-Care. Approximately 9% receive SSI/SSDI, while 6%
were receiving General Assistance. Approximately 54% of all respondents stated they are not receiving
any type of government assistance.
Figure 59: Percentage of Respondents Who Are Currently Receiving Any Form of
Government Assistance(Top 5 Responses)
80% 66.5%
60% 54.0%
40% - 24.5%
20% r 18.1°/ 12.2% 0 10.5%
�, 9.2% 8.8% 5.4% 5.5%
0% EEk771 MEN"
Not receiving any Food Stamps MediCal/MediCare SSI General Relief
services
■2003 02007
2003 Numbers:Multiple response question with 1,662 respondents offering 1,994 responses.
2007 Numbers:Multiple response question with 693 respondents offering 884 responses.
Reasons for Not Receiving Government Assistance
Access to government assistance is an important research area for homeless service providers. When
respondents who were not receiving any type of government assistance were asked why they were not
receiving aid, 25% responded they do not think they are eligible for any assistance. Many respondents
cited the lack of a permanent address(24%)and a lack of identification(21%)as reasons for not receiving
government aid. Approximately 18% of respondents not receiving government aid indicated they never
applied for any type of program. It is important to remember that those not staying in shelters are
probably less informed about the availability and eligibility requirements of social services,because many
sheltered homeless receive information about assistance programs from their service providers.
54
i
E
R
1
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
I
I
Figure 60: Reasons Respondents Provided For Not Receiving Any Government Assistance
(Top 5 Responses)
50%
40%
28.6% o
30% 24.5% 25.7%23.9% 22.9%20.7% 20.7% o
15
20% 17.9/0 .6%13.0%
10% - BI
0%
d
Don't think No permanent Have no Never applied No
eligible address identification transportation
■2003 ❑2007
2003 Numbers:Multiple response question with 1,221 respondents offering 2,089 responses.
2007 Numbers: Multiple response question with 368 respondents offering 663 responses.
Homeless Services and Programs
Homeless survey respondents were asked if they were receiving or participating in any types of homeless
services or programs. Such services include free meals, emergency shelters, bus passes,job training, day
shelter services, legal assistance, and alcohol and drug counseling. Approximately 42% of respondents
indicated they receive free meals, while 25% use the food pantry. Almost 19% indicated using an
emergency shelter,while 25%did not use any services.
Figure 61: Services or Assistance Respondents Report Using(Top 5 Responses)
50% 41.7%
40%
30% 24.8% 24.8%
18.7%
20% 14.1%
10%
0%
Free meals Food pantry Not using any Emergency Bus passes
services shelter
Multiple response question with 690 respondents offering 1,419 responses.
55
i
I
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
211 Help Line
Nearly 18%of respondents were aware of the San Bernardino County 211 toll-free telephone help line.
Of those respondents,nearly one-third(33%)had ever used the 211 help line.
Figure 62: Awareness of San Bernardino County 211 Help Line
100%
Bz.z°i°
80%
60%
40°x°
17.8%
20%
0%
Aware of Help Line Not Aware of Help Line
N=690
Figure 63: Have You Ever Used the Help Line?
0
° 66.7%
60%
40% 33.3%
20%
0%
Yes No
N=120
56
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Sources of Income
While some respondents were able to earn income from employment, many respondents were receiving
income from sources such as public assistance, disability benefits,or panhandling.
Income from Government Sources
Over half of the respondents (57%) indicated that they are receiving no money from government sources.
Nearly 20%of respondents received between$1 and$300 per month from government sources,while 8%
received between$301 and$600 per month.Nearly 2%received over$1,000 from government sources.
Figure 64: Total(Gross)Monthly Income From All Government Benefits
80%
56.8%
60%
40%
19.5% o
20% 8.4% 13.1% 2.2%
0%
Zero $1 -$300 $301 -$600 $601 -$1,000 Over$1,000
N=673
Income from Private Sources
Respondents were asked how much money they had received in the past month from all sources other
than government assistance. Almost 46% of respondents received between $1 and $300 per month from
other sources, while 15% received between $301 and $600 per month. Nearly 3% received over $1,000
from all other sources.
Figure 65: Total Gross Monthly Income From All Other Sources
50% 45.8%
40%
30.9%
30%
20% 14.9%
0 8.2%
10/0 28%
0%
Zero $1 -$300 $301 -$600 $601 -$1,000 Over$1,000
N=673
57
x
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Other Sources of Income
Approximately 44%of the respondents received income from recycling,while 28%received money from
panhandling or asking for money.Twenty-six percent(26%)received income from family or friends,
while 14%received income from selling other found items.
Figure 66: Other Sources of Income(Top 5 Responses)
50% 43.8%
40%
30% 28.2% 26.4%
20% 13.8%
7.9%
10% 00%i I NNL_'
Recycling Panhandling Family/friends Selling other Selling
found items blood/plasma
Multiple response question with 621 respondents offering 1,027 responses.
58
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Alcohol and Drug Abuse
Substance use (alcohol or drugs) was the second-most cited cause of homelessness among the homeless
survey population in San Bernardino County. Furthermore, many of the homeless respondents said they
were experiencing alcohol or drug use at the time the survey was administered.
Alcohol Abuse
Approximately 34% of homeless respondents indicated they were experiencing alcohol abuse at the time
of the survey. Nationally, 62%of the homeless population has experienced alcohol problems during their
lifetime.13
Figure 67: Percentage of Respondents Who Indicated They Were Currently Experiencing Alcohol Abuse
80%
61.6%
60%
40% 34.1%
20%
4.3%
0%
Experiencing alcohol abuse Not experiencing alcohol Declined to state
abuse
N=669
Drug Abuse
Approximately 35% of survey respondents stated they were experiencing drug abuse at the time of the
survey. In the national survey conducted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in
1999, 58%of the homeless population had drug problems during their lifetime.
Figure 68: Percentage of Respondents Who Indicated They Were Currently Experiencing Drug Abuse
80%
60.7%
60%
40% 34.8%
0
° 4.5%
0%
Experiencing drug abuse Not experiencing drug Declined to state
abuse
N=669
13 The Urban Institute,Homelessness:Programs and the People They Serve,Findings of tlw National Survey of Homeless Assistance
Providers and Clients:Summary Report,Department of Housing and Urban Development,December 1999.
59
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Recovery
Approximately 45% of survey respondents indicated they were currently experiencing substance abuse
(either drug or alcohol or both). Of those respondents, 20% are currently receiving substance abuse
counseling.
Figure 69: Percentage of Respondents Who Were Experiencing Substance Abuse and Are Currently
Receiving Substance Abuse Counseling
60%
45.1%
40%
20.4%
20%
0%
Experiencing substance abuse Receiving substance abuse counseling
N=697 N=314
Domestic Violence
Homeless survey respondents were asked if they were experiencing domestic violence. At the time of the
survey, nearly 10% of respondents indicated experiencing domestic violence. Nearly 14% of female
respondents stated they were experiencing domestic violence, while 6% of males indicated experiencing
domestic violence.
Figure 70: Respondents Currently Experiencing Domestic/Partner Violence or Abuse(By Gender)
40%
30%
20% 14.3%
9.6%
10% 6.1%
0%
Men Women Total
N=411 N=237 N=655
Note:This graph does not include 4 transgender individuals that indicated experiencing domestic/partner violence,
representing 57%of the transgendered population.
60
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
Medical Care and Health Conditions
Access to health care is vital to general well-being. While many San Bernardino County residents struggle
with the high costs of health care, homeless residents are particularly vulnerable to many unique
challenges regarding their physical and mental health.
Access to Medical Care
Approximately 34% of homeless respondents stated that since they became homeless they have needed
health care but have been unable to receive it. In a given year, 24% of the national homeless population
needed to see a doctor or nurse but were unable to do so.14
Figure 71: Percentage of Respondents Who Have Needed Health Care and Been Unable to Receive It
Since Becoming Homeless'
40% 34.0%
30% 27.0%
20%
10%
0%
2003(N=1,608) 2007(N=673)
'In 2003,this response option was worded as"Has there been a time in the last 12 months that you or your children needed
health care,dental care,or medications and did not receive it?"
Respondents were asked where they usually go when they need medical attention. Respondents most
commonly reported going to the hospital emergency room (48%), the free/community clinic (9%), or the
Veterans Affairs Clinic (6%). Approximately 19% of the survey sample indicated that they did not go
anywhere to receive medical help.
14 The Urban Institute,Homelessness:Programs and the People They Serve,Findings of the National Survey of Homeless Assistance
Providers and Clients:Summary Report,Department of Housing and Urban Development,December 1999.
61
i
I
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Findings
E
Figure 72: Where Respondents Usually Get Medical Care(Top 5 Responses)
60% 47.9%
40%
18.6%
20% 8.7% 5.5% 5.0%
0%
Hospital Don't ever go Free/community VA clinic Private doctor
emergency clinic
room
N=677
Visits to the Emergency Room
When respondents were asked how many times in the past year they had visited the Emergency Room
(ER) for any type of treatment, 49% stated they had not visited the ER within the past year. However,
nearly 6%of respondents had received ER treatment five or more times in the past year.The utilization of
the ER for non-emergency treatment reduces ER resources, and hinders treatment of critically injured
patients. It should be noted,however,that the use of the ER for non-emergency treatment is not a problem
solely limited to the homeless community,and was not specifically addressed in this survey.
Figure 73: Number of Times in the Past Year Respondents Have Used the Emergency Room For Any
Treatment
60% 48.6%
40%
20% 16.9% 13.6% °
9.7/0 5.4% 5.9%
0%
Never 1 time 2 times 3 times 4 times 5 or more
times
N=663
62
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Methodology
Survey Methodology
Planning and Implementation
A survey of homeless persons was conducted in
order to yield qualitative data about the homeless
community, which will be used to apply for N
ys:r�t'nt<
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act federal
funding. Additionally, the qualitative data are
important for homeless program development and
planning. The survey elicited information such as
gender, family status, military service, length and
recurrence of homelessness, usual nighttime ; p< `
accommodations, causes of homelessness, and access
to services through closed-ended and multiple response questions. The survey questions bring greater
perspective to current issues of homelessness, and the provision and delivery of services both current and
in the future. The survey also provides a benchmark with which to track changes in the living and
economic conditions of the County's homeless population for future homeless studies.
Homeless workers referred by local service providers were trained by Applied Survey Research to
conduct the surveys. Training sessions led potential interviewers through a detailed and lengthy
orientation that included project background information, and detailed instruction on respondent
eligibility, interviewing protocol, prompting for detailed response, and confidentiality. Because of
confidentiality and privacy issues, service providers typically conducted surveys administered in shelters.
No self-administered surveys were accepted for methodological reasons.
Homeless workers were compensated at a rate of$5.00 per each completed survey. It was determined that
survey data would be more easily collected if an incentive gift was offered to survey respondents in
appreciation for their time and participation. A $5 pre-paid phone card was selected as an incentive to
participate in the survey. These cards, which were easy to obtain and distribute, were thought to have
wide appeal,and could be provided within the project budget.
Survey Sampling
Developing a truly random sample of homeless survey respondents is challenging. An important
consideration is that there is not enough information about the target population to develop a sampling
strategy that effectively represents the target demographics and subpopulations' diversity.Applied Survey
Research considered a randomized "every third or fourth encounter" survey approach, but felt that it
would be too challenging to administer with our preferred homeless peer interview methodology. Instead
ASR selected a convenience sample approach, augmented by a strategy to increase the sample size
significantly.
63
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Methodology
Strategic attempts were made to reach individuals of various subset groups such as homeless youth,
minority ethnic groups, military veterans, domestic violence victims, and migrant workers. Because
random sampling was not employed, the extent to which the survey respondents compare to, or differ
from,the homeless population in general is unknown.
Trained homeless interviewers administered surveys to the "street" homeless. These workers were used
as interviewers because they were familiar with the conditions and problems of homeless persons, and it
was hoped that they would therefore be more likely to obtain responses to the survey questions from the
homeless respondents. Interviewers were asked to inquire if the homeless person had already taken the
survey, and if not, if they were willing to do so,knowing there was a"thank you"gift at the completion of
the survey. Workers were also asked to remain unbiased at all times, make no assumptions or prompts,
and ask all questions but allow respondents to skip any question they did not feel comfortable answering.
Surveys were also administrated in shelters and residential program facilities. Typically, trained program
staff conducted those surveys. The same survey was used in both shelter and street environments.
Approximately 78%of all valid surveys were completed by unsheltered homeless,and the remaining 22%
were completed by the sheltered homeless. Our actual census results of 82% unsheltered homeless and
18% sheltered homeless means that the unsheltered homeless were slightly underrepresented in the
survey,while the sheltered homeless were slightly overrepresented in the survey.
Data Collection
Care was taken by interviewers to ensure that
respondents felt comfortable regardless of the street or
I
shelter location. During the interviews, respondents were
encouraged to be candid in their responses and were .-
informed that these responses would be framed as
general findings, would be kept confidential, and would
not be traceable to any one individual.
Overall, the interviewers experienced excellent
cooperation from respondents. This was likely influenced by the fact that nearly all of the street
interviewers had previously been, or are now, fellow members of the homeless community. Another
reason for interview cooperation may have been the gift of the pre-paid phone card, which was given to
respondents upon the completion of the interview.
64
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Survey Methodology
Data Integrity
The survey requested respondents' initials and date of birth, so that duplication could be avoided without
compromising the respondents' anonymity. Upon completion of the survey effort, an extensive
verification process was conducted to eliminate potential duplicates. This process examined respondents'
date of birth, initials, gender, ethnicity, length of homelessness, and consistencies in patterns of responses
to other questions on the survey. It was determined that 24 of the surveys were duplicates. Therefore,
1,019 surveys conducted were valid.
Survey Challenges and Limitations
The 2007 homeless survey is not a scientifically random survey of all homeless experiences. In an effort
to survey homeless persons throughout San Bernardino County, surveys were collected in a non-random
manner. The nature of the non-random survey collection tends to over-represent the street and sheltered
homeless, resulting in under-representation of a potentially large population of homeless persons and
families living in unfit or overcrowded housing. Survey results do, however, go further to inform the
community about homelessness in the San Bernardino County.
Comparisons can be made between the 2003 and 2007
surveys, thus providing interesting longitudinal data. This is
due to the fact that some questions from the 2003 survey were
again used in the 2007 survey. It is noted when there are minor
differences in question and answer phrasing between the two
surveys. Therefore, we not only are able to provide an up-to-
date profile of San Bernardino's County's current homeless ' �
population; we also can look at differences in the homeless Pr
population over time. '
In any survey research,there is always an opportunity for misrepresentation or bias.This is noted and
acknowledged by HUD in their homeless street count guidelines15. Since there is no mechanism to
separate truth from fiction in survey responses, it is important to make every effort to elicit the most
truthful responses from interviewees. Using a peer interviewing methodology is believed to allow the
respondents to be more candid with their answers,and may help reduce the apprehension of revealing
personal information.
is U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development,Office of Community Planning and Development.A Guide to
Counting Unsheltered Homeless People Revised,September 2006.
65
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Continuum of Care Application
Overall Summary for the Continuum of Care Application
The purpose of the following summaries is to provide local jurisdictions with consolidated information to
facilitate the completion of the application for Continuum of Care(CoC)funds.The following summaries
are based directly upon the results discussed in the body of the report. Please note that the information on
the sheltered homeless populations and subpopulations contained in the tables below reflect only those
people found in emergency shelters and transitional housing. Under the HUD definition of homelessness,
those housed in jails, hospitals, rehabilitation facilities, or who are living "doubled-up" in a house do not
qualify as homeless.
Homeless Population
The following table details the results of the 2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey.
The results are broken down by sheltered versus unsheltered status.
Part 1:Homeless Population Sheltered Unsheltered Total
Emergency Transitional
1. Number of Household with Dependent
Children 152 40 45 237
1 a.Total Number of Persons in Households 490 121 167 778
with Dependent Children
2.Number of Households without Dependent 314 292 5,286 5,892
2a.Total Number of Persons in Households 317 292 5,582 6
without Dependent Children ,191
Total(lines Ia+2a) 807 413 5,749 6,969
'Number of Households without dependent children is an estimate based on survey results.
Homeless Subpopulations
The following table further breaks down the census data into subpopulations. This data is based on both
the homeless census and data from the homeless survey. The results in the below chart are estimates,
calculated by applying the survey results to the census population.
Part 2:Homeless Subpopulations Sheltered Unsheltered Total
1. Chronically Homeless] 142 2,244 2,386
2. Severely Mentally Ill 393 1,627 2,020
3. Chronic Substance Abuse 233 2,849 3,082
4. Veterans 137 931 1,068
5. Persons with HIV/AIDS 2 213 215
6. Victims of Domestic Violence 118 552 670
7. Unaccompanied Youth(Under 18 years of age) 33 120 153
'"Sheltered"Chronically Homeless Subpopulations include persons in emergency shelter only.
66
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix I: Census Instrument
Appendix I:
Census Instrument
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Street Count
Street Count Map #:
Tally Sheet Deployment Location:
Team Membei 1: Deployment Location Phone :
Team Member 2: Tearn Captain:
Tally INDIVIDUALS ONLY in top columns.
#of Individual Men #of Individual Women # Undetermined #of Individual
Gender Youth under 18
Tally FAMILIES ONLY in lower columns.If more than 8 families,use back of sheet.
Family Units #of Men #of Women Youth under 18 years old
Family 1
Family 2
Family 3
Family 4
Family 5
Family 6
Family 7
Family 8
When the Number of People are Unknown,
Tally# of VEHICLES AND ENCAMPMENTS ONLY here
# of cars with sleeping occupants
# of Vans or RVs with electrical or water connections
# of Encampments with people
# of Persons reported by Park Ranger
67
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix II• Survey Instrument
Appendix II:
Survey Instrument
0683128873 (Off—usaj
2007 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY HOMELESS COUNT SURVEY
REFUSALS J Interview Due:_
(Interviewer:Read question&
Interviewer's(Your)Name: answers to the resDOnttent)
I I ' Shade Circles Like This-->•
Neighborhood or city: L�
RespontlenCS Initials:First Middle Last (Olhcaunre) Not Like This—�X
1 What is your birth date? S.Now long haw you been homeless since you last lived
In a permanent housing situation? (Shade only 11
Monts Day Year_ O 7 days or less O 4 months O 8 months O 12 mmths
O B-30 days O 5 months O 9 months O 1.2 years
O 2 months O 6 months O 1 D months O 2.3 years
(Office toe) (Office use) (Office use) 0 3 months 07 months 0 11 months O More than 3 years
2.Which racial I ethnlc group do you identity with the most? 10.Where were you living at the time you most recently
I'MoNV 11 became homeless?(Shade only t)
O White/Caucasian O American IndiaNAla3kaq Native O San Bernardino County(Continue with nuesrlon toe)
C BlackiAh ica,Aanencan O Aston 0 Los Angeas County (Ski.to ques(ion 1061
O Hispani./Lahno 0 pacific Island., O Riverside County (Silo to Qu 06
eston 11
O OOrerlMulti-ethnic O Other county in California(Skio to Question 1061
3.How do you identify yourself?
O Male O Fenws O TransgerMer O Out of Stale (Skip to question 106)
103. How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before
4.Have you ever served In the United States Armed Forces? becoming homeless?(Shade only N
O Yes (Continue with question 4a1 O 7 days or less 0 4-6 monffu O 3-5 years
O No (Skio to Question 3) O Bd 30 days O 7-11 n+ontht O 6-10 years
O 1-3 months O 1-2 yams O Moe than 10 yews
4a. Did you some in the regular military or in a National Guard (please Skio to question 111
or military reserve unit?(Shade all that abolvl
O Regular 10b.What Was the primary reason you came to San
eg y O National Guard O Reserve Bernardino County? (Shade only 1)
O For a job I seeking work O To access VA services and/or
4b.What is your discharge status? O 1 was Win or grew up here VA ckrac
O tiororable C CHher than Honwablz O Other v To atteas Ironwiess swnces
O General O Dishonorable O Don!know O My family aWlw friends are here 0 i,was forced out of my
0 1 was traveling and got stranded pmvous comrnun ty
S.An you widow or widower of a veteran of the United O 1 visited and decided to stay 0 1 am just passing through
States Armed Forces? O Weather I climate O Other
O Yes O No 11.Immediately before you became homeless this last time.
wen you:(Shade only 1)
S.Do you live alone without family,partner,or friends? O Living in a borne owned by O In}ail or prison
O Yes (Ski.to Question 71 you or your partner O In a hospital
O No (Ask question Sal O Renting a home w await ment
O Staying voth friends O In a mental ImWth facilty
O Living nth relatives O In a substance abu
6a.Do you live with:.(Shatle all that adolyl n9 w treatment program
•Spouse or wanner O Other family m emberts) O Living in subsidized housing C In foster care
•Ch,ldlcridd-, O Fnend s) O Other
•parent or legal guardian O Other 12.What do you think is the primar event or condition
that led to your homelessness?(Please choose the
7.Where do you usually stay at night? (Shade only 71 main reason.Shade only 11
•Outdoes/streets!parks O A place in a house not O L.st job O HospitalizatiorvYreatment program
normally used for steeping O Familyi domestic violence
•Unconverted Garage/attiubasaneM O Landlord sold'slopped renhi
(kitchen,livng room,etc.) or re-used property g 0 Incarceration
O Backyard w storage structure O Emergency shelter
•Abandoned building O Pubic facilities(train station, O Landlord raised rent O Got too old fssep—mdcare
bus tmnwt center,etc. O Foreclosure on Iwme due to O Divorced a
•N6teUtoteG �Pol ) unath.,:i,mortgage paymersts 0 HurrFwne I4-htrina
O Automobile O Transitional housing O Alcoho!w dig use O Other natural disaster;foe!flood
O Vat O Other shelter O Gambling problem O For t rg Lesbian,Gay,Bisexual.
O Carper O Other O Illness or medical problem or Tmnsgender
How many people,including O Encampment O Mental hearth issues O Other
}roumelf,usually stay Mere? How marry pzopie ti,re there? 0 Arg:nrwttrtamiiy or friend asked O Don t Know:decline to stale
you to leave
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
8.is this the first time you have been homeless? (Shade all that cooly)
O Cant afford rent O No transportation
Oyes (Skip to Q—rior,9) O No pb!no income O Bad credit
0 No (Continue wilt,question Gal O No money for momng costs O Ev,ct-re—d
(security deperert,first O Criminal record
Ga.In the last 12 months how many times have you been a"-lass month rentl C Don't want.
homeless,Including this present time? (Shade only 11 0 No 1,J]ava4able 0 Other
O One time O 3 titles 0 1,1"— 14.Are you currently using any of the following services/
02t O 4 tames O 6 tin+es C r&m than 6 times assistance?(Shade all that aoolyl
O E nerge y shorter 0 Sheller day services
Gb. In the last 3 years how many times have you been O Transition!housing O Legal assistance
homeless.including this present time? (Shade only 11 O Free meals 0 Heakh services
U
One time O 3 irmes C 5 times O Food pantry O Mental health setwoes
O Bus passes 0 Other
0 2 times 0 4 times O 6 times O More than 6 times O Job training O Not using any se s
L0 Alcohol I Dig counseling
68
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix II• Survey Instrument
1 2557128875 (Offixe use)EFTI 21a.Do you have any children:IShatle all that aoolvl
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms 1 2 3 4 5 6+
of government assistance?(Shade all that aoolvl O 16 or Over living with You? How merry? O O O O O O
•General Relief O SSI(Supplemental Security IncomeySS O In foster care? Flow many? O O O O O O
•Food Stamps O Cash Aid lCal,VORKS 0 0-5 years Irving with you? How many? 0 0 0 0 0 0
O Medi Cal lMed:-Care O VA Disability Compensation
O Veteran's Benefits 0 6-12 years Inirg with you? How many? 0 0 0 0 0 0
O Other governmental assistance
•WIC (State disability benefits,workers O 13 X17 years living with You?How many? O C O O O O
•Social Security compensation.unemployment,etc.) Are Your children.aces 6 to 17 and living
(/f yes to any of these,(to to 161 with You.in school? O Yes O No
O 1 am not currently reeving my of these
As( k 15a) 22.Since you became homeless this last time,have you
needed medical care and been unable to receive it?
15a.If you are not receiving any government assistance, O Yes O No
why not?(Shade ail that apply) 23.Where do you usually get medical care?
O Dona thank I'm eligible O I have app5ed for one or more of (Shade only 1)
O Have no ID these services,and I am O Hospital.-gency room O Pdvare doctor
currently waiting for approval
O No permanent address C Day know where to go O Urgent care clinic J Friends i family
C No transportation O Turned down O Public health clinic O Don't ever go
O Never applied O Will apply soon O Veterans Affairs Clinic O Other
O Benefits were cut off O Dont creed government assistance C Free dmic(canmunity clinic
U I-gi,ation Issues O Paper work too dificuk 233.How many times in the last 12 months have you used
0 1 am afraid my children will the emergency room for any treatment?
be taken away from me O Other L I W I
J
16.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all imes (Office use)
Government benefits?(County.State,Federal monies) 24. How many nights,if any,have you spent in jail or
(Shade only t) prison during the last 12 months
O Zero G 3301-$400 O 5701-SSCO
O$1-S1o0 G$401-S500 C S&OI-5900
.`;$10 t-5200 O 5501-s600 C 5901-51000 nights
0$201-$300 O$601-$700 O Over S1000 (Cffrce user
25.Are you currently on probation or parole?
17.Are you currently employed? (Shade only 11 Oyes ONO O Declined to state
O No,unemployed(Continue with 17a]
O Yes,pan time 25a. Were you on probation or parole at the time you most
(Skip to question 18) recently became homeless?
O Yes full time /Skip W Question 18) O Yes O No O Declined 10 state
173.What is keeping you from getting employment? 26.Are you currently experiencing any of the following:
(Shade ail that applyl 26a.Physical disability O Yes O No O Declined to state
O Need education O No permanent address
O Need training O No vinsportaticvl 25D.Mental Illness U Yes O No C Declined to state
•Need clothing O No tools for trade 26c.Depression O Yes O No O Declined to state
•No shower facilities O No work permit(No S.S.#) 26d.Alcohol abuse O Yes O No O Declined to state
•No phone O No photo identificatxm
•Health problems O Don't want to work 26e.Drug abuse O Yes O No O Declined to state
•Disabled O No jabs 261.Domesticipartner
•Alcohol;drug issue O Retired violence or abuse O Yes O No O Declined to state
O Criminal record O Spouseiparrner doesn't want me to mil 26g.Chronic health
O No child care O Other, problems O Yes O No O Declined to state
18.What are your other sources of income? 26h.AIDSIHIV related t7 Yes O No O Declined to all that aoolvl illness
•Family 1 trends O Selling other found items 261.Post-traumatic
•Pension C Selling blood!plasma stress disorder(PTSD) O Yes O No O Declined to state
O Child support O Gambling 26j.Developmental disability(A chronic condition that
O Panhandling O Sex work significantly limits a person's ability to speak,hear,see,walk,
O Recycling O Other learn,or perform fundamental O Yes O No C Declined tin stare
19.What is your total(gross)monthly Income from all
non-Government sources?(Job,panhandling,recycling,etc.) 27•Were you ever In foster care?(Before your 18th birthday,
O Zero O$301-1400 C$701-SWO were you ever removed from your home by the state.
O 51-slo0 O$401-$500 O 5801-$900 county,or court and sent to live with people other than
O 5101-S200 O$501-$600 O 5901-slow your mother or father?)
O 5201-S300 0$601-5700 O Over 51000 O Yes O No
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing? 28.What Is the highest level of education you have completed?
O Less than 6th Grade
O Yes (Continue with question 20a) O AA degree!techincal certificate
O No O Less than high school diploma O BA ee or above
(Skin to question 211 O High school diplomarGED �
20a.How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list? C Some college,rw degree O Gr3dJ to or profession.'degree
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free
Telephone Help Line?
months years I O Yes
( uaej (Ask question,29a
21.Do you have any children,living with you or not? O No (End of surveil
O Yes (Ask Question 21a) 29a.Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211
O No (Skip to ti-scion 221 Help Line?
LC Yes C No
69
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III• General Survey Results
Appendix III:
General Survey Profile Results
1.Age
Response Percent
13-17 years 5 .7%
18-21 years 25 3.6%
22-30 years 130 18.9%
31-40 years 187 27.1%
41-50 years 216 31.3%
51-60 years 95 13.8%
More than 60 years 31 4.5%
Total 689 100.0%
2.Which racial/ethnic group do you identify with the most?
Response Percent
White/Caucasian 309 44.7%
Black/African American 169 24.4%
Hispanic/Latino 151 21.8%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 14 2.0%
Asian 7 1.0%
Pacific Islander 7 1.0%
Other/Multi-ethnic 35 5.1%
Total 692 100.0%
3.How do you identify yourself?
Response
Frequency Percent
Male 435 63.1%
Female 247 35.8%
Transgender 7 1.0%
Total 689 100.0%
4. Have you ever served in the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 116 17.0%
No 567 83.0%
Total 683 100.0%
4a.Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?
70
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
Response
Regular Military 96 13.8%
National Guard 14 2.0%
Reserve 6 .9%
Multiple response question with 697 respondents offering 116 responses.
4a. Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?
Response
Regular Military 96 85.0%
National Guard 14 12.4%
Reserve 6 5.3%
Multiple response question with 113 respondents offering 116 responses.
4b.What is your discharge status?
Response
Honorable 73 63.5%
General 20 17.4%
Other than Honorable 9 7.8%
Dishonorable 6 5.2%
Other 4 3.5%
Don't know 3 2.6%
Total 115 100.0%
5.Are you widow or widower of a veteran of the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 20 2.9%
No 658 97.1%
Total 678 100.0%
6.Do you live alone without family,partner, or friends?
Response Percent
Yes 295 42.5%
No 399 57.5%
Total 694 100.0%
71
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
6a.Do you live with:
Response
Frequency Percent
Spouse or partner 78 20.0%
Child/children 49 12.6%
Parent or legal guardian 13 3.3%
Other family member(s) 43 11.0%
Friend(s) 116 29.7%
Other 153 39.2%
Multiple response question with 390 respondents offering 452 responses.
7.Where do you usually stay at night?
Response
Outdoors/streets/parks 181 26.3%
Automobile 33 4.8%
Unconverted Garage/attic/basement 24 3.5%
Backyard or storage structure 19 2.8%
Abandoned building 50 7.3%
Motel/hotel 50 7.3%
A place in a house not normally used for sleeping 58 8.4%
Emergency shelter 49 7.1%
Transitional housing 57 8.3%
Other shelter 43 6.2%
Public facilities 10 1.5%
Encampment 19 2.8%
Other 57 8.3%
Van 13 1.9%
Camper 26 3.8%
Total 689 100.0%
8. Is this the first time you have been homeless?
Response
Yes 342 49.5%
No 349 50.5%
Total 691 100.0%
8a. In the last 12 months how many times have you been homeless, including this present
time?
Response Percent
Onetime 438 63.6%
72
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
2 times 76 11.0%
3 times 48 7.0%
4 times 22 3.2%
5 times 22 3.2%
6 times 11 1.6%
More than 6 times 72 10.4%
Total 689 100.0%
8b. In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
One time 348 50.3%
2 times 87 12.6%
3 times 65 9.4%
4 times 37 5.3%
5 times 30 4.3%
6 times 16 2.3%
More than 6 times 109 15.8%
Total 692 100.0%
8b.In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
2 times 87 25.3%
3 times 65 18.9%
4 times 37 10.8%
5 times 30 8.7%
6 times 16 4.7%
More than 6 times 109 31.7%
Total 344 100.0%
9. How long have you been homeless since you last lived in a permanent housing situation?
Response
7 days or less 29 4.3%
8-30 days 42 6.2%
2 months 56 8.2%
3 months 44 6.5%
4 months 35 5.1%
5 months 31 4.6%
6 months 38 5.6%
7 months 23 3.4%
73
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
8 months 25 3.7%
9 months 20 2.9%
10 months 17 2.5%
11 months 16 2.4%
12 months 40 5.9%
1-2 years 85 12.5%
2-3 years 57 8.4%
More than 3 years 122 17.9%
Total 680 100.0%
10.Where were you living at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
San Bernardino County 500 71.9%
Los Angeles County 74 10.6%
Riverside County 44 6.3%
Other county in California 31 4.5%
Out of State 46 6.6%
Total 695 100.0%
10a. How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before becoming homeless?
Response
7 days or less 12 2.4%
8-30 days 12 2.4%
1 -3 months 13 2.6%
4-6 months 17 3.4%
7-11 months 18 3.6%
1 -2 years 56 11.2%
3-5 years 74 14.8%
6-10 years 50 10.0%
More than 10 years 248 49.6%
Total 500 100.0%
10b.What was the primary reason you came to San Bernardino County?
Response
For a job/seeking work 30 16.0%
1 was born or grew up here 17 9.1%
My family and/or friends are here 37 19.8%
1 was traveling and got stranded 19 10.2%
I visited and decided to stay 13 7.0%
74
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
To access homeless services 9 4.8%
1 was forced out of my 7 37%
1 am just passing through 13 7.0%
Weather/climate 2 1.1%
Other 36 19.3%
To access VA services and/or 4 2.1%
Total 187 100.0%
11. Immediately before you became homeless this last time,were you:
Response
Living in a home owned by you or your partner 70 10.2%
Renting a home or apartment 195 28.4%
Staying with friends 109 15.9%
Living with relatives 143 20.8%
Living in subsidized housing 15 2.2%
In jail or prison 69 10.0%
In a hospital 3 .4%
In a substance abuse 23 3.3%
In foster care 2 .3%
Other 48 7.0%
In a mental health facility 10 1.5%
Total 687 100.0%
12.What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?
Response Percent
Lost job 163 23.7%
Landlord raised rent 21 3.0%
Alcohol or drug use 162 23.5%
Illness or medical problem 17 2.5%
Mental health issues 27 3.9%
Family/domestic violence 30 4.4%
Incarceration 40 5.8%
Got too old for foster care 3 .4%
Divorced or separated 14 2.0%
Don't Know/decline to state 22 3.2%
Other 67 9.7%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or re-used property 28 4.1%
Hospitalization/treatment program 4 .6%
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave 62 9.0%
75
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
Hurricane Katrina 3 .4%
Other natural disaster/fire/flood 3 .4%
For being Lesbian,Gay,Bisexual,or Transgender 4 .6%
Gambling problem 8 1.2%
Foreclosure on home due to 11 1.6%
Total 689 100.0%
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
Response
No job/no income 368 53.0%
Can't afford rent 332 47.8%
No money for moving costs 206 29.7%
No transportation 160 23.1%
Bad credit 132 19.0%
Criminal record 101 14.6%
Eviction record 71 10.2%
Don't want to 44 6.3%
No housing available 40 5.8%
Other 101 14.6%
Multiple response question with 694 respondents offering 1555 responses.
14.Are you currently using any of the following services/assistance?
Response
Free meals 288 41.7%
Food pantry 171 24.8%
Not using any services 171 24.8%
Emergency shelter 129 18.7%
Bus passes 97 14.1%
Alcohol/Drug counseling 92 13.3%
Shelter day services 92 13.3%
Transitional housing 84 12.2%
Mental health services 83 12.0%
Health services 58 8.4%
Legal assistance 34 4.9%
Job training 33 4.8%
Other 87 12.6%
Multiple response question with 690 respondents offering 1419 responses.
76
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms of government assistance?
Response
I am not currently receiving any of these 374 54.0%
Food Stamps 170 24.5%
Medi respondents offering Cal/Medi respondents 64 9.2%
offering Care
SSI(Supplemental Security Income)/SSDI 61 8.8%
General Relief 38 5.5%
Social Security 30 4.3%
Cash Aid/CalWORKS 27 3.9%
WIC 23 3.3%
VA Disability Compensation 17 2.5%
Veteran's Benefits 15 2.2%
Other governmental assistance 25 3.6%
Multiple response question with 693 respondents offering 844 responses.
15a.If you are not receiving any government assistance,why not?
Response Percent
Don't think I'm eligible 90 24.5%
No permanent address 88 23.9%
Have no ID 76 20.7%
Never applied 66 17.9%
No transportation 48 13.0%
Turned down 46 12.5%
Will apply soon 39 10.6%
Paper work too difficult 31 8.4%
1 have applied and I am currently waiting for approval 29 7.9%
Don't know where to go 24 6.5%
Don't need government assistance 23 6.3%
Benefits were cut off 19 5.2%
Immigration issues 9 2.4%
1 am afraid my children will be taken away from me 7 1.9%
Other 68 18.5%
Multiple response question with 368 respondents offering 663 responses.
16.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all Government benefits?
Response Percent
Zero 382 56.8%
$1 -$100 24 3.6%
77
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
$101 -$200 81 12.0%
$201 -$300 26 3.9%
$301 -$400 21 3.1%
$401 -$500 11 1.6%
$501 -$600 25 3.7%
$601 -$700 12 1.8%
$701 -$800 27 4.0%
$801 -$900 26 3.9%
$901 -$1000 23 3.4%
Over$1000 15 2.2%
Total 673 100.0%
17.Are you currently employed?
Response
No,unemployed 607 87.6%
Yes,part time 60 8.7%
Yes,full time 26 3.8%
Total 693 100.0%
17a.What is keeping you from getting employment?
Response Percent
No permanent address 205 33.9%
No transportation 194 32.1%
No phone 177 29.3%
Alcohol/drug issue 147 24.3%
Need clothing 142 23.5%
Need training 137 22.6%
Need education 120 19.8%
Criminal record 102 16.9%
No photo identification 89 14.7%
No shower facilities 82 13.6%
Health problems 82 13.6%
Disabled 80 13.2%
No jobs 75 12.4%
No tools for trade 57 9.4%
Don't want to work 39 6.4%
No child care 20 3.3%
No work permit(No S.S.#) 14 2.3%
Retired 10 1.7%
78
E
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
I
Spouse/partner doesn't want me to work 9 1.5%
Other 117 19.3%
Multiple response question with 605 respondents offering 1898 responses.
18.What are your other sources of income?
Response Percent
Recycling 272 43.8%
Panhandling 175 28.2%
Family/friends 164 26.4%
Selling other found items 86 13.8%
Selling blood/plasma 49 7.9%
Sex work 31 5.0%
Gambling 20 3.2%
Pension 9 1.4%
Child support 1 .2%
Other 220 35.4%
Multiple response question with 621 respondents offering 1027 responses.
19.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all non-Government sources?
Response Percent
Zero 208 30.9%
$1 _$100 145 21.5%
$101 -$200 89 13.2%
$201 -$300 75 11.1%
$301 -$400 43 6.4%
$401 -$500 30 4.5%
$501 -$600 27 4.0%
$601 -$700 13 1.9%
$701 -$800 9 1.3%
$801 _$900 8 1.2%
$901 _$1000 7 1.0%
Over$1000 19 1 2.8%
Total 673 100.0%
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing?
Response
Yes 80 11.5%
No 616 88.5%
Total 696 100.0%
79
i
k
E
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
20a. How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list?(Total in months)
Response
1 month 33 51.6%
2-12 months 10 15.6%
13-24 months 5 7.8%
25-36 months 6 9.4%
37-48 months 3 4.7%
49 months or more 7 10.9%
Total 64 100.0%
21.Do you have any children,living with you or not?
Percent Response Frequency
Yes 154 22.8%
No 521 77.2%
Total 675 100.0%
21 a. Do you have any children who are?
Percent Response Frequency
18 or over living with you? 38 27.3%
In foster care? 44 31.7%
0 - 5 years living with you? 46 33.1%
6 - 12 years living with you? 43 30.9%
13 - 17 years living with you? 21 15.1
Multiple response question with 139 respondents offering 192 responses.
21a-1.How many children do you have 18 years old or over living with you?
Response
One child 14 43.8%
Two children 8 25.0%
Three children 2 6.3%
Four children 6 18.8%
Six or more children 2 6.3%
Total 32 100.0%
21a-2.How many children do you have in foster care?
Response
One child 12 30.8%
Two children 15 38.5%
Three children 6 15.4%
80
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
Four children 3 7.7%
Five children 2 5.1%
Six or more children 1 2.6%
Total 39 100.0%
21 a-3. How many children do you have 0-5 years old living with you?
Response
One child 31 58.5%
Two children 19 35.8%
Three children 1 1.9%
Five children 1 1.9%
Six or more children 1 1.9%
Total 53 100.0%
21 a-4. How many children do you have 6. 12 years old living with you?
Response
One child 23 53.5%
Two children 12 27.9%
Three children 4 9.3%
Four children 2 4.7%
Six or more children 2 4.7%
Total 43 100.0%
21a-5. How many children do you have 13-17 years old living with you?
Response
One child 15 78.9%
Two children 1 5.3%
Three children 3 15.8%
Total 19 100.0%
21a-6.Are your children,ages 6 to 17 and living with you, in school?
Response
Yes 36 80.0%
No 9 20.0%
Total 45 100.0%
22.Since you became homeless this last time, have you needed medical care and been unable
to receive it?
Response
Yes 229 34.0%
81
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
No 444 66.0%
Total 673 100.0%
23.Where do you usually get medical care?
Response
Hospital emergency room 324 47.9%
Urgent care clinic 21 3.1%
Public health clinic 29 4.3%
Veterans Affairs Clinic 37 5.5%
Free clinic/community clinic 59 8.7%
Private doctor 34 5.0%
Friends/family 9 1.3%
Don't ever go 126 18.6%
Other 38 5.6%
Total 677 100.0%
23a. How many times in the last 12 months have you used the emergency room for any
treatment?
Response
Never 322 48.6%
1 time 112 16.9%
2 times 90 13.6%
3 times 64 9.7%
4 times 36 5.4%
5 times 10 1.5%
More than 5 times 29 4.4%
Total 663 100.0%
24. How many nights,if any, have you spent in jail or prison during the last 12 months?
Response
0 nights 404 61.9%
1 -5 nights 75 11.5%
6-10 nights 32 4.9%
11 -20 nights 20 3.1%
21 -50 nights 31 4.7%
More than 50 nights 91 13.9%
Total 653 100.0%
25. Are you currently on probation or parole?
Response Percent
82
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
Yes 189 28.1%
No 445 66.2%
Declined to state 38 5.7%
Total 672 100.0%
25a.Were you on probation or parole at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
Yes 152 22.9%
No 456 68.7%
Declined to state 56 8.4%
Total 664 100.0%
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following:
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 177 473 23
26.3% 70.3% 3.4%
26b.Mental illness 172 456 42
25.7% 68.1% 6.3%
26c. Depression 285 374 19
42.0% 55.2% 2.8%
26d.Alcohol abuse 228 412 29
34.1% 61.6% 4.3%
26e.Drug abuse 233 406 30
34.8% 60.7% 4.5%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 63 574 25
9.5% 86.7% 3.8%
26g.Chronic health problems 120 531 22
17.8% 78.9% 3.3%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 20 610 34
3.0% 91.9% 5.1%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 83 560 23
12.5% 84.1% 3.5%
26j.Developmental disability 76 563 31
11.3% 84.0% 4.6%
27.Were you ever in foster care?
Response
Yes 88 12.9%
83
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix III: General Survey Results
No 592 87.1%
Total 680 100.0%
28.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Response Percent
Less than 6th Grade 32 4.7%
Less than high school diploma 236 34.5%
High school diplomalGED 241 35.2%
Some college,no degree 114 16.7%
AA degree I technical certificate 35 5.1%
BA degree or above 13 1.9%
Graduate or professional degree 13 1.9%
Total 684 100.0%
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free Telephone Help Line?
Response
Yes 123 17.8%
No 567 82.2%
Total 690 100.0%
29a. Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211 Help Line?
Response
Yes 40 33.3%
No 80 66.7%
Total 120 100.0%
84
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
Appendix IV:
Survey Profile Results by Veteran Status
1.Age
Response
13-17 years 0.0%
18-21 years 0.0%
22-30 years 7.0%
31-40 years 18.4%
41-50 years 38.6%
51-60 years 22.8%
More than 60 years 13.2%
Total 114
2.Which racial 1 ethnic group do you identify with the most?
Response
White/Caucasian 53.0%
Black/African American 23.5%
Hispanic/Latino 12.2%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 3.5%
Asian 0.9%
Pacific Islander 1.7%
Other/Multi-ethnic 5.2%
Total 115
3.How do you identify yourself?
Response
Male 92.2%
Female 6.1%
Transgender 1.7%
Total 115
4.Have you ever served in the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 100.0%
No 0.0%
Total 116
85
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
4a. Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?
Response
Regular Military 85.0%
National Guard 12.4%
Reserve 5.3%
Total Cases 113
Total Responses 116
4b.What is your discharge status?
Response
Honorable 63.5%
General 17.4%
Other than Honorable 7.8%
Dishonorable 5.2%
Other 3.5%
Don't know 2.6%
Total 115
5.Are you widow or widower of a veteran of the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 9.7%
No 90.3%
Total 113
6. Do you live alone without family,partner,or friends?
lResponse
Yes 43.1%
No 56.9%
Total 116
86
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
6. Do you live with:
Response
Spouse or partner 18.2%
Child/children 10.6%
Parent or legal guardian 4.5%
Other family member(s) 10.6%
Friend(s) 37.9%
Other 39.4%
Total Cases 66
Total Responses 80
7.Where do you usually stay at night?
Response
Outdoors/streets/parks 27.6%
Automobile 3.4%
Unconverted Garage/attic/basement 5.2%
Backyard or storage structure 4.3%
Abandoned building 7.8%
Motel/hotel 7.8%
A place in a house not normally used for sleeping 9.5%
Emergency shelter 8.6%
Transitional housing 6.9%
Other shelter 6.9%
Public facilities 1.7%
Encampment 4.3%
Other 2.6%
Van 0.9%
Camper 2.6%
Total 116
8. Is this the first time you have been homeless?
Response
Yes 39.7%
No 60.3%
Total 116
87
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
8a. In the last 12 months how many times have you been homeless, including this present
time?
Response
One time 58.3%
2 times 7.0%
3 times 7.8%
4 times 3.5%
5 times 4.3%
6 times 2.6%
More than 6 times 16.5%
Total 115
8b. In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
One time 39.7%
2 times 14.7%
3 times 6.0%
4 times 8.6%
5 times 4.3%
6 times 4.3%
More than 6 times 22.4%
Total 116
9. How long have you been homeless since you last lived in a permanent housing situation?
Response
7 days or less 2.6%
8-30 days 6.1%
2 months 2.6%
3 months 3.5%
4 months 4.3%
5 months 2.6%
6 months 6.1%
7 months 1.7%
8 months 5.2%
9 months 1.7%
10 months 3.5%
11 months 3.5%
12 months 7.0%
1-2 years 14.8%
88
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
2-3 years 9.6%
More than 3 years 25.2%
Total 115
10.Where were you living at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
San Bernardino County 70.7%
Los Angeles County 9.5%
Riverside County 8.6%
Other county in California 3.4%
Out of State 7.8%
Total 116
10a. How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before becoming homeless?
Response
7 days or less 3.7%
8-30 days 3.7%
1 -3 months 3.7%
4-6 months 4.9%
7-11 months 4.9%
1 -2 years 14.6%
3-5 years 13.4%
6-10 years 7.3%
More than 10 years 43.9%
Total 82
10b. What was the primary reason you came to San Bernardino County?
Response
For a job/seeking work 18.2%
1 was born or grew up here 12.1%
My family and/or friends are here 9.1%
1 was traveling and got stranded 6.1%
1 visited and decided to stay 6.1%
To access homeless services 0.0%
I was forced out of my 3.0%
1 am just passing through 12.1%
Weather/climate 3.0%
Other 18.2%
To access VA services and/or 12.1%
89
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
Total 33
11. Immediately before you became homeless this last time,were you:
Response
Living in a home owned by 19.0%
Renting a home or apartment 23.3%
Staying with friends 15.5%
Living with relatives 13.8%
Living in subsidized housing 1.7%
In jail or prison 8.6%
In a hospital 0.9%
In a substance abuse 6.0%
In foster care 0.0%
Other 7.8%
In a mental health facility 3.4%
Total 116
12.What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?
Response
Lost job 21.9%
Landlord raised rent 6.1%
Alcohol or drug use 20.2%
Illness or medical problem 5.3%
Mental health issues 4.4%
Family/domestic violence 0.9%
Incarceration 6.1%
Got too old for foster care 0.9%
Divorced or separated 5.3%
Don't Know/decline to state 2.6%
Other 7.9%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or re-used property 5.3%
Hospitalization/treatment program 0.9%
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave 5.3%
Hurricane Katrina 1.8%
Other natural disaster/fire/flood 0.0%
For being Lesbian,Gay,Bisexual,or Transgender 0.0%
Gambling problem 3.5%
Foreclosure on home due 1.8%
Total 114
90
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
Response
Can't afford rent 46.6%
No job/no income 43.1%
No money for moving costs 24.1%
No housing available 5.2%
No transportation 19.8%
Bad credit 13.8%
Eviction record 6.0%
Criminal record 14.7%
Don't want to 12.9%
Other 19.0%
Total Cases 116
Total Responses 238
14.Are you currently using any of the following services/assistance?
Response
Emergency shelter 22.4%
Transitional housing 9.5%
Free meals 50.9%
Food pantry 24.1%
Bus passes 15.5%
Job training 6.9%
Alcohol/Drug counseling 6.9%
Shelter day services 21.6%
Legal assistance 4.3%
Health services 13.8%
Mental health services 10.3%
Other 11.2%
Not using any services 19.8%
Total Cases 116
Total Responses 252
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms of government assistance?
Response
General Relief 5.2%
Food Stamps 21.6%
Medi-Cal/Medi-Care 6.9%
91
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
SSI(Supplemental Security Income)/SSDI 10.3%
Cash Aid/CalWORKS 0.0%
Veteran's Benefits 12.1%
1 am not currently receiving any of these 36.2%
WIC 1.7%
VA Disability Compensation 12.1%
Social Security 10.3%
Other governmental assistance 2.6%
Total Cases 116
Total Responses 138
15a. If you are not receiving any government assistance,why not?
Response
Don't think I'm eligible 14.3%
Have no ID 21.4%
No permanent address 28.6%
No transportation 16.7%
Never applied 19.0%
Benefits were cut off 4.8%
1 have applied and I am currently waiting for approval 9.5%
Don't know where to go 2.4%
Turned down 11.9%
Will apply soon 11.9%
Don't need government assistance 7.1%
Paper work too difficult 7.1%
Immigration issues 4.8%
1 am afraid my children will be taken away from me 2.4%
Other 23.8%
Total Cases 42
Total Responses 78
16.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all Government benefits?
Response
Zero 42.2%
$1 -$100 5.2%
$101 -$200 11.2%
$201 -$300 4.3%
$301 -$400 3.4%
$401 -$500 1.7%
92
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
$501 -$600 4.3%
$601 -$700 0.0%
$701 -$800 5.2%
$801 -$900 6.9%
$901 -$1000 9.5%
Over$1000 6.0%
Total 116
17.Are you currently employed?
Response
No,unemployed 87.1%
Yes,part time 7.8%
Yes,full time 5.2%
Total 116
17a.What is keeping you from getting employment?
Response
Need education 13.9%
Need training 10.9%
Need clothing 16.8%
No shower facilities 15.8%
No phone 28.7%
Health problems 17.8%
Disabled 19.8%
Criminal record 17.8%
No permanent address 34.7%
No transportation 37.6%
No tools for trade 10.9%
No work permit(No S.S.#) 0.0%
Don't want to work 11.9%
No jobs 8.9%
No child care 1.0%
Retired 6.9%
Other 16.8%
Alcohol/drug issue 19.8%
No photo identification 10.9%
Spouse/partner doesn't want me to work 0.0%
Total Cases 101
Total Responses 304
93
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
18.What are your other sources of income?
Response
Family/friends 21.2%
Pension 4.8%
Child support 0.0%
Recycling 39.4%
Selling other found items 20.2%
Selling blood/plasma 8.7%
Sex work 1.9%
Other 38.5%
Gambling 6.7%
Panhandling 25.0%
Total Cases 104
Total Responses 173
19.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all non-Government sources?
Response Percent
Zero 30.2%
$1 _$100 20.7%
$101 -$200 17.2%
$201 -$300 11.2%
$301 -$400 6.9%
$401 -$500 3.4%
$501 -$600 0.9%
$601 -$700 0.9%
$701 -$800 0.9%
$801 -$900 2.6%
$901 _$1000 1.7%
Over$1000 3.4%
Total 116
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing?
Response
Yes 12.1%
No 87.9%
Total 116
94
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
20a. How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list?(Total in months)
Response
1 month 9.1%
2-12 months 18.2%
13-24 months 9.1%
25-36 months 27.3%
37-48 months 9.1%
49 months or more 27.3%
Total 11
21. Do you have any children, living with you or not?
'Response Percent
Yes 17.4%
No 82.6%
Total 115
21a. Do you have any children who are?
Response
18 or over living with you? 37.5%
In foster care? 37.5%
0-5 years living with you? 18.8%
6-12 years living with you? 18.8%
13-17 years living with you? 12.5%
Total Cases 16
Total Responses 20
21 a-1. How many children do you have 18 years old or over living with you?
Response
One child 33.3%
Two children 0.0%
Three children 0.0%
Four children 33.3%
Six or more children 33.3%
Total 3
21a-2. How many children do you have in foster care?
Response Percent
One child 33.3%
95
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV• Veteran Survey Results
Two children 66.7%
Three children 0.0%
Four children 0.0%
Five children 0.0%
Six or more children 0.0%
Total 3
21a-3. How many children do you have 0—5 years old living with you?
Response
One child 66.7%
Two children 33.3%
Three children 0.0%
Five children 0.0%
Six or more children 0.0%
Total 3
21a-4. How many children do you have 6—12 years old living with you?
Response
One child 100.0%
Two children 0.0%
Three children 0.0%
Four children 0.0%
Six or more children 0.0%
Total 3
21 a-5. How many children do you have 13—17 years old living with you?
Response
One child 100.0%
Two children 0.0%
Three children 0.0%
Total 1
Are your children, ages 6 to 17 and living with you,in school?
Response
Yes 33.3%
No 66.7%
Total 3
96
I
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
22.Since you became homeless this last time, have you needed medical care and been unable
to receive it?
Response
Yes 33.3%
No 66.7%
Total 114
23.Where do you usually get medical care?
Response
Hospital emergency room 36.0%
Urgent care clinic 3.5%
Public health clinic 3.5%
Veterans Affairs Clinic 30.7%
Free clinic/community clinic 7.0%
Private doctor 3.5%
Friends/family 0.0%
Don't ever go 13.2%
Other 2.6%
Total 114
23a. How many times in the last 12 months have you used the emergency room for any
treatment?
Response
Never 51.4%
1 time 16.2%
2 times 12.6%
3 times 9.9%
4 times 5.4%
5 times 0.9%
More than 5 times 3.6%
Total 111
24. How many nights, if any, have you spent in jail or prison during the last 12 months?
Response
0 nights 60.4%
1 -5 nights 16.2%
6-10 nights 4.5%
11 -20 nights 4.5%
21 -50 nights 2.7%
More than 50 nights 11.7%
97
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
Total 111
25. Are you currently on probation or parole?
Response Percent
Yes 26.5%
No 69.0%
Declined to state 4.4%
Total 113
25a. Were you on probation or parole at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
Yes 19.1%
No 71.3%
Declined to state 9.6%
Total 115
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following:
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 48 62 4
42.1% 54.4% 3.5%
26b.Mental illness 38 63 9
34.5% 57.3% 8.2%
26c.Depression 52 58 4
45.6% 50.9% 3.5%
26d.Alcohol abuse 40 66 4
36.4% 60.0% 3.6%
26e.Drug abuse 32 74 4
29.1% 67.3% 3.6%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 10 94 4
9.3% 87.0% 3.7%
26g.Chronic health problems 34 75 5
29.8% 65.8% 4.4%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 4 97 8
3.7% 89.0% 7.3%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 33 70 6
30.3% 64.2% 5.5%
26j.Developmental disability 16 89 5
14.5% 80.9% 4.5%
98
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IV: Veteran Survey Results
27.Were you ever in foster care?
Response
Yes 14.2%
No 85.8%
Total 113
28.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Response
Less than 6th Grade 5.4%
Less than high school diploma 9.8%
High school diplomalGED 34.8%
Some college,no degree 28.6%
AA degree 1 technical certificate 13.4%
BA degree or above 4.5%
Graduate or professional degree 3.6%
Total 112
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free Telephone Help Line?
Response
Yes 19.0%
No 81.0%
Total 116
29a. Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211 Help Line?
..
Yes 57.1%
No 42.9%
Total 21
99
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Appendix V:
Survey Profile Results by Substance Abuse
1.Age
Response Percent
13-17 years 0.6%
18-21 years 1.9%
22-30 years 19.4%
31-40 years 26.8%
41-50 years 31.6%
51-60 years 15.2%
More than 60 years 4.5%
Total 310
2.Which racial 1 ethnic group do you identify with the most?
Response
White/Caucasian 40.6%
Black/African American 24.0%
Hispanic/Latino 25.9%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 1.9%
Asian 1.6%
Pacific Islander 2.2%
Other/Multi-ethnic 3.8%
Total 313
3. How do you identify yourself?
Response
Male 65.2%
Female 33.5%
Transgender 1.3%
Total 310
4.Have you ever served in the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 16.6%
No 83.4%
Total 307
100
-- I
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
4a.Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?
Response
Regular Military 13.1%
National Guard 1.6%
Reserve 1.0%
Total 16.7%
4b.What is your discharge status?
Response
Honorable 62.0%
General 18.0%
Other than Honorable 8.0%
Dishonorable 8.0%
Other 2.0%
Don't know 2.0%
Total 50
5.Are you widow or widower of a veteran of the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 3.3%
No 96.7%
Total 305
6.Do you live alone without family,partner,or friends?
Response
Yes 46.2%
No 53.8%
Total 312
6.Do you live with:
Response
Spouse or partner 22.0%
Child/children 3.0%
Parent or legal guardian 1.2%
Other family member(s) 12.2%
Friend(s) 39.0%
Other 42.1%
Total Cases 164
Total Responses 196
101
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
7.Where do you usually stay at night?
Response
Outdoors/streets/parks 31.1%
Automobile 5.4%
Unconverted Garage/attic/basement 3.2%
Backyard or storage structure 3.5%
Abandoned building 10.9%
Motel/hotel 6.1%
A place in a house not normally used for sleeping 10.3%
Emergency shelter 5.4%
Transitional housing 3.8%
Other shelter 3.8%
Public facilities 1.6%
Encampment 2.9%
Other 6.4%
Van 1.3%
Camper 4.2%
Total 312
B. Is this the first time you have been homeless?
Response
Yes 45.7%
No 54.3%
Total 313
8a. In the last 12 months how many times have you been homeless, including this present
time?
Response
One time 57.3%
2 times 12.1%
3 times 8.3%
4 times 3.2%
5 times 3.8%
6 times 2.2%
More than 6 times 13.1%
Total 314
102
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
8b. In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
One time 45.9%
2 times 11.5%
3 times 10.2%
4 times 4.8%
5 times 5.4%
6 times 3.2%
More than 6 times 19.1%
Total 314
9.How long have you been homeless since you last lived in a permanent housing situation?
Response
7 days or less 2.9%
8-30 days 5.4%
2 months 4.8%
3 months 5.1%
4 months 4.5%
5 months 4.8%
6 months 7.3%
7 months 4.2%
8 months 3.8%
9 months 1.9%
10 months 3.2%
11 months 1.6%
12 months 5.4%
1-2 years 13.1%
2-3 years 10.2%
More than 3 years 21.7%
Total 313
10.Where were you living at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
San Bernardino County 73.9%
Los Angeles County 10.2%
Riverside County 6.4%
Other county in California 4.8%
Out of State 4.8%
Total 314
103
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
10a. How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before becoming homeless?
Response
7 days or less 2.6%
8-30 days 1.7%
1 -3 months 1.7%
4-6 months 3.0%
7-11 months 4.3%
1 -2 years 9.5%
3-5 years 15.9%
6-10 years 12.1%
More than 10 years 49.1%
Total 232
10b. What was the primary reason you came to San Bernardino County?
p.
For a job/seeking work 10.0%
I was born or grew up here 7.5%
My family and/or friends are here 21.3%
1 was traveling and got stranded 10.0%
I visited and decided to stay 6.3%
To access homeless services 6.3%
1 was forced out of my 3.8%
1 am just passing through 8.8%
Weather/climate 0.0%
Other 21.3%
To access VA services and/or 5.0%
Total 80
11.Immediately before you became homeless this last time,were you:
Response
Living in a home owned by 7.0%
Renting a home or apartment 25.2%
Staying with friends 15.3%
Living with relatives 25.2%
Living in subsidized housing 1.9%
In jail or prison 13.1%
In a hospital 0.0%
In a substance abuse 5.4%
In foster care 0.3%
104
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Other 4.8%
In a mental health facility 1.9%
Total 314
12.What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?
Response
Lost job 18.9%
Landlord raised rent 1.9%
Alcohol or drug use 37.5%
Illness or medical problem 1.0%
Mental health issues 3.8%
Family/domestic violence 2.6%
Incarceration 6.7%
Got too old for foster care 0.3%
Divorced or separated 2.9%
Don't Know/decline to state 3.5%
Other 4.8%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or re-used property 3.2%
Hospitalization/treatment program 0.6%
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave 7.4%
Hurricane Katrina 0.6%
Other natural disaster/fire/flood 0.0%
For being Lesbian,Gay, Bisexual,or Transgender 1.3%
Gambling problem 1.3%
Foreclosure on home due to 1.6%
Total 312
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
Response
Can't afford rent 51.3%
No job/no income 59.9%
No money for moving costs 32.2%
No housing available 6.1%
No transportation 29.0%
Bad credit 22.6%
Eviction record 12.4%
Criminal record 19.4%
Don't want to 8.0%
Other 13.1%
105
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Total Cases 314
Total Responses 797
14.Are you currently using any of the following services/assistance?
Response
Emergency shelter 20.1%
Transitional housing 8.3%
Free meals 46.0%
Food pantry 29.1%
Bus passes 16.9%
Job training 4.8%
Alcohol/Drug counseling 20.4%
Shelter day services 17.6%
Legal assistance 5.8%
Health services 8.6%
Mental health services 14.1%
Other 11.2%
Not using any services 26.2%
Total Cases 313
Total Responses 717
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms of government assistance?
Response
General Relief 6.7%
Food Stamps 21.0%
Medi-Cal/Medi-Care 5.4%
SSI(Supplemental Security Income)/SSDI 10.8%
Cash Aid/CalWORKS 1.3%
Veteran's Benefits 1.6%
1 am not currently receiving any of these 56.4%
WIC .6%
VA Disability Compensation 2.2%
Social Security 3.8%
Other governmental assistance 2.9%
Total Cases 314
Total Responses 354
15a. If you are not receiving any government assistance,why not?
106
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Response
Don't think I'm eligible 31.4%
Have no ID 26.9%
No permanent address 27.4%
No transportation 16.6%
Never applied 22.9%
Benefits were cut off 4.6%
1 have applied and I am currently waiting for approval 9.1%
Don't know where to go 6.3%
Turned down 14.9%
Will apply soon 13.1%
Don't need government assistance 5.1%
Paper work too difficult 10.9%
Immigration issues 1.7%
1 am afraid my children will be taken away from me 2.3%
Other 15.4%
Total Cases 175
Total Responses 365
16.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all Government benefits?
Response Percent
Zero 60.3%
$1 -$100 1.9%
$101 -$200 11.2%
$201 -$300 4.2%
$301 -$400 1.6%
$401 -$500 1.3%
$501 -$600 4.5%
$601 -$700 2.2%
$701 -$800 3.8%
$801 -$900 4.2%
$901 -$1000 3.2%
Over$1000 1.6%
Total 312
17.Are you currently employed?
Response
No,unemployed 92.0%
107
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Yes,part time 6.1%
Yes,full time 1.9%
Total 314
17a.What is keeping you from getting employment?
Response
Need education 21.1%
Need training 26.0%
Need clothing 27.0%
No shower facilities 17.3%
No phone 31.8%
Health problems 14.9%
Disabled 12.8%
Criminal record 24.2%
No permanent address 36.0%
No transportation 35.3%
No tools for trade 9.7%
No work permit(No S.S.#) 1.4%
Don't want to work 9.3%
No jobs 12.8%
No child care 1.0%
Retired 1.7%
Other 15.9%
Alcohol/drug issue 41.9%
No photo identification 17.0%
Spouse/partner doesn't want me to work 2.4%
Total Cases 289
Total Responses 1,039
18.What are your other sources of income?
Response
Family/friends 28.1%
Pension 1.4%
Child support .3%
Recycling 49.5%
Selling other found items 19.3%
Selling blood/plasma 10.5%
Sex work 9.8%
Other 31.5%
108
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Gambling 5.8%
Panhandling 41.4%
Total Cases 295
Total Responses 583
19.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all non-Government sources?
Response
Zero 26.5%
$1 _$100 20.0%
$101 -$200 14.5%
$201 -$300 11.6%
$301 -$400 10.0%
$401 -$500 5.5%
$501 -$600 4.8%
$601 -$700 1.9%
$701 -$800 0.6%
$801 -$900 0.3%
$901 _$1000 1.0%
Over$1000 3.2%
Total 310
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing?
Response
Yes 8.9%
No 91.1%
Total 314
20a.How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list?(Total in months)
Response
1 month 40.7%
2-12 months 14.8%
13-24 months 11.1%
25-36 months 18.5%
37-48 months 7.4%
49 months or more 7.4%
Total 27
21. Do you have any children,living with you or not?
109
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Response
Yes 18.6%
No 81.4%
Total 307
21 a. Do you have any children who are?
Response
18 or over living with you? 25.9%
In foster care? 46.3%
0-5 years living with you? 25.9%
6-12 years living with you? 14.8%
13-17 years living with you? 9.3%
Total Cases 54
Total Responses 66
21a-1.How many children do you have 18 years old or over living with you?
Response Percent
One child 38.5%
Two children 23.1%
Three children 15.4%
Four children 15.4%
Six or more children 7.7%
Total 13
21a-2. How many children do you have in foster care?
Response
One child 28.6%
Two children 28.6%
Three children 19.0%
Four children 9.5%
Five children 9.5%
Six or more children 4.8%
Total 21
21a-3.How many children do you have 0—5 years old living with you?
Response
One child 69.2%
Two children 23.1%
110
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Three children 0.0%
Five children 7.7%
Six or more children 0.0%
Total 13
21a-4. How many children do you have 6—12 years old living with you?
Response
One child 62.5%
Two children 25.0%
Three children 12.5%
Four children 0.0%
Six or more children 0.0%
Total 8
21a-5. How many children do you have 13—17 years old living with you?
Response
One child 100.0%
Two children 0.0%
Three children 0.0%
Total 5
Are your children, ages 6 to 17 and living with you, in school?
Response
Yes 66.7%
No 33.3%
Total 9
22.Since you became homeless this last time, have you needed medical care and been unable
to receive it?
Response
Yes 36.8%
No 63.2%
Total 310
23.Where do you usually get medical care?
Response
Hospital emergency room 47.2%
Urgent care clinic 3.9%
111
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Public health clinic 5.8%
Veterans Affairs Clinic 6.5%
Free clinic/community clinic 8.7%
Private doctor 2.3%
Friends/family 1.9%
Don't ever go 18.8%
Other 4.9%
Total 309
23a. How many times in the last 12 months have you used the emergency room for any
treatment?
Response
Never 44.7%
1 time 16.4%
2 times 14.5%
3 times 10.5%
4 times 6.6%
5 times 2.0%
More than 5 times 5.3%
Total 304
24. How many nights,if any,have you spent in jail or prison during the last 12 months?
Response
0 nights 49.8%
1 -5 nights 15.3%
6-10 nights 5.6%
11 -20 nights 3.7%
21 -50 nights 7.3%
More than 50 nights 18.3%
Total 301
25. Are you currently on probation or parole?
Response
Yes 35.7%
No 59.3%
Declined to state 4.9%
Total 305
25a. Were you on probation or parole at the time you most recently became homeless?
sponse Percent
112
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
Yes 29.7%
No 62.7%
Declined to state 7.6%
Total 303
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following:
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 95 201 7
31.4% 66.3% 2.3%
26b.Mental illness 103 186 14
34.0% 61.4% 4.6%
26c.Depression 165 138 5
53.6% 44.8% 1.6%
26d.Alcohol abuse 228 74 2
75.0% 24.3% 0.7%
26e.Drug abuse 233 73 1
75.9% 23.8% 0.3%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 40 252 7
13.4% 84.3% 2.3%
26g.Chronic health problems 68 231 5
22.4% 76.0% 1.6%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 14 271 16
4.7% 90.0% 5.3%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 42 255 7
13.8% 83.9% 2.3%
26j. Developmental disability 41 256 10
13.4% 83.4% 3.3%
27.Were you ever in foster care?
Response Percent
Yes 12.6%
No 87.4%
Total 309
28.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Response
Less than 6th Grade 6.5%
Less than high school diploma 32.4%
113
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix V: Substance Abuse Results
High school diploma/GED 39.8%
Some college,no degree 13.6%
AA degree/technical certificate 5.2%
BA degree or above 1.6%
Graduate or professional degree 1.0%
Total 309
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free Telephone Help Line?
Response
Yes 12.7%
No 87.3%
Total 314
29a. Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211 Help Line?
Response
Yes 33.3%
No 66.7%
Total 39
114
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
Appendix VI:
Survey Profile Results by Youth Age 13 - 21
1.Age
Response
13-17 years 5 16.7%
18-21 years 25 83.3%
Total 30 100.0%
2.Which racial 1 ethnic group do you identify with the most?
Response
White/Caucasian 11 37.9%
Black/African American 7 24.1%
Hispanic/Latino 7 24.1%
Asian 1 3.4%
Pacific Islander 1 3.4%
Other/Multi-ethnic 2 6.9%
Total 29 100.0%
3. How do you identify yourself?
Response
Male 16 53.3%
Female 13 43.3%
Transgender 1 3.3%
Total 1 30 1 100.0%
4.Have you ever served in the United States Armed Forces?
Response
No 29 100.0%
Total 29 100.0%
6.Do you live alone without family, partner,or friends?
Response
Yes 9 30.0%
No 21 70.0%
Total 30 100.0%
6. Do you live with:
115
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
Response
Spouse or partner 2 9.5%
Child/children 3 14.3%
Parent or legal guardian 2 9.5%
Other family member(s) 2 9.5%
Friend(s) 8 38.1%
Other 7 33.3%
Multiple response question with 21 respondents offering 24 responses.
7.Where do you usually stay at night?
Response
Outdoors/streets/parks 6 20.0%
Unconverted Garage/attic/basement 2 6.7%
Backyard or storage structure 1 3.3%
Abandoned building 3 10.0%
Motel/hotel 2 6.7%
A place in a house not normally used for sleeping 3 10.0%
Emergency shelter 3 10.0%
Transitional housing 4 13.3%
Other shelter 3 10.0%
Public facilities 1 3.3%
Encampment 1 3.3%
Other 1 3.3%
Total 30 100.0%
8. Is this the first time you have been homeless?
Response
Yes 13 44.8%
No 16 55.2%
Total 29 100.0%
8a.In the last 12 months how many times have you been homeless, including this present
time?
Response
One time 18 62.1%
2 times 1 3.4%
3 times 3 10.3%
4 times 2 6.9%
5 times 2 6.9%
6 times 1 3.4%
116
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
More than 6 times 2 6.9%
Total 29 100.0%
8b. In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
One time 14 46.7%
2 times 4 13.3%
3 times 1 3.3%
4 times 2 6.7%
5 times 2 6.7%
More than 6 times 7 23.3%
Total 30 100.0%
9. How long have you been homeless since you last lived in a permanent housing situation?
Response
7 days or less 2 7.1%
8-30 days 3 10.7%
2 months 7 25.0%
3 months 2 7.1%
6 months 1 3.6%
7 months 1 3.6%
9 months 2 7.1%
10 months 1 3.6%
12 months 1 3.6%
1-2 years 2 7.1%
2-3 years 2 7.1%
More than 3 years 4 14.3%
Total 28 100.0%
10.Where were you living at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
San Bernardino County 23 76.7%
Los Angeles County 3 10.0%
Riverside County 2 6.7%
Other county in California 1 3.3%
Out of State 1 3.3%
Total 30 100.0%
10a. How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before becoming homeless?
117
:i
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
Response
8-30 days 2 8.7%
1 -3 months 1 4.3%
7-11 months 2 8.7%
1 -2 years 2 8.7%
3-5 years 6 26.1%
More than 10 years 10 43.5%
Total 23 100.0%
10b.What was the primary reason you came to San Bernardino County?
Response
For a job/seeking work 1 16.7%
1 was born or grew up here 1 16.7%
1 was traveling and got stranded 1 16.7%
Other 3 50.0%
Total 6 100.0%
11.Immediately before you became homeless this last time,were you:
Response
Living in a home owned by 2 6.9%
Renting a home or apartment 4 13.8%
Staying with friends 4 13.8%
Living with relatives 11 37.9%
In jail or prison 1 3.4%
In a hospital 1 3.4%
In a substance abuse 1 3.4%
In foster care 1 3.4%
Other 4 13.8%
Total 29 100.0%
12.What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?
Response Percent
Lost job 9 31.0%
Landlord raised rent 2 6.9%
Alcohol or drug use 4 13.8%
Family/domestic violence 2 6.9%
Got too old for foster care 2 6.9%
Don't Know/decline to state 1 3.4%
Other 3 10.3%
118
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave 4 13.8%
Gambling problem 1 3.4%
Foreclosure on home due to 1 3.4%
Total 29 100.0%
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
Response
Can't afford rent 11 36.7%
No job/no income 23 76.7%
No money for moving costs 9 30.0%
No housing available 2 6.7%
No transportation 7 23.3%
Bad credit 1 3.3%
Eviction record 2 6.7%
Criminal record 2 6.7%
Don't want to 1 3.3%
Other 2 6.7%
Multiple response question with 30 respondents offering 60 responses.
14.Are you currently using any of the following services/assistance?
Response Percent
Emergency shelter 7 23.3%
Transitional housing 3 10.0%
Free meals 5 16.7%
Food pantry 4 133%
Bus passes 7 23.3%
Job training 2 6.7%
Alcohol/Drug counseling 3 10.0%
Shelter day services 7 23.3%
Legal assistance 3 10.0%
Health services 0 0.0%
Mental health services 2 6.7%
Other 5 16.7%
Not using any services 9 30.0%
Multiple response question with 30 respondents offering 57 responses.
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms of government assistance?
Response Percent
119
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
General Relief 3 10.3%
Food Stamps 7 24.1%
Medi-Cal/Medi-Care 3 10.3%
SSI(Supplemental Security Income)/SSDI 1 3.4%
Cash Aid/CalWORKS 1 3.4%
Veteran's Benefits 0 0.0%
I am not currently receiving any of these 18 62.1%
WIC 3 10.3%
VA Disability Compensation 0 0.0%
Social Security 1 3.4%
Other governmental assistance 0 0.0%
Multiple response question with 29 respondents offering 37 responses.
15a. If you are not receiving any government assistance,why not?
Response
Don't think I'm eligible 4 23.5%
Have no ID 6 35.3%
No permanent address 5 29.4%
No transportation 5 29.4%
Never applied 3 17.6%
Benefits were cut off 1 5.9%
1 have applied and I am currently waiting for approval 0 0.0%
Don't know where to go 2 11.8%
Turned down 1 5.9%
Will apply soon 2 11.8%
Don't need government assistance 2 11.8%
Paper work too difficult 2 11.8%
Immigration issues 1 5.9%
1 am afraid my children will be taken away from me 1 0 0.0%
Other 5 29.4%
Multiple response question with 17 respondents offering 39 responses.
16.What is your total (gross)monthly income from all Government benefits?
Response
Zero 15 51.7%
$1 -$100 4 13.8%
$101 -$200 3 10.3%
120
'�PlIIlN N NAMMNNMNwrNMM N Ilr. I �Iq
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
$201 -$300 3 10.3%
$501 -$600 1 3.4%
$601 -$700 2 6.9%
$801 -$900 1 3.4%
Total 29 100.0%
17.Are you currently employed?
Response
No,unemployed 28 96.6%
Yes,part time 1 3.4%
Total 29 100.0%
17a.What is keeping you from getting employment?
Response Percent
Need education 9 33.3%
Need training 6 22.2%
Need clothing 3 11.1%
No shower facilities 2 7.4%
No phone 10 37.0%
Health problems 1 3.7%
Disabled 3 11.1%
Criminal record 3 11.1%
No permanent address 11 40.7%
No transportation 8 29.6%
No tools for trade 3 11.1%
No work permit(No S.S.#) 1 3.7%
Don't want to work 1 3.7%
No jobs 3 11.1%
No child care 2 7.4%
Retired 0 0.0%
Other 4 14.8%
Alcohol/drug issue 5 18.5%
No photo identification 5 18.5%
Spouse/partner doesn't want me to work 1 3.7%
Multiple response question with 27 respondents offering 81 responses.
18.What are your other sources of income?
Response
Family/friends 13 50.0%
121
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
Pension 0 0.0%
Child support 0 0.0%
Recycling 8 30.8%
Selling other found items 2 7.7%
Selling blood/plasma 2 7.7%
Sex work 1 3.8%
Other 8 30.8%
Gambling 0 0.0%
Panhandling 1 6 23.1%
Multiple response question with 26 respondents offering 40 responses.
19.What is your total (gross)monthly income from all non-Government sources?
Response Percent
Zero 11 37.9%
$1 _$100 8 27.6%
$101 -$200 3 10.3%
$201 -$300 4 13.8%
$501 -$600 1 3.4%
$601 -$700 1 3.4%
$901 _$1000 1 3.4%
Total 29 100.0%
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing?
Response
Yes 5 16.7%
No 25 83.3%
Total 30 100.0%
20a. How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list?(Total in months)
Response
1 month 1 33.3%
2-12 months 1 33.3%
13-24 months 1 33.3%
Total 3 100.0%
21.Do you have any children, living with you or not?
Response Percent
Yes 5 17.2%
No 24 82.8%
122
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
Total 29 100.0%
21a. Do you have any children who are?
Response Percent
18 or over living with you? 2 50.0%
In foster care? 0 0.0%
0-5 years living with you? 2 50.0%
6-12 years living with you? 0 0.0%
13-17 years living with you? 0 0.0%
Multiple response question with 4-4-responses.
Q21A_1
Four children 1 100.0%
Total 1 100.0%
Q21A_2
0 .0%
Total 0 .0%
Q21A_3
One child 2 66.7%
Two children 1 33.3%
Total 3 100.0%
Q21A_4
0 .0%
Total 0 .0%
Q21 A_5
0 .0%
Total 0 .0%
Are your children, ages 6 to 17 and living with you, in school?
123
now
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
0 .0%
Total 0 .0%
22.Since you became homeless this last time, have you needed medical care and been unable
to receive it?
Response Percent
Yes 10 37.0%
No 17 63.0%
Total 27 100.0%
23.Where do you usually get medical care?
Response
Hospital emergency room 12 40.0%
Veterans Affairs Clinic 1 3.3%
Free clinic/community clinic 2 6.7%
Private doctor 3 10.0%
Friends/family 1 3.3%
Don't ever go 8 26.7%
Other 3 10.0%
Total 30 100.0%
23a. How many times in the last 12 months have you used the emergency room for any
treatment?
Response
Never 16 57.1%
1 time 2 7.1%
2 times 6 21.4%
3 times 2 7.1%
4 times 1 3.6%
More than 5 times 1 3.6%
Total 28 100.0%
24. How many nights,if any,have you spent in jail or prison during the last 12 months?
Response
0 nights 17 63.0%
1 -5 nights 3 11.1%
6-10 nights 4 14.8%
11 -20 nights 1 3.7%
More than 50 nights 2 7.4%
Total 27 100.0%
124
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
25. Are you currently on probation or parole?
Response
Yes 7 25.9%
No 20 74.1%
Total 27 100.0%
25a.Were you on probation or parole at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
Yes 5 17.9%
No 23 82.1%
Total 28 100.0%
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following:
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 2 25 2
6.9% 86.2% 6.9%
26b.Mental illness 4 24 1
13.8% 82.8% 3.4%
26c. Depression 8 21 0
27.6% 72.4% 0.0%
26d.Alcohol abuse 6 22 1
20.7% 75.9% 1 3.4%
26e.Drug abuse 4 24 0
14.3% 85.7% 0.0%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 3 26 0
10.3% 89.7% 0.0%
26g.Chronic health problems 3 26 0
10.3% 89.7% 0.0%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 1 28 0
3.4% 96.6% 0.0%
26i. Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 2 26 1
6.9% 89.7% 3.4%
26j.Developmental disability 1 26 1
3.6% 92.9% 3.6%
27.Were you ever in foster care?
Response
Yes 6 20.0.
125
s
f
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VI: Youth Survey Results
i
No 24 80.0%
Total 30 100.0%
28.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Response
Less than high school diploma 19 63.3%
High school diploma/GED 7 23.3%
Some college,no degree 3 10.0%
AA degree/technical certificate 1 3.3%
Total 30 1 100.0%
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free Telephone Help Line?
Response
Yes 6 20.7%
No 23 79.3%
Total 29 100.0%
29a. Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211 Help Line?
Response
No 6 100.0%
Total 6 100.0%
126
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
Appendix VII:
Survey Profile Results by Those with Mental Illness
1.Age
Response
13-17 years 0.6%
18-21 years 1.8%
22-30 years 19.6%
31-40 years 26.8%
41-50 years 29.8%
51-60 years 16.3%
More than 60 years 5.1%
Total 332
2.Which racial 1 ethnic group do you identify with the most?
Response
White/Caucasian 43.3%
Black/African American 24.5%
Hispanic/Latino 22.7%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 1.5%
Asian 0.9%
Pacific Islander 1.2%
Other/Multi-ethnic 6.0%
Total 335
3. How do you identify yourself?
Response
Male 60.0%
Female 38.2%
Transgender 1.8%
Total 335
4. Have you ever served in the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 21.7%
No 78.3%
Total 332
127
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
4a.Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?(%
totals out of all respondents)
Response
Regular Military 18.1%
National Guard 2.1%
Reserve 1.2%
Total Cases 337
Total Responses 409
4a. Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?(%
total of veterans only)
Response
Regular Military 85.9%
National Guard 9.9%
Reserve 5.6%
Total Cases 71
Total Responses 72
4b.What is your discharge status?
Response
Honorable 60.6%
General 14.1%
Other than Honorable 9.9%
Dishonorable 8.5%
Other 4.2%
Don't know 2.8%
Total 71
5.Are you widow or widower of a veteran of the United States Armed Forces?
Response
Yes 4.2%
No 95.8%
Total 331
6.Do you live alone without family,partner,or friends?
Response
Yes 41.4%
No 58.6%
Total 336
128
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
i
6. Do you live with:
Response
Spouse or partner 20.1%
Child/children 10.8%
Parent or legal guardian 1.5%
Other family member(s) 9.8%
Friend(s) 35.1%
Other 37.1%
Total Cases 194
Total Responses 222
7.Where do you usually stay at night?
Response
Outdoors/streets/parks 25.2%
Automobile 5.1%
Unconverted Garage/attic/basement 3.6%
Backyard or storage structure 3.6%
Abandoned building 7.8%
Motel/hotel 6.6%
A place in a house not normally used for sleeping 7.8%
Emergency shelter 8.4%
Transitional housing 9.0%
Other shelter 7.8%
Public facilities 1.8%
Encampment 3.6%
Other 5.1%
Van 1.5%
Camper 3.0%
Total 333
8. Is this the first time you have been homeless?
Response
Yes 46.1%
No 53.9%
Total 336
8a. In the last 12 months how many times have you been homeless, including this present
time?
Response
129
P
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
One time 57.9%
2 times 11.3%
3 times 8.3%
4 times 4.2%
5 times 2.7%
6 times 2.4%
More than 6 times 13.4%
Total 337
8b. In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
One time 46.3%
2 times 11.9%
3 times 9.2%
4 times 6.5%
5 times 4.5%
6 times 3.3%
More than 6 times 18.4%
Total 337
9.How long have you been homeless since you last lived in a permanent housing situation?
Response
7 days or less 4.2%
8-30 days 6.8%
2 months 8.3%
3 months 4.5%
4 months 5.7%
5 months 4.5%
6 months 6.3%
7 months 2.4%
8 months 3.3%
9 months 3.3%
10 months 3.0%
11 months 1.2%
12 months 6.0%
1-2 years 12.5%
2-3 years 10.1%
More than 3 years 18.2%
Total 336
130
i
i
i
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
10.Where were you living at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
San Bernardino County 71.8%
Los Angeles County 11.6%
Riverside County 5.6%
Other county in California 3.9%
Out of State 7.1%
Total 337
10a.How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before becoming homeless?
Response
7 days or less 2.1%
8-30 days 2.5%
1 -3 months 1.7%
4-6 months 4.1%
7-11 months 2.5%
1 -2 years 10.7%
3-5 years 16.9%
6-10 years 10.3%
More than 10 years 49.2%
Total 242
10b. What was the primary reason you came to San Bernardino County?
Response
For a job/seeking work 12.2%
1 was born or grew up here 8.9%
My family and/or friends are here 18.9%
1 was traveling and got stranded 13.3%
1 visited and decided to stay 8.9%
To access homeless services 5.6%
1 was forced out of my 4.4%
1 am just passing through 5.6%
Weather/climate 1.1%
Other 16.7%
To access VA services 4.4%
Total 90
11.Immediately before you became homeless this last time,were you:
L-Response
131
i
I
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
II
Living in a home owned by 9.5%
Renting a home or apartment 29.8%
Staying with friends 15.5%
Living with relatives 19.9%
Living in subsidized housing 3.0%
In jail or prison 10.4%
In a hospital 0.9%
In a substance abuse 3.0%
In foster care 0.0%
Other 5.7%
In a mental health facility 2.4%
Total 336
12.What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?
Response
Lost job 19.7%
Landlord raised rent 3.3%
Alcohol or drug use 21.5%
Illness or medical problem 2.4%
Mental health issues 7.5%
Family/domestic violence 4.2%
Incarceration 6.6%
Got too old for foster care 0.3%
Divorced or separated 2.1%
Don't Know/decline to state 3.3%
Other 7.8%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or re-used property 5.4%
Hospitalization/treatment program 0.0%
Argument/family or friend asked you to leave 10.1%
Hurricane Katrina 0.9%
Other natural disaster/fire/flood 0.6%
For being Lesbian,Gay,Bisexual,or Transgender 0.6%
Gambling problem 1.8%
Foreclosure on home due to 2.1%
Total 335
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
Response
Can't afford rent 50.7%
132
t
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
No job/no income 51.3%
No money for moving costs 32.9%
No housing available 6.8%
No transportation 26.7%
Bad credit 21.7%
Eviction record 11.6%
Criminal record 16.3%
Don't want to 5.9%
Other 13.9%
Total Cases 337
Total Responses 802
14.Are you currently using any of the following services/assistance?
Response Percent
Emergency shelter 21.2%
Transitional housing 14.3%
Free meals 44.5%
Food pantry 26.3%
Bus passes 14.3%
Job training 6.0%
Alcohol/Drug counseling 17.0%
Shelter day services 18.5%
Legal assistance 6.3%
Health services 11.9%
Mental health services 19.4%
Other 11.6%
Not using any services 22.4%
Total Cases 335
Total Responses 783
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms of government assistance?
Response
General Relief 6.5%
Food Stamps 28.5%
Medi-Cal/Medi-Care 10.1%
SSI(Supplemental Security Income)/SSDI 13.1%
Cash Aid/CalWORKS 4.7%
Veteran's Benefits 3.3%
133
II
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
I am not currently receiving any of these 45.7%
WIC 3.9%
VA Disability Compensation 3.9%
Social Security 3.9%
Other governmental assistance 2.7%
Total Cases 337
Total Responses 425
15a. If you are not receiving any government assistance,why not?
Response
Don't think I'm eligible 19.1%
Have no ID 20.4%
No permanent address 26.3%
No transportation 12.5%
Never applied 15.1%
Benefits were cut off 5.9%
1 have applied and I am currently waiting for approval 14.5%
Don't know where to go 7.2%
Turned down 11.2%
Will apply soon 12.5%
Don't need government assistance 5.9%
Paper work too difficult 11.8%
Immigration issues 2.0%
1 am afraid my children will be taken away from me 3.3%
Other 15.8%
Total Cases 152
Total Responses 279
16.What is your total (gross)monthly income from all Government benefits?
Response
Zero 50.0%
$1 -$100 2.4%
$101 -$200 12.3%
$201 -$300 3.3%
$301 -$400 4.2%
$401 -$500 2.1%
$501 -$600 5.4%
$601 -$700 2.1%
$701 -$800 5.4%
134
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
$801 -$900 4.8%
$901 -$1000 5.1%
Over$1000 2.7%
Total 332
17.Are you currently employed?
Response Percent
No,unemployed 90.2%
Yes,part time 5.9%
Yes,full time 3.9%
Total 337
17a.What is keeping you from getting employment?
Response
Need education 20.7%
Need training 25.3%
Need clothing 25.3%
No shower facilities 13.5%
No phone 31.6%
Health problems 18.4%
Disabled 16.8%
Criminal record 19.4%
No permanent address 36.5%
No transportation 35.5%
No tools for trade 10.5%
No work permit(No S.S.#) 2.0%
Don't want to work 5.9%
No jobs 12.5%
No child care 4.3%
Retired 2.0%
Other 17.8%
Alcohol/drug issue 26.3%
No photo identification 14.1%
Spouse/partner doesn't want me to work 2.0%
Total Cases 304
Total Responses 1,035
18.What are your other sources of income?
Response Percent
135
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
Family/friends 26.2%
Pension 1.0%
Child support 0.0%
Recycling 45.7%
Selling other found items 15.2%
Selling blood/plasma 9.6%
Sex work 7.6%
Other 34.8%
Gambling 4.3%
Panhandling 32.1%
Total Cases 302
Total Responses 533
19.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all non-Government sources?
Response Percent
Zero 29.5%
$1 _$100 18.7%
$101 -$200 14.5%
$201 -$300 10.5%
$301 -$400 8.1%
$401 -$500 4.2%
$501 -$600 4.5%
$601 -$700 1.8%
$701 -$800 2.4%
$801 _$900 1.8%
$901 _$1000 1.5%
Over$1000 2.4%
Total 332
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing?
Response
Yes 14.5%
No 85.5%
Total 337
20a. How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list?(Total in months)
Response
1 month 41.5%
2-12 months 17.1%
136
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
13-24 months 9.8%
25-36 months 12.2%
37-48 months 7.3%
49 months or more 12.2%
Total 41
21.Do you have any children, living with you or not?
Response
Yes 22.8%
No 77.2%
Total 329
21 a. Do you have any children who are?
Response
18 or over living with you? 20.6%
In foster care? 35.3%
0-5 years living with you? 29.4%
6-12 years living with you? 33.8%
13-17 years living with you? 17.6%
Total Cases 68
Total Responses 93
21a-1. How many children do you have 18 years old or over living with you?
Response
One child 16.7%
Two children 33.3%
Three children 0.0%
Four children 33.3%
Six or more children 16.7%
Total 12
21 a-2. How many children do you have in foster care?
Response
One child 40.0%
Two children 35.0%
Three children 15.0%
Four children 5.0%
Five children 5.0%
Six or more children 0.0%
137
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
Total 20
21 a-3. How many children do you have 0—5 years old living with you?
Response
One child 65.2%
Two children 26.1%
Three children 0.0%
Five children 4.3%
Six or more children 4.3%
Total 23
21a-4. How many children do you have 6—12 years old living with you?
Response
One child 56.5%
Two children 26.1%
Three children 13.0%
Four children 4.3%
Six or more children 0.0%
Total 23
21a-5. How many children do you have 13—17 years old living with you?
Response
One child 72.7%
Two children 9.1%
Three children 18.2%
Total 11
Are your children,ages 6 to 17 and living with you, in school?
Response
Yes 70.8%
No 29.2%
Total 24
22.Since you became homeless this last time,have you needed medical care and been unable
to receive it?
Response
Yes 42.3%
No 57.7%
Total 333
138
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
23.Where do you usually get medical care?
Response
Hospital emergency room 51.6%
Urgent care clinic 4.2%
Public health clinic 5.7%
Veterans Affairs Clinic 8.4%
Free clinic/community clinic 8.4%
Private doctor 5.1%
Friends/family 0.9%
Don't ever go 12.5%
Other 3.3%
Total 335
23a. How many times in the last 12 months have you used the emergency room for any
treatment?
Response
Never 39.1%
1 time 17.1%
2 times 15.6%
3 times 11.9%
4 times 7.0%
5 times 1.8%
More than 5 times 7.3%
Total 327
24. How many nights, if any, have you spent in jail or prison during the last 12 months?
Response
0 nights 58.0%
1 -5 nights 13.6%
6-10 nights 4.6%
11 -20 nights 1.9%
21 -50 nights 5.6%
More than 50 nights 16.4%
Total 324
25. Are you currently on probation or parole?
Response
Yes 32.8%
No 63.2%
139
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
Declined to state 4.0%
Total 329
25a. Were you on probation or parole at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
Yes 26.1%
No 67.2%
Declined to state 6.7%
Total 329
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following:
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 120 198 7
36.9% 60.9% 2.2%
26b.Mental illness 172 134 19
52.9% 41.2% 5.8%
26c.Depression 285 50 1
84.8% 14.9% 0.3%
26d.Alcohol abuse 140 172 11
43.3% 53.3% 3.4%
26e.Drug abuse 142 170 9
44.2% 53.0% 2.8%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 46 262 11
14.4% 82.1% 3.4%
26g.Chronic health problems 95 224 7
29.1% 68.7% 2.1%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 16 289 16
5.0% 90.0% 5.0%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 83 231 10
25.6% 71.3% 3.1%
26j.Developmental disability 58 258 11
17.7% 78.9% 3.4%
27.Were you ever in foster care?
Response
Yes 14.6%
No 85.4%
Total 329
140
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VII: Mental Illness Results
28.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Response
Less than 6th Grade 6.3%
Less than high school diploma 30.5%
High school diploma/GED 35.6%
Some college,no degree 16.9%
AA degree/technical certificate 5.4%
BA degree or above 2.7%
Graduate or professional degree 2.4%
Total 331
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free Telephone Help Line?
Response
Yes 19.4%
No 80.6%
Total 335
29a. Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211 Help Line?
Response Percent
Yes 42.9%
No 57.1%
Total 63
141
t
I
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
1
i
E
t
Appendix VIII:
Survey Profile Results by Length of Homelessness
1.Age
Response
less 13 17 years 1 2% 0.8% months 1.3% 720.2%.0% 0.0%
18-21 years 7.1% 0.8% 2.6% .4% 3.5%
22-30 years 25.0% 27.8% 20.5% 7.0%31-40 years 27.4% 27.0% 23.1% .2% 35.1%
41-50 years 25.6% 34.9% 33.3% 32.3% 29.8%
51-60 years 11.9% 6.3% 11.5% 16.1% 22.8%
More than 60 years 1.8% 2.4% 7.7% 4.8% 1.8%
Total 168 126 78 124 57
2.Which racial/ethnic group do you identify with the most?
Response
less months
White/Caucasian 45.9% 37.3% 44.4% 50.9%
Black/African American 18.8% 34.1% 26.6% 21.1%
Hispanic/Latino 22.9% 19.0% 226.6% 15.8%
American Indian/Alaskan Native 1.8% 4.8% . 0.8% 0.0%
Asian 0.0% .8% 2.6% 0.0% 1.8%
Pacific Islander 1.2% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other/Multi-ethnic 9.4% 2.4% 5.1% 1.6% 10.5%
Total 170 126 78 124 57
3. How do you identify yourself?
Response
less months
Male 62.0% 65.1% 66.2% 61.0% 57.9%
Female 37.4% 34.1% 29.9% 38.2% 42.1%
Transgender 0.6% 0.8% 3.9% 0.8% 0.0%
Total 171 126 77 123 57
4. Have you ever served in the United States Armed Forces?
Response
less months
Yes 1 10.1% 13.6% 1 20.8% 1 20.5% 20.0%
142
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
No 89.9% 86.4% 79.2% 79.5% 80.0%
Total 168 125 77 122 55
4a. Did you serve in the regular military or in a National Guard or military reserve unit?
..
less months
Regular Military 7.6% 8.7% 16.7% 17.6% 15.8%
National Guard 1.8% 3.9% 1.3% 1.6% 1.8%
Reserve .6% .8% 2.6% .8% .0%
Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Total Cases 171 127 78 125 57
Total Responses 188 144 94 150 67
4b.What is your discharge status?
Response
less months
Honorable 58.8% 64.7% 56.3% 70.8% 54.5%
General 17.6% 11.8% 25.0% 25.0% 18.2%
Other than Honorable 11.8% 5.9% 6.3% 4.2% 9.1%
Dishonorable 0.0% 17.6% 0.0% 0.0% 9.1%
Other 11.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 9.1%
Don't know 0.0% 0.0% 12.5% .0% 0.0%
Total 17 17 16 24 11
5.Are you widow or widower of a veteran of the United States Armed Forces?
Response
months less
Yes 2.4% 0.0% 1.3% 2.5% 1.8%
No 97.6% 100.0% 98.7% 97.5% 98.2%
Total 165 126 76 121 57
6.Do you live alone without family,partner,or friends?
Response
less months
Yes 40.8% 51.2% 47.4% 41.1% 38.6%
No 59.2% 48.8% 52.6% 58.9% 61.4%
Total 169 127 78 124 57
6. Do you live with:
Response
less months
143
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
Spouse or partner 21.4% 26.7% 30.0% 18.1% 14.3%
Child/children 19.4% 11.7% 7.5% 15.3% 8.6%
Parent or legal guardian 3.1% 3.3% 2.5% 2.8% 0.0%
Other family member(s) 10.2% 10.0% 15.0% 16.7% 2.9%
Friend(s) 21.4% 38.3% 37.5% 34.7% 25.7%
Other 37.8% 25.0% 25.0% 40.3% 57.1%
Total Cases 98 60 40 72 35
Total Responses 111 69 47 92 38
7.Where do you usually stay at night?
Response
less months
Outdoors/streets/parks 18.0% 27.8% 28.2% 25.0% 24.6%
Automobile 7.2% 8.7% 6.4% 1.6% 1.8%
Unconverted Garage/attic/basement 4.2% 4.0% 2.6% 4.8% 1.8%
Backyard or storage structure 3.0% 1.6% 2.6% 3.2% 3.5%
Abandoned building 5.4% 6.3% 6.4% 4.8% 10.5%
Motel/hotel 6.6% 11.1% 7.7% 10.5% 5.3%
A place in a house not normally used for 7.2% 5.6% 15.4% 10.5% 7.0%
sleeping
Emergency shelter 11.4% 7.1% 3.8% 5.6% 14.0%
Transitional housing 12.0% 7.1% 7.7% 9.7% 3.5%
Other shelter 7.8% 4.8% 2.6% 10.5% 5.3%
Public facilities 1.8% 2.4% .0% .0% 1.8%
Encampment 1.8% .8% 6.4% 1.6% 1.8%
Other 7.8% 5.6% 3.8% 8.9% 12.3%
Van 3.0% 2.4% 5.1% .8% .0%
Camper 3.0% 4.8% 1 1.3% 1 2.4% 1 7.0%
Total 167 126 78 124 57
B. Is this the first time you have been homeless?
Response
less months
Yes 55.6% 56.7% 57.7% 46.8% 38.6%
No 44.4% 43.3% 42.3% 53.2% 61.4%
Total 171 127 78 124 57
8a. In the last 12 months how many times have you been homeless, including this present
time?
Response
144
i
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
less months
One time 68.6% 68.5% 64.1% 65.3% 54.4%
2 times 12.4% 15.0% 14.1% 11.3% 10.5%
3 times 11.8% 4.7% 3.8% 9.7% 5.3%
4 times 3.6% 3.9% 2.6% 2.4% 5.3%
5 times .6% 3.1% 6.4% 12% 7.0%
6 times .6% 1.6% .0% .8% 5.3%
More than 6 times 2.4% 3.1% 9.0% 7.3% 12.3%
Total 169 127 78 124 57
8b. In the last 3 years how many times have you been homeless, including this present time?
Response
less months
One time 55.6% 56.7% 72.766300% 47.2% 38.6%
2 times 16.4% 16.5% 12.8% 12.3%
3 times 12.3% 8.7% 13.6% 10.5%
4 times 5.3% 3.9% 10.4% 7.0%
5 times 4.1% 7.1% 6.4% 3.2% 3.5%
6 times 0.0% 1.6% 5.1% .8% 1.8%
More than 6 times 6.4% 5.5% 12.8% 12.0% 26.3%
Total 171 127 78 125 57
9. How long have you been homeless since you last lived in a permanent housing situation?
Response
months less
7 days or less 17.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
8-30 days 24.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
2 months 32.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
3 months 25.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
4 months 0.0% 27.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
5 months 0.0% 24.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
6 months 0.0% 29.9% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
7 months 0.0% 18.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
8 months 0.0% 0.0% 32.1% 0.0% 0.0%
9 months 0.0% 0.0% 25.6% 0.0% 0.0%
10 months 0.0% 0.0% 21.8% 0.0% 0.0%
11 months 0.0% 0.0% 20.5% 0.0% 0.0%
12 months 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 32.0% 0.0%
1-2 years 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 68.0% 0.0%
2-3 years 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%
145
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
Total 171 127 78 125 57
10.Where were you living at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
less months
San Bernardino County 69.0% 85.0% 73.1% 75.2% 73.7%
Los Angeles County 8.8% 6.3% 14.1% 8.8% 7.0%
Riverside County 10.5% 1.6% 6.4% 6.4% 5.3%
Other county in California 4.7% .8% 6.4% 1.6% 7.0%
Out of State 7.0% 6.3% .0% 8.0% 7.0%
Total 171 127 78 125 57
10a. How long had you lived in San Bernardino County before becoming homeless?
Response
months less
7 days or less 2.5% 2.8% 1.8% 11% 0.0%
8-30 days 3.4% 3.7% 3.5% 1.1% 2.4%
1 -3 months 3.4% 2.8% 3.5% 2.1% 2.4%
4-6 months 3.4% 8.3% 1.8% 2.1% 0.0%
7-11 months 5.9% 3.7% 3.5% 5.3% 0.0%
1 -2 years 13.6% 12.0% 14.0% 12.8% 9.5%
3-5 years 15.3% 14.8% 15.80% 11.7% 19.0%
6-10 years 5.1% 11.1% 14.0% 10.6% 9.5%
More than 10 years 47.5% 40.7% 42.1% 53.2% 57.1%
Total 118 108 57 94 42
10b.What was the primary reason you came to San Bernardino County?
Response
less months
For a job/seeking work 24.5% 21.1% 10.0% 13.8% 13.3%
1 was born or grew up here 11.3% 5.3% 10.0% 10.3% 0.0%
My family and/or friends are here 15.1% 21.1% 10.0% 24.1% 33.3%
1 was traveling and got stranded 9.4% 21.1% 5.0% 10.3% 0.0%
I visited and decided to stay 7.5% 5.3% 10.0% 3.4% 20.0%
To access homeless services 5.7% 0.0% 10.0% 6.9% 0.0%
I was forced out of my 1.9% 5.3% 10.0% 3.4% 0.0%
I am just passing through 7.5% 5.3% 10.0% 10.3% 6.7%
Weather/climate 1.9% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other 11.3% 15.8% 20.0% 13.8% 20.0%
To access VA services 3.8% 0.0% 0.0% 3.4% 6.7%
146
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
Total 1 53 1 19 1 20 29 15
11.Immediately before you became homeless this last time,were you:
Response
less months
Living in a home owned by 10.6% 7.1% 15.4% 9.6% 10.5%
Renting a home or apartment 32.9% 27.6% 26.9% 34.4% 26.3%
Staying with friends 12.9% 15.7% 15.4% 17.6% 26.3%
Living with relatives 20.6% 27.6% 15.4% 16.0% 14.0%
Living in subsidized housing 3.5% 0.8% 1.3% 3.2% 0.0%
In jail or prison 8.2% 9.4% 11.5% 11.2% 15.8%
In a hospital 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0%
In a substance abuse 4.7% 2.4% 5.1% 3.2% 1.8%
In foster care 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other 4.7% 7.9% 9.0% 4.0% 3.5%
In a mental health facility 0.6% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8%
Total 170 127 78 125 57
12.What do you think is the primary event or condition that led to your homelessness?
Response
less months
Lost job 34.5% 27.8% 18.2% 21.6% 15.8%
Landlord raised rent 3.5% 3.2% 3.9% 3.2% 3.5%
Alcohol or drug use 19.9% 17.5% 27.3% 30.4% 26.3%
Illness or medical problem 0.0% 2.4% 3.9% 3.2% 3.5%
Mental health issues 2.3% 4.0% 2.6% 3.2% 7.0%
Family/domestic violence 7.0% 4.0% 3.9% 3.2% 5.3%
Incarceration 5.3% 7.9% 5.2% 7.2% 8.8%
Got too old for foster care 0.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8%
Divorced or separated 1.2% 2.4% 2.6% 1.6% 1.8%
Don't Know/decline to state 2.3% 4.8% 0.0% 3.2% 1.8%
Other 7.0% 7.1% 6.5% 8.0% 10.5%
Landlord sold/stopped renting or re- 7.6% 1.6% 2.6% 4.8% 3.5%
used property
Hospitalization/treatment program 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.0% 1.8%
Argument/family or friend asked you to 6.4% 11.9% 19.5% 5.6% 7.0%
leave
Hurricane Katrina 0.0% 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Other natural disaster/fire/flood 1.2% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0% 0.0%
For being Lesbian,Gay, Bisexual,or 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0%
Transgender
147
4
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
Gambling problem 1.2% 0.0% 1.3% 1.6% 0.0%
Foreclosure on home due 0.0% 2.4% 1.3% 2.4% 1.8%
Total 171 126 77 125 57
13.What is keeping you from getting permanent housing?
Response
less months
Can't afford rent 40.0% 46.5% 48.7% 52.0% 57.9%
No job/no income 52.4% 55.1% 60.3% 52.8% 54.4%
No money for moving costs 29.4% 27.6% 30.8% 27.2% 38.6%
No housing available 6.5% 2.4% 6.4% 4.0% 8.8%
No transportation 20.0% 16.5% 28.2% 21.6% 40.4%
Bad credit 16.5% 22.8% 20.5% 20.0% 22.8%
Eviction record 11.8% 8.7% 12.8% 8.8% 12.3%
Criminal record 11.8% 7.9% 20.5% 16.0% 24.6%
Don't want to 2.9% 3.9% 6.4% 3.2% 1.8%
Other 10.0% 15.7% 19.2% 10.4% 15.8%
Total Cases 170 127 78 125 57
Total Responses 342 263 198 270 158
14.Are you currently using any of the following services/assistance?
Response
less months
Emergency shelter 23.5% 16.1% 16.7% 16.0% 26.8%
Transitional housing 15.3% 8.9% 11.5% 13.6% 10.7%
Free meals 37.6% 47.6% 35.9% 42.4% 50.0%
Food pantry 23.5% 25.0% 24.4% 29.6% 19.6%
Bus passes 16.5% 8.1% 19.2% 15.2% 21.4%
Job training 6.5% 4.0% 6.4% 2.4% 5.4%
Alcohol/Drug counseling 17.1% 10.5% 9.0% 16.0% 16.1%
Shelter day services 11.2% 10.5% 14.1% 9.6% 26.8%
Legal assistance 5.9% 1.6% 7.7% 5.6% 3.6%
Health services 8.8% 4.0% 9.0% 7.2% 10.7%
Mental health services 9.4% 10.5% 12.8% 8.8% 19.6%
Other 11.2% 11.3% 16.7% 12.0% 10.7%
Not using any services 24.1% 21.8% 29.5% 28.8% 19.6%
Total Cases 170 124 78 125 56
Total Responses 358 223 166 259 135
148
f
E
(j$
A
!p{
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
r
15.Are you currently receiving any of the following forms of government assistance?
Response
months less
General Relief 5.9% 3.2% 5.1% 5.6% 5.3%
Food Stamps 28.2% 21.4% 26.9% 27.4% 36.8%
Medi-Cal/Medi-Care 11.8% 7.9% 11.5% 9.7% 10.5%
SSI(Supplemental Security 7.6% 10.3% 10.3% 6.5% 12.3%
Income)/SSDI
Cash Aid/CalWORKS 7.1% 3.2% 1.3% 4.8% 5.3%
Veteran's Benefits 1.2% 3.2% 2.6% 4.0% 00%
I am not currently receiving any of these 50.6% 57.9% 53.8% 54.8% 43.9%
WIC 7.1% 1.6% 1.3% 2.4% 1.8%
VA Disability Compensation 1.8% 2.4% 3.8% 1.6% 1.8%
Social Security 4.1% 3.2% 3.8% 4.0% 3.5%
Other governmental assistance 4.1% 5.6% 3.8% 4.0% 00%
Total Cases 170 126 78 124 57
Total Responses 220 151 97 155 69
15a.If you are not receiving any government assistance,why not?
Response
less months
Don't think I'm eligible 22.6% 23.3% 19.5% 27.3% 40.0%
Have no ID 15.5% 16.4% 24.4% 22.7% 24.0%
No permanent address 16.7% 17.8% 26.8% 22.7% 28.0%
No transportation 11.9% 8.2% 7.3% 16.7% 16.0%
Never applied 11.9% 24.7% 17.1% 18.2% 12.0%
Benefits were cut off 4.8% 2.7% .0% 7.6% 12.0%
1 have applied and I am currently waiting 13.1% 5.5% 2.4% 6.1% 4.0%
for approval
Don't know where to go 2.4% 8.2% 4.9% 7.6% 8.0%
Turned down 13.1% 15.1% 14.6% 13.6% 8.0%
Will apply soon 13.1% 6.8% 17.1% 13.6% 8.0%
Don't need government assistance 3.6% 9.6% 7.3% 9.1% 12.0%
Paper work too difficult 4.8% 5.5% 12.2% 7.6% 8.0%
Immigration issues 2.4% 1.4% 2.4% .0% 4.0%
1 am afraid my children will be taken 2.4% 1.4% .0% 3.0% 4.0%
away from me
Other 15.5% 13.7% 31.7% 16.7% 8.0%
Total Cases 84 73 41 66 25
Total Responses 129 j 117 j 77 j 127 j 49
149
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
16.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all Government benefits?
Response
less months
Zero 52.7% 60.3% 51.3% 59.3% 55.4%
$1 -$100 4.8% 4.0% 6.6% 2.4% 1.8%
$101 -$200 13.9% 7.1% 11.8% 13.0% 12.5%
$201 -$300 4.2% 4.8% 3.9% 3.3% 3.6%
$301 -$400 3.6% 3.2% 1.3% 5.7% 1.8%
$401 -$500 1.8% 00% 2.6% 1.6% 3.6%
$501 -$600 4.2% 5.6% 5.3% 3.3% 1.8%
$601 -$700 1.8% 1.6% 2.6% 08% 5.4%
$701 -$800 3.6% 3.2% 3.9% 3.3% 5.4%
$801 -$900 3.0% 4.0% 2.6% 4.1% 3.6%
$901 -$1000 1.8% 4.8% 3.9% 1.6% 5.4%
Over$1000 4.2% 1.6% 3.9% 1.6% 0.0
Total 165 126 76 123 56
17.Are you currently employed?
Response
less months
No,unemployed 84.7% 89.0% 89.7% 86.3% 87.7%
Yes,part time 8.8% 7.1% 7.7% 12.1% 7.0%
Yes,full time 6.5% 3.9% 2.6% 1.6% 5.3%
Total 170 127 78 124 57
17a.What is keeping you from getting employment?
Response
less months
Need education 19.4% 14.3% 18.6% 21.5% 22.0%
Need training 22.9% 21.4% 25.7% 19.6% 28.0%
Need clothing 20.1% 19.6% 21.4% 26.2% 30.0%
No shower facilities 11.1% 10.7% 18.6% 12.1% 16.0%
No phone 27.1% 22.3% 40.0% 26.2% 36.0%
Health problems 10.4% 6.3% 14.3% 14.0% 18.0%
Disabled 11.1% 17.9% 12.9% 10.3% 16.0%
Criminal record 11.1% 17.0% 15.7% 26.2% 22.0%
No permanent address 33.3% 33.0% 41.4% 37.4% 40.0%
No transportation 30.6% 26.8% 30.0% 34.6% 46.0%
No tools for trade 8.3% 7.1% 5.7% 12.1% 10.0%
No work permit(No S.S.#) 4.2% .9% 2.9% .9% 2.0%
150
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
Don't want to work 1.4% 9.8% 4.3% 1.9% 4.0%
No jobs 11.1% 8.9% 11.4% 15.0% 16.0%
No child care 3.5% 1.8% 1.4% 5.6% 6.0%
Retired 07% 00% 2.9% 09% 2.0%
Other 13.9% 15.2% 25.7% 24.3% 16.0%
Alcohol/drug issue 21.5% 23.2% 34.3% 29.0% 24.0%
No photo identification 11.1% 16.1% 18.6% 9.3% 20.0%
Spouse/partner doesn't want me to work 00% 1.8% 00% 2.8% 00%
Total Cases 144 112 70 107 50
Total Responses 393 307 242 353 187
18.What are your other sources of income?
Response
less months
Family/friends 30.6% 21.4% 24.3% 35.1% 25.5%
Pension 2.0% 09% 1.4% 09% 2.1%
Child support 00% 09% 00% 0.0% 0.0%
Recycling 35.4% 45.3% 40.5% 40.4% 57.4%
Selling other found items 8.2% 10.3% 18.9% 10.5% 23.4%
Selling blood/plasma 7.5% 7.7% 5.4% 10.5% 10.6%
Sex work 2.7% 6.8% 4.1% 4.4% 4.3%
Other 36.1% 31.6% 44.6% 36.8% 36.2%
Gambling 1.4% 2.6% 5.4% .9% 10.6%
Panhandling 15.0% 27.4% 29.7% 31.6% 34.0%
Total Cases 147 117 74 114 47
Total Responses 204 181 129 195 96
19.What is your total(gross)monthly income from all non-Government sources?
Response
less months
Zero 34.1% 31.0% 26.0% 30.6% 33.9%
$1 _$100 23.2% 18.3% 15.6% 21.5% 21.4%
$101 -$200 12.2% 15.9% 14.3% 11.6% 5.4%
$201 -$300 8.5% 13.5% 18.2% 10.7% 12.5%
$301 -$400 3.7% 8.7% 9.1% 8.3% 7.1%
$401 -$500 3.0% 7.1% 3.9% 5.8% 1.8%
$501 -$600 4.9% 1.6% 3.9% 3.3% 5.4%
$601 -$700 1.2% 1.6% 2.6% 2.5% 3.6%
$701 -$800 1.2% 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% 3.6%
151
i
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
$801 -$900 2.4% 0.0% 1.3% 1.7% 0.0%
$901 -$1000 0.0% 2.4% 1.3% 0.8% 1.8%
Over$1000 5.5% 0.0% 3.9% 0.8% 3.6%
Total 164 126 77 121 56
20.Are you on the waiting list for Section 8 Housing?
Response
months less
Yes 17.0% 8.7% 9.0% 8.1% 19.3%
No 83.0% 91.3% 91.0% 91.9% 80.7%
Total 171 127 78 124 57
20a. How long have you been on the section 8 waiting list?(Total in months)
Response
less months
1 month 47.8% 50.0% 25.0% 66.7% 50.0%
2-12 months 26.1% 20.0% 0.0% 11.1% 12.5%
13-24 months 8.7% 0.0% 25.0% 11.1% 12.5%
25-36 months 4.3% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.5%
37-48 months 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 11.1% 0.0%
49 months or more 13.0% 10.0% 25.0% 0.0% 12.5%
Total 23 10 4 9 8
21.Do you have any children,living with you or not?
Response months
less months
Yes 28.0% 22.0% 19.7% 22.8% 756
No 72.0% 78.0% 80.3% 77.2%
Total 164 123 76 123
21 a.Do you have any children who are?
Response
less months
18 or over living with you? 26.8% 31.8% 33.3% 14.8% 0.0%
In foster care? 24.4% 27.3% 60.0% 33.3% 42.9%
0-5 years living with you? 31.7% 40.9% 40.0% 25.9% 42.9%
6-12 years living with you? 41.5% 31.8% 20.0% 33.3% 0.0%
13-17 years living with you? 24.4% 9.1% 6.7% 11.1% 28.6%
Total Cases 41 22 15 27 7
Total Responses 61 31 24 32 8
152
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
21a-1.How many children do you have 18 years old or over living with you?
Response
less months
One child 44.4% 40.0% 40.0% 25.0% 0.0%
Two children 33.3% 60.0% 0.0% 50.0% 0.0%
Three children 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Four children 11.1% 0.0% 40.0% 25.0% 0.0%
Six or more children 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 9 5 5 4 0
21 a-2. How many children do you have in foster care?
Response
less months
One child 20.0% 25.0% 71.4% 11.1% 0.0%
Two children 60.0% 25.0% 14.3% 55.6% 33.3%
Three children 10.0% 25.0% 0.0% 11.1% 33.3%
Four children 0.0% 0.0% 14.3% 11.1% 33.3%
Five children 10.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Six or more children 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 11.1% 0.0%
Total 10 4 7 9 3
21a-3. How many children do you have 0-5 years old living with you?
Response
less months
One child 56.3% 55.6% 50.0% 54.5% 75.0%
Two children 37.5% 33.3% 50.0% 45.5% 25.0%
Five children 0.0% 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Six or more children 6.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 16 9 6 11 4
21a-4. How many children do you have 6-12 years old living with you?
Response
less months
One child 52.9% 42.9% 66.7% 55.6% 0.0%
Two children 23.5% 14.3% 33.3% 44.4% 0.0%
Three children 11.8% 14.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Four children 0.0% 28.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Six or more children 11.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 17 7 3 9 0
21a-5.How many children do you have 13-17 years old living with you?
153
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII• Length Homeless Results
Response . or
months less
One child 77.8% 0.0% 0.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Two children 11.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Three children 11.1% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Total 9 1 1 3 2
Are your children,ages 6 to 17 and living with you,in school?
Response
months less
62.5/o
Yes 93.8% ° 50.0% 66.7% 100.0%
No 6.3% 37.5% 50.0% 33.3% 0.0%
Total 16 8 2 9 3
22.Since you became homeless this last time, have you needed medical care and been unable
to receive it?
Response
less months
Yes 31.5% 23.2% 26.9% 39.2% 36.8%
No 68.5% 76.8% 73.1% 60.8% 63.2%
Total 165 125 78 120 57
23.Where do you usually get medical care?
Response
less months
Hospital emergency room 53.0% 42.7% 45.5% 42.7% 52.6%
Urgent care clinic 4.3% 3.2% 1.3% 1.6% 5.3%
Public health clinic 3.0% 7.3% 3.9% 4.0% 1.8%
Veterans Affairs Clinic 3.7% 7.3% 3.9% 7.3% 3.5%
Free clinic/community clinic 8.5% 7.3% 10.4% 11.3% 14.0%
Private doctor 5.5% 5.6% 3.9% 5.6% 8.8%
Friends/family 1.8% 1.6% 0.0% 1.6% 0.0%
Don't ever go 15.2% 18.5% 24.7% 22.6% 10.5%
Other 4.9% 6.5% 6.5% 3.2% 3.5%
Total 164 124 77 124 57
23a. How many times in the last 12 months have you used the emergency room for any
treatment?
Response
less months
Never 44.2% 57.0% 52.0% 48.4%
154
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
1 time 19.0% 13.2% 16.0% 16.4% 23.2%
2 times 15.3% 13.2% 16.0% 14.8% 7.1%
3 times 8.0% 9.1% 10.7% 11.5% 14.3%
4 times 6.1% 5.0% 2.7% 4.1% 10.7%
5 times 1.8% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 3.6%
More than 5 times 5.5% 2.5% 2.7% 4.1% 3.6%
Total 163 121 75 122 56
24. How many nights, if any, have you spent in jail or prison during the last 12 months?
Response
less months
0 nights 67.3% 65.8% 64.5% 58.7% 56.4%
1 -5 nights 10.1% 14.2% 7.9% 7.4% 7.3%
6-10 nights 4.4% 3.3% 5.3% 5.8% 3.6%
11 -20 nights 3.8% 1.7% 53% 3.3% 1.8%
21 -50 nights 3.1% 6.7% 2.6% 9.1% 5.5%
More than 50 nights 11.3% 8.3% 14.5% 15.7% 25.5%
Total 159 120 76 121 55
25. Are you currently on probation or parole?
Response
less months
Yes 26.7% 24.6% 25.6% 29.5% 35.7%
No 68.5% 70.6% 66.7% 62.3% 60.7%
Declined to state 4.8% 4.8% 7.7% 8.2% 3.6%
Total 165 126 78 122 56
25a.Were you on probation or parole at the time you most recently became homeless?
Response
less months
Yes 20.1% 23.3% 23.4% 23.0% 28.1%
No 71.3% 72.5% 64.9% 63.9% 64.9%
Declined to state 8.5% 4.2% 11.7% 13.1% 7.0%
Total 164 120 77 122 57
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following:(3 Months or less)
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 33 123 5
20.5% 76.4% 3.1
155
_1 _
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
26b.Mental illness 32 121 7
20.0% 75.6% 4.4%
26c.Depression 69 91 3
42.3% 55.8% 1.8%
26d.Alcohol abuse 42 114 4
26.3% 71.3% 2.5%
26e.Drug abuse 35 119 7
21.7% 73.9% 4.3%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 14 137 7
8.9% 86.7% 4.4%
26g.Chronic health problems 28 131 5
17.1% 79.9% 3.0%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 3 148 8
1.9% 93.1% 5.0%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 15 136 7
9.5% 86.1% 4.4%
26j.Developmental disability 18 135 9
11.1% 83.3% 5.6%
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following: (4-8 months)
Declined
Yes No to state
26a. Physical disability 32 88 2
26.2% 72.1% 1.6%
26b.Mental illness 29 87 5
24.0% 71.9% 4.1%
26c.Depression 49 73 2
39.5% 58.9% 1.6%
26d.Alcohol abuse 46 73 5
37.1% 58.9% 4.0%
26e.Drug abuse 48 68 6
39.3% 55.7% 4.9%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 10 108 2
8.3% 90.0% 1.7%
26g.Chronic health problems 15 102 3
12.5% 85.0% 2.5%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 2 111 7
1.7% 92.5% 5.8%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 12 106 3
156
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
9.9% 87.6% 2.5%
26j.Developmental disability 11 109 4
8.9% 87.9% 3.2%
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following: (9. 12 months)
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 13 64 1
16.7% 82.1% 1.3%
26b.Mental illness 16 57 5
20.5% 73.1% 6.4%
26c. Depression 34 40 4
43.6% 51.3% 5.1%
26d.Alcohol abuse 24 49 5
30.8% 62.8% 6.4%
26e.Drug abuse 26 45 7
33.3% 57.7% 9.0%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 9 65 3
11.7% 84.4% 3.9%
26g.Chronic health problems 13 62 3
16.7% 79.5% 3.8%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 4 68 6
5.1% 87.2% 7.7%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 8 68 2
10.3% 87.2% 2.6%
26j.Developmental disability 5 70 2
6.5% 90.9% 2.6%
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following: (1 -3 years)
Declined
Yes No to state
26a. Physical disability 29 89 5
23.6% 72.4% 4.1%
26b.Mental illness 27 81 14
22.1% 66.4% 11.5%
26c.Depression 56 65 2
45.5% 52.8% 1.6%
26d.Alcohol abuse 46 69 6
38.0% 1 57.0% 5.0%
157
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
26e.Drug abuse 43 74 4
35.5% 61.2% 3.3%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 9 108 5
7.4% 88.5% 4.1%
26g.Chronic health problems 18 103 3
14.5% 83.1% 2.4%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 1 117 4
0.8% 95.9% 3.3%
26i.Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 11 106 5
9.0% 86.9% 4.1%
26j.Developmental disability 8 105 6
6.7% 1 88.2% 1 5.0%
26. Are you currently experiencing any of the following: (+3 years)
Declined
Yes No to state
26a.Physical disability 18 34 4
32.1% 60.7% 7.1%
26b.Mental illness 20 32 3
36.4% 58.2% 5.5%
26c.Depression 29 27 1
50.9% 47.4% 1.8%
26d.Alcohol abuse 18 36 3
31.6% 63.2% 5.3%
26e.Drug abuse 28 27 1
50.0% 48.2% 1.8%
26f.Domestic/partner violence or abuse 6 46 4
10.7% 82.1% 7.1%
26g.Chronic health problems 13 40 3
23.2% 71.4% 5.4%
26h.AIDS/HIV related illness 1 51 4
1.8% 91.1% 7.1%
26i. Post-traumatic stress disorder(PTSD) 9 44 2
16.4% 80.0% 3.6%
26j. Developmental disability 12 43 1
21.4% 76.8% 1.8%
158
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix VIII: Length Homeless Results
27.Were you ever in foster care?
Response
less months
Yes 13.9% 15.2% 15.4% 9.9% 3.5%
No 86.1% 84.8% 84.6% 90.1% 96.5%
Total 166 125 18 121 57
28.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Response
months less
Less than 6th Grade 2.4% 8.7% 1.3% 1.6% 5.4%
Less than high school diploma 30.5% 39.4% 30.8% 33.6% 26.8%
High school diploma/GED 37.1% 37.0% 37.2% 39.3% 41.1%
Some college,no degree 20.4% 11.8% 17.9% 16.4% 16.1%
AA degree/technical certificate 4.2% 0.8% 10.3% 5.7% 8.9%
BA degree or above 2.4% 0.8% 1.3% 2.5% 1.8%
Graduate or professional degree 3.0% 1.6% 1.3% 0.8% 0.0%
Total 167 127 78 122 56
29.Are you aware of the San Bernardino County 211 Toll-free Telephone Help Line?
Response
less months
Yes 25.4% 19.8% 21.8% 14.5% 15.8%
No 74.6% 80.2% 78.2% 85.5% 84.2%
Total 169 126 78 124 57
29a. Have you ever used the San Bernardino County 211 Help Line?
Response
less months
Yes 27.9% 45.8% 25.0% 27.8% 22.2%
No 72.1% 54.2% 75.0% 72.2% 77.8%
Total 43 24 16 18 9
159
.....____...._._._..
2007 San Bernardino County Homeless Census and Survey Appendix IX: Definitions
Appendix IX:
Definitions
Census Tract—A small,relatively permanent statistical subdivision of a county used for the purpose of
presenting data. Census tract boundaries normally follow visible features, but may follow governmental
unit boundaries and other non-visible features in some instances.The spatial size of census tracts varies
widely depending on the density of settlement,ranging from 2,000 to 8,000 inhabitants (an average of
about 4,000 inhabitants is preferred).
Chronic Homelessness is defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development,the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services,and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs as "an
unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has either been continuously
homeless for a year or more,or has had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years."
Emergency shelter is the provision of a safe alternative to the streets,either in a shelter facility,or
through the use of motel vouchers. Emergency shelter is short-term,usually for 30 days or less.
Domestic violence shelters are considered emergency shelter,as they provide safe, immediate housing for
victims and their children.
Homeless Persons,according to the Stewart B. McKinney Act of 1987, are people who lack a fixed,
regular and adequate nighttime residence, and have a primary nighttime residence that is either a public or
private shelter,an institution that provides temporary residence for individuals intended to be
institutionalized,or a public or private location that is not designed for,or ordinarily used as,a regular
sleeping accommodation for human beings.
Transitional housing is more long-term housing,and can last up to two years. Transitional housing
requires that the resident participate in a structured program to work toward the established goals so that
they can move on to permanent housing. Residents are often provided with an array of supportive
services to assist them in meeting goals. In transitional housing,residents may or may not pay rent.
160