San Diego City Council on July 22 voted to postpone the agreement of creating a homeless shelter with up to 1,000 beds in a 65,000-square-foot commercial building at Kettner Boulevard and Vine Street in Middletown. After hours-long public testimony, Council members collectively felt there were just too many unanswered questions and details left out of the proposal, now dubbed Hope @ Vine, to immediately sign off on it.
One of many sticking points with the shelter was the City’s independent budget analyst’s report that concluded the tentative 30-year lease deal for Hope @ Vine was above market rate for $1.95 per square foot with annual 3.5% rent increases and an estimated $12.5 million in facility maintenance costs over the lease’s term.
The City Council’s final motion directed staff to renegotiate lease revisions with Middletown warehouse owner Douglas Hamm, and return July 30 with updated terms for reconsideration before the Council’s August recess.
Gloria defended the megashelter proposal insisting it would “turn the tide” on homelessness. “The Hope @ Vine campus represents big, bold action that offers the potential to make a significant positive change in unsheltered homelessness in San Diego,” he said. “It will be a sanctuary, providing not only a bed but also a pathway to recovery and reintegration into society. This project is a testament to my administration’s collective resolve to confront this crisis head-on.”
The shelter will be designed to meet diverse needs, with a variety of onsite services and different spaces for families and individuals, argued Gloria who claimed the new facility would have the flexibility to adapt and change the space as needed.
“It’s an investment in our City’s moral and social fabric, aimed at providing real, measurable outcomes for those in need,” Gloria said. “I urge the City Council to support this game-changing initiative. By backing the Hope @ Vine campus, we are choosing to be leaders who not only talk about change but deliver it.”
More than 100 people testifying before the Council however didn’t see it the same way. The majority opposed the shelter, contending it was the wrong proposal in the wrong place at the wrong time. Testimony at times turned emotional with people breaking into tears expressing fear of homelessness creating blight and/or threatening their neighborhood’s safety.
Opponents also argued smaller shelters are more effective than larger ones in providing homeless with personalized care and services. At one point, several unsheltered people testified they would prefer to “remain on the street” rather than be housed impersonally in megashelters where they won’t feel safe.
Casey Smith, the City’s deputy COO, told the Council that “there have been consistent and sustained efforts since 2017 to identify countless locations on City property for shelter sites.”
He added: “Unfortunately there are minimal opportunities. The search revealed parcels that were not large enough, on slopes, in the middle of sensitive habitat, immediately adjacent to freeways, had poor access or were located in a residential neighborhood or not near mass transit.”
District 2 Councilmember Jennifer Campbell representing Point Loma agreed the shelter lease needed more work. “Homelessness is San Diego’s most pressing issue and a health problem,” said Campbell, a physician. “The lack of enough housing in our City for those who earn lower- and middle-income is the major reason for homelessness. We must address homelessness using every single tool.
“There are still 2,000 homeless people on our City’s streets. We must continue those programs that work. But we have to be very careful not to put our City in jeopardy by trying to do too much with too little. We should send this lease back to staff and back to negotiations,” said Campbell.
The City recently abandoned another plan to convert H Barracks near Liberty Station. Proposed was a temporary, large-scale homelessness services shelter there, a plan highly unpopular with some Point Loma residents. Ultimately, the City opted to turn the site into a safe parking lot for people living out of their vehicles.
Since then, two nonprofits based on similar working models, Point Loma Cares and Mission Hills Cares, have emerged to oppose the creation of large-scale homeless shelters. Representatives belonging to both groups as well as a local planning group reacted to the City Council’s July 22 decision to postpone approval of the Hope @ Vine shelter.
“We’re all in unison saying we need a long-term permanent plan and fix to end the homelessness crisis,” said Margaret Virissimo of Point Loma Cares, speaking on her own behalf. “That certainly is not opening a 1,000-bed shelter in San Diego, which is why we’re showing a united front against these shady projects. We won’t stand for it. This isn’t us crying ‘Not in my backyard.’ We’re actually looking at the bigger picture, how this is going to impact all of San Diego.”
Patty Ducey-Brooks of Mission Hills Cares concurred that bigger is not better when it comes to shelters. “We are combined to address this issue from every angle,” she said warning Little Italy and Old Town nearby will also be adversely impacted by large-scale shelters.
“There has been more crime and attacks on women by homeless people, and this is going to get worse because of this facility,” she added. “Nobody (in the City) wants to pay attention to what it’s going to cost to make that site a proper place to house people.”
Andrew Hollingworth of the Peninsula Community Planning Board, speaking for himself, cautioned there are larger issues involved with the two proposed different-but-related homeless shelters. “It’s become very clear to me that the City is intent on concentrating homeless in Midtown and Point Loma,” he said cautioning, “They (City) want to get rid of single-family homes and put in huge, permanent homeless shelters that are going to destroy Midtown and Point Loma. The City also wants to institute a 1-cent sales tax. They (City Council) need to prove they can prudently manage the City’s money, which they are not doing.”
HOPE @ VINE
Terms of the City’s Tentative 30-year lease agreement for shelter commercial space provide benefits to the City including:
– 19 months of rent waived ($2.4 million in savings).
– $5 million unrestricted contribution from property owner.
– Property owner responsible for the mitigation of any potential hazards identified during the renovation process.
– The property is not available for purchase; however, the City has the first right of refusal should the landlord sell the property.
– If the property is sold within five years, the City would receive profits from the sale (14% of the net).
– Deal includes an adjacent parcel of land that can serve multiple uses including additional shelter and services.
