A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Colorado Village Collaborative to fund two Safe Outdoor Space sites with amenities and services that provide outdoor accommodation for up to 100 households. Approves a contract with Colorado Village Collaborative for $899,569 and through 12-31-21 to fund two Safe Outdoor Space (SOS) sites, with amenities and services that provide outdoor accommodation for up to 100 households (HOST-202157407). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 3-8-21. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 2-3-21.
Ten I's Council Resolution 20 1-008 has been adopted. The next item up is Council Resolution 20 1-0090. Council Member Cashman, will you please put Council Resolution 20 1-0090 on the floor for adoption? Yes, Council President. I move that council resolution 20 1-0090 be adopted. Second. It's been moved and seconded by Councilman Herndon. Second, questions or comments by members of Council. Council Member Sawyer, you're up. Thanks, Madam President. I call this out for a vote because I would like to be a no on this. That's something I've struggled with and gone back and forth on for months. And I want to just be really clear. Everyone deserves a home, especially one that's safe during COVID. But more than 80% of our voters in May 2019 said they don't want urban camping. And I don't understand why we are spending our time and money defending urban camping ban in courts on the one hand, and then funding urban camping in direct contradiction to the will of our voters on the other. To me, that doesn't make any sense. So the lack of a cohesive plan, I think, is a failure of our leadership. I think we're sending mixed messages and breaking the trust of our voters while all the while causing confusion for our most vulnerable citizens. Our population of residents experiencing homelessness deserve better. To start with, they deserve heat and a roof and a door. We think we have around 2000 people sleeping on our streets every night. In addition to those who are using our shelters. And in addition to those who are couch surfing, this contract is a Band-Aid that covers about 5% of the need at a huge cost and pays a private provider for services that we as a city already provide when it comes to social services. That money can be spent on so many other things that could help stop the cycle of homelessness upstream before it starts, like eviction protection or drug rehabilitation or mental health services. Once again, we councilmembers are being put in a no win situation over which we have very little input. This contract fronts 100 tents with for almost $900,000, where 60% of the budget is directed at a site that has yet to be determined where residents have not been engaged or even know that this might be coming to their neighborhood. And the two pilot SS sites were private sites with private funding. And that makes sense. But this is very different from what we're talking about here. This is taxpayer money. And that requires a process that I don't see has happened in this case in the same way. I saw this last week, and I find it ironic that I'm saying it again tonight, a week later. This is not the only solution to this problem. This is the only solution that we're being presented. And once again, councilmembers are left to be the voice of our residents, asking for a rational explanation that isn't coming. I don't believe that this is a responsible use of our tax or our city tax dollars. So I'm going to be a no on this one tonight. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Sawyer. Councilwoman Connie. Thank you, Madam President. I appreciate that. You know, colleagues can respectfully disagree about different approaches, and I respect anybody's right to vote against, you know, any contractor approach that they are not comfortable with. But I do want to just clarify some of the facts on the record, because I think some of the concerns that have been shared might be confusing to members of our community who may be watching this meeting. And I think it's important if we're going to debate these things, that we get all those facts out there. So I would like to ask if Cole Chandler could please be promoted as one of the individuals receiving this contract. And then I see Angie Nelson is here. So I'd like to start maybe with a question, a couple of questions for Angie, if I may, Madam President. Mm hmm. Go ahead. Angie, can you clarify, please, how much private funding was being leveraged along with the city dollars involved in this contract? And you should introduce yourself as well, please. Hi, everyone. My name's Angie Nelson. I'm the acting. Deputy director. For Homelessness Resolution and Housing Stability within the Department of Housing Stability. And your question about how much private funding is leveraged, I am going to have to get back to you with that. Well, why don't we have Callie answer it, then, perhaps. There you go. Thank you. Thank you. And please introduce yourself. Call. I am Cole Chandler, executive director of Color Village Collaborative. I live in District nine. So the answer to that question for 2021 is that this contract would provide 86% of the funding that would fund both of these programs through the entirety of 2021. Now that being said, we have been operating one of these sites since December 15, 2020, and we did that as well as opened a site at First Baptist Church of Denver, utilizing about $300,000 worth of private funds. And so those are not coming into that figure that I'm sharing with you. But 86% of the funds to operate this through the end of the year would be provided by this contract. Okay. So $300,000 for a first site and then about 16% of this contract, private funding. Kim Kohl, can you please describe several of the differences between the safe outdoor spaces and encampments that are subject to the urban camping ban that has been raised? Can you just describe those differences? Absolutely. So I think it's really important that we state that safe outdoor spaces are not what was on the ballot when Initiative 300 came forward. Those are two entirely different things. Initiative 300 would have given people the right to sleep in public space, essentially wherever they choose. That is absolutely not what this is. This is a resource rich service rich encampment model that's fully managed by staff 24 hours a day and intends to do three things. First and foremost, to prevent the spread of COVID 19, which we have done to date, 0% of folks that have been tested have tested positive. Second, it intends to connect people to long term housing resources and case management. So we have connected five people to the beloved community, tiny home village. To date, we've had two people connect to vouchers. We've had five people entered into the one home system. Eight people in our program are currently receiving ongoing case management. So you've seen those kinds of things as well. Third, it intends to reduce the impact on neighborhoods of existing unsanctioned camps. So if you're a council member that is getting calls about unsanctioned camps, if you're getting calls saying, hey, I call 311 all the time and nothing ever happens if you're getting those kinds of complaints. This is intended to be a solution to that precise issue. So I want to create that differentiation. This is not the same issue that was voted on in 2019. Thanks. And then, Angie, I just want to ask, is there a supportive housing home available for every individual? Well, first of all, let me ask. There was a claim made that there are 2000 people sleeping on the streets right now. We have imprecise data to count things, but we had both a point in time study as well as some community studies. So do you do you have an estimate or what? What's your thought? Is that the right ballpark figure to be using today? You know, the ballpark figure, just like. You said, there are a few different data points. One being the point in time, but in the other, there was. A community led. Point in time count that happened over the summer, which inflated that number tenfold. And so we are still getting our hands around what that ballpark figure looks like right now. And I think we need to to get back to you on what the the best precise estimation is right now through our street outreach teams. And some of. Their understanding. We probably won't get a great number for this, and it's part of the challenge, and we'll have even less data in the coming year than we have now, unfortunately. But let's just go with 1000 from the point in time or 2000. Do we have a supportive housing unit available in Denver for each of those individuals today? No, we don't. We are absolutely working to build that pipeline. And in interventions like safe outdoor space, help give people a platform of stability. That. Meets them where they're at so that they can work towards those longer. Term. Solutions that Coleman spoke to. But, you know, unfortunately, the availability. Of a. Permanent housing is the thing that we're we're driving towards but don't have enough of for everyone in need today. And then call can I just ask for the folks who are staying in the safe outdoor spaces now? Do you have data or anecdotal information about where they were sleeping before and whether or not they were? You know, I would I, too, would like everyone to sleep in a heated building with a bed and a door. But I'm not sure that's where the people you're serving were sleeping prior to this. Thanks, Councilwoman. 100% of the people that were serving were sleeping outdoors in tents or worse prior to move in. When we opened our site. 32 of the people that originally moved in were in an unsanctioned camp directly across the street. That camp is now gone because of this solution coming in place. And so people that are coming in are coming from outdoors. When they come into our site, they have a tent that's rated for subzero temperatures that's on a platform that keeps them out of the snow. And they have electricity to every single unit, as well as warming tents available on site as well. So. Well, I appreciate that additional background. I'm just going to add a comment, Madam President, before I turn it back to you, which is that, you know, I think full disclosure, I was one of the folks who worked with the community to help to bring this idea and develop it and bring it to the city. And I think that in that process, I both heard from numerous neighborhoods, including, you know, not just folks that experienced camps every day, but I you know, Councilman Cashman and I were at a Westwood Park neighborhood meeting where I was asked, why can't the city find a safer, more orderly place for people who are not going inside to be more safely and to get the help they need? These ideas, they didn't use this language safe outdoor space. Right. That's language that we invented. But they talked about this concept. You know, we did massive outreach around to be an overwhelmingly you know, more than 50% of folks were supportive of this in scientific surveys as well as informal surveys. There is really strong support for this model. And I will just say I heard a lot of mixed feelings. You know, I have a 10,000 plus person email list. And when I sent an email out specifically about this model, I heard lots of questions, consternation, some, you know, some concerns. But I did not hear widespread disapproval. But I will tell you that when I shared that, it was then open and folks were seeing the news coverage and seeing the sites. I have had no complaints from folks saying we should close this, we should stop doing this. So I just you know, I knew that we all have different constituencies and districts and we hear from different people. But I would just say I've got none of the to see that the community does not support this model and does not want to see it. And therefore, you know, to vote against it, I think is just misstating the massive, you know, you know, again, polling, surveys and others that show that a majority of residents think this idea is worth trying. It is an interim measure. This if this is our destination, we're in big trouble, but it's not our destination. We just doubled down on our supportive housing pipeline to accelerate it and to generate more homes. And so if anyone thinks we're going to address this crisis only with long term solutions and no emergency solutions, then the lives that will be lost in the interim, whether it's to hypothermia or hopelessness or what other ways that people die when they're on the streets unprotected, I'm not willing to make that sacrifice. So I will continue to advocate for doors and roofs and individual keys to homes for everybody. I'll continue to be an advocate for supportive housing, but I will be strongly supporting this contract tonight, not just because I believe it is the more humane harm reduction alternative to sleeping on the streets without the heated tent and without the service provider and without the food that these sites provide. But also because I have heard from massive numbers of my constituents that they think this is the direction that would be better to go than what we've had with unregulated camps. So for those reasons, I'll be supporting it tonight, and I urge my colleagues to do the same. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Canete. Councilwoman. So I see your your back up. I'm going to go ahead if it's okay to go to Councilwoman Ortega and then we'll circle back with you. Councilwoman Ortega, go ahead, please. Madam President, I just wanted to ask Cole or Angie a question about some of the data that we were provided. There was some information that showed that some people had secured vouchers. And I'm just trying to understand if those are going through the one home process with MDA, try to get people into the pipeline to secure those vouchers. And if they've been successful in finding housing, because we've heard in the past that just because somebody has a voucher doesn't mean it automatically provides them a unit. Yeah. Thank you, Councilman. I'll take that one. And Angie, if you want to jump in, feel free. So those are our data points from CBC Internal Data. Just so you know, every single person that's enrolled in the safe outdoor space has been enrolled in the HMS Homeless Management Information System. That's all that's also really important because that means people that weren't previously connected with services are now connected to this greater system. So an outreach worker working for St Francis Center, working for an urban peak, can find literally where this person that they used to have to go try to meet in a different encampment, find where they're staying every single night and see where they are. So the two people that have now, as I stated, been connected to housing vouchers. It's because they previously had come up on a list, but their outreach worker had not been able to connect with them. And they were able to do that because they found that they were within our space and they were able to let them know that they have come up and that their name is up for a voucher. Now, they have not yet connected to your housing unit, but that work is ongoing through the process with the outreach workers . So can you tell me if any of the client population that have ended up in any of these locations have come from areas other than downtown Denver? So, for example, as you know, we've got a lot of people that live outside along. I think it's Sanderson Gulch near the MDH facility on Florida and Federal Boulevard. I know that we've had people living along same creek in Council District 11. The Santa Fe Corridor is another area. And so just wanted to ask about how people are getting plugged into that pipeline because I know a lot of the homeless outreach tends to be right in the downtown, but we have chronic homeless people who have been, you know, living along the South Platte River and other areas of the city that don't seem to have the same entree, if you will, into the MDH pipeline, because it's based on the street outreach workers helping get them connected to that resource and get them into the system so that, you know, when their name comes up and a unit comes up, they get priority over, you know, people who are not in that system. So can you speak to that? Yeah. So our strategy for filling this site and I'll speak specifically for the CBC operated site at Denver Community Church was to identify people that were camping within a four block radius of the site and help bring them in. And the reason for doing that was in order to deliver on that third goal that I shared, which was to reduce the impact of unsanctioned homelessness in the neighborhood. So our specific outreach efforts are for people that are in that Capitol Hill area. And what I would say is that the points that you're making are reasons to be advocating for this to exist in other areas of town. We need these kinds of solutions to pop up all around the city so that people that are in unsanctioned camps can come in to a resource and service rich environment. And it shouldn't just be located within the downtown core. But right now, those are the only options that are available to us. Yeah. And I think the Street outreach piece is a critical part of being able to ensure that people across the city are being able to get plugged into the same pipeline, because that's that's been sort of a a missing link, if you will, where, you know, unfortunately, we've got more people on our streets than than what we would like to see. And, you know, through lots of different mechanisms. I mean, people don't realize who who come here every Monday night that we've spent, you know, upwards of $50 million on providing overnight sheltering for people in our motels and at the Coliseum and National Western, as well as the shelters that are owned by the city of Denver and run by other folks. But at the same time that we've had more shelter beds than ever, we also have more people on our streets. And so I am supportive of this tonight. I just wanted to make sure that and this really is a conversation for Britta as well, because, you know, that's where our our homeless services are. And we always want to make sure that we're not just concentrating everything downtown, which is important, but we also want to be addressing the needs of people in other areas of our city at the same time. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Councilwoman Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. Just wanted to point out that I attended committee and don't need to do committee work on the floor. Our job is to approve contracts or not approve contracts based on what we think is appropriate for tax expenditures, based on our constituencies. And I have made my point and I don't need to continue the conversation any more. I'm ready to vote. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Councilman Sawyer. Madam Secretary. Roll call. Sawyer. No, black I. CDEBACA Yes, of course. Clark. All right. Flynn. I. Herndon. I. Cashman. I. Kenny. I. Ortega, I. Sandoval. Yes, absolutely. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce results. One eight and I's. Ten I's Council Resolution 20 1-0090 has been adopted. That concludes the items to be called out. All bills for introduction are ordered published. Council members remember this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote I. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilmember Cashman, would you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor? Yes, Council President, I move that resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in the block for the following items. All series of 2020 10051005200750077006900990121012200 30 700 60 700 70 300 70 40000 80 500 90 500 90 700980 100 zero zero 50 400 80 600 80 900 92 and 0059 second. It has been moved and I heard Herndon first councilman oh. In a way. You've got three more hearings in their. Calendar. The second. Can we vote on that? Let's go to the tape. Got to keep eye on it. Madam Secretary, roll call, please. Black. I see tobacco. I. Clark. I. When? I. Herndon. I. Cashman. I can eat. I. Ortega. I. Sandoval. I. Sawyer. I. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 11 eyes. 11 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 20, Dash 1424, changing the zoning classification for 753 South Downing Street. A required public hearing on Council Bill 20, Dash 1561, changing the zoning classification for 925 South Pennsylvania Street and a required public hearing on Council Bill 21, Dash 0006 Changing the Zoning Classification for 2112 South Emmerson Street. Anyone wishing to speak on any of these matters must go online to sign up during the recess of council.