CC 2019-04-09_11a Supplemental No. 2MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JAMES A. BERGMAN, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
DATE:
AGENDA ITEM 11.a. – APRIL 9 , 2019 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
INFORMATION REGARDING HILLSIDE CHURCH DEVELOPMENT
CONCEPTUAL PROJECT IN NEIGHBORING GROVER BEACH
APRIL 9, 2019
Attached is additional correspondence received regarding the above referenced item.
cc: City Attorney
City Clerk
Public Review Binder
1
On Apr 9, 2019, at 2:05 PM, Irene Cypert wrote:
Irene Cypert
Saratoga Ave.
Grover Beach, CA 93433
April 9, 2019
Re: Opposition to recommendation to award $2.6 million in HEAP funds to the 5 Cities Homeless Coalition.
Dear Council Member Keith Storton,
I am writing to ask any Council members who sit on the Homeless Services Oversight Council or who are able to
advise the HSOC, to reconsider the way the Homeless Emergency Aid Program or HEAP grant funds were divided.
Please, do not award the $2.6 million to the 5 Cities Homeless Coalition.
Under HEAP regulations, “100% of program funds shall be contractually obligated by June 30, 2021. Any funds not
expended by that date shall be returned to the agency and revert to the General Fund.” I understand that the
purchase of the Hillside church property would fulfill this requirement. What I could not find was what would happen if
the Hillside project was unable to be open and operational by the June 30, 2021 date, because of delays caused by
community opposition. Will the Hillside property need to be sold? Will the funds need to be returned to the State’s
General Fund and therefore our county would lose the $2.6 million? Would the 5 Cities Homeless Coalition keep
those funds?
According to the HEAP website, HEAP was established to provide funds to address “immediate homelessness
challenges.” Community opposition certainly has the potential to delay the Hillside project.
Please reconsider granting the $2.6 million in HEAP funds to one of the other worthy projects. Almost all of which the
HSOC themselves, rated higher for project readiness and lower for risk than the Hillside project. The Salvation
Army’s Scattered Site Supportive Housing project comes with $1 million of matching funds and three or more
separate units spread out across the county. I believe having smaller individual sites would bring less opposition from
surrounding neighbors, than having one large site with a larger concentration of homeless individuals in a residential
neighborhood, like at the Hillside project.
Thank you for reconsidering the division of the HEAP funds, so that our homeless community members can receive
help as soon as possible and our county does not risk losing much needed funding.
Sincerely,
Irene Cypert