N.3. 21-2731 DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING POSSIBLE NEXT STEPS OF THE OPERATION AND LOCATION OF THE REDONDO BEACH EMERGENCY HOMELESS SHELTER (PALLET SHELTERS)
Kingsdale area has done it’s share. The pallet shelters need to move from Kingsdale as promised. It’s already past the six months. There are many negative impacts to the area businesses, families, children, schools, and parks. To be fair other locations should be explored. Also this doesn’t seem to be an emergency when the homeless count in 2020 was 176 and 2021 was down to 92. 71% in south and 29% in north. 35% from Redondo Beach.
I support moving the pallet shelter from the Kingsdale location but as an alternative to BCHD use the vacant lot near the main post office on Catalina. Seems like a better solution for those concerned about proximity to schools. If you can't move it shut it down as you promised.
I see no reason to approve an inferior solution, such as pallet shelters, when BCHD has 140 rooms leftover from the 200 hospital rooms from the failed South Bay Hospital. BCHDs consultants state that best practice allows the 514 building to be used for another 25 years. Security and services using inside rooms and the existing cafeteria would be much more effective than pallet shelters. Kill the pallet shelter move and takeover our publicly purchased and owned South Bay Hospital rooms.
I am a 7 year resident of Paulina Avenue. I am writing to you today to oppose the recommendation for the pallet shelter to be moved to the Beach Cities Health District location. The City will incur costly moving expenses that can be better allocated to other services to our residents. The current pallet shelter was created using the blending and braiding of County and Cares ACT funds. Both funds might not be available again so the City would be making a premature financial decision without even knowing the fiscal impact.
I would also like to bring to your attention that there are 4 schools within .25 radius of this proposed site. (Towers, Beryl, Parras, and Redondo Union) Thee high school alone has 3000 kids. The sheer number of students that could be impacted, in addition to the residents that could be impacted from the Beach Cities location doesn't sound like a wise choice. While I understand it can be a challenge to find the perfect fit, I challenge the City to find locations that have minimal impacts to students and residents.
Lastly, I request that you do extensive community outreach to the surrounding schools, residents and other stakeholders who could potentially be impacted BEFORE you make a decision to move the pallet shelter or add an additional one.
I strongly oppose the move given the proximity to 4 schools, cancer patients receiving treatment at BCHD and residents that are closer to BCHD than any other potential location for the pallet housing. The discussion should focus on not whether someone gets housing, but who qualifies for housing in redondo’s borders, and specifically what steps are taken to screen the risk of each person (assuming they are allowed in close proximity to residents, etc). This is something that we as a community need to establish. Unhoused individuals that pose no threat to the community and have some nexus to our community shouldn’t be an issue, but many unhoused individuals have mental or drug issues that make them a greater risk to our community, our children and our elderly. What type of screening or predictive analytics are being done to ensure that the people admitted to these facilities (in close proximity to residences) pose no threat to our community/public safety? How are we as a city working on some intake assessment that proactively protects public safety? If someone is deemed unsafe based on an assessment and data analysis they should be removed from any community until they receive treatment and or mental health care AWAY from residents. So much of the focus has been on housing first, but none of the conversation has focused on public safety and how we are protecting our community. Why are the rights of unhoused individuals that ALSO pose a risk to public safety put above the rights of those paying for their housing? If we pay, when do we have a say about who gets to stay and who has to go? The progression of the homeless issue will eventually revolve around assessing risk and then determining who can stay in ANY community. How else do you protect public safety? After the fact policing will not suffice…proactive management will help put residents at ease about who is allowed to stay in their neighborhood.
The City must al least consider a move of the present Kingsdale homeless shelter but it MUST NOT consider the BCHD location.
The BCHD location is surrounded by many residences, commercial businesses and is in the walking path for school children attending RUHS, Parras, Beryl and Towers schools. There must be other neutral locations that will better serve the homeless and not put the residents at any risk. BCHD already recognizes the risks by informing their tenants of the possible move and telling them there will be "on-site security around the clock". Why is that necessary unless there are security and safety risks?
I would like to report what the situation is like as someone who lives walking distance to the current shelter and can provide an in depth experience. Contrary to what your staff say who do not have a grasp of the situation as they are not the ones there 24/7, the homeless influx has happened in the area. There has undeniably been a significant increase of transients at/near the location. There is also a crazy increase of trash left all over the streets. Your ordinance is also unsuccessful as I have seen plenty of overnight campers on Kingsdale. What else would you expect?
For lack of better words, it was nothing short of INCOMPETENT to have placed this by a residential area, right by schools, a park and the largest commercial retailer in our City, our Galleria. Urging you to remove this from Kingsdale immediately.
City council, the city attorney and the mayor must be held accountable for moving the shelter as promised. The Kingsdale location has done its share, housing the pallet shelter for OVER the allowed 6 months. The local area and businesses have all had major adverse effects from the current location and operation of the shelter. The current Kingsdale site IS located within 200 yards of a neighborhood, a park, and two RBUSD schools. Since the opening of the shelter of Kingsdale, students have been witness to various crime, quality of life, and emotional traumas that NONE OF US CONSENTED TO and which we opposed from the initial suggestion of this site. Let's remind the council that this site is THE CLOSEST TO ANY RBUSD SCHOOLS, AND WAS THE MOST EXPENSIVE TO BUILD OUT. Now it's time to make the decision to move the shelter as promised. Council said it could easily be moved and must follow through despite costs to move.
It is unfair to the students and families that we solely endure the increase in crime and safety issues related to the location of the shelter on Kingsdale. Students have seen homeless people overdose in the front yards, had their belongings and toys stolen from the front yards in broad daylight, been cussed and yelled at by belligerent individuals, and three neighbors had their cars vandalized by a homeless individual. Middle schoolers(who often walk themselves to Adams) have to manage dealing with homeless individuals under the influence and defecating on the sidewalk. The area is littered with trash.One neighbor said "in the 27 years I've lived here, I've never seen problems with the homeless until the shelter." (Three of his car windows and door were smashed by a homeless man recently.) Don't be fooled, this is a result of the shelters proximity to our homes and schools. If one actually does the research you can hear over and over again about the negative issues the local businesses have endured since the shelter was put at Kingsdale. Having to hire armed security, employee safety concerns related to homeless threats in staff parking lots, loss sales, theft, etc etc.
Council MUST move the shelter from Kingsdale as promised.
I support the city moving the pallet shelter from the Kingsdale location to the proposed location at the BCHD. The original agreement that the city council made to establish the pallet shelter was that it would be at Kingsdale for six months then moved another location in South Redondo or shut down. It is past time for the council to keep its word. The Kingsdale neighborhood has done it’s share.
There has been a significant increase in issues involving the homeless since the shelter opened to both the residents and the businesses in the Kingsdale area. However, I do believe that the Redondo Beach P.D. could have been more proactive in mitigating these issues with a greater police presence in the area and been more responsive to calls from the area businesses and residents. Harbor Interfaith and City Net should have done a better job managing the area around the shelter.
Moving the pallet homes to the BCHD site would allow council to keep its’s word to move the shelter, give the police and service organizations another shot at better managing the area around the shelter and buying more time for the city to consider other locations for the pallet homes to be rotated to.
Locating the Pallet Shelter adjacent to the Galleria undermines the efforts being made to revitalize the area to once again make it a huge revenue generator for the city.
No location in the city is ideal for this project. The pallet homes should be rotated between the five districts, each hosting for a six month period.
Finally it appears that the E Comments from the July 6th cancelled meeting regarding this issue were not included this time around. Most of these comments were from those that supported moving the shelter out of Kingsdale. Seems that once again the concerns of the nearby businesses and the residents that live near the current shelter are being ignored.
By allowing the BCHD to "use" or obtain a "Temporary Use Permit" for housing Homeless individuals ON Publicly Owned land that is not Zoned for habitation would create a Slippery Slope, that WILL lead into the "argument" that well... this land is already being used for HOUSING FOLKS... SO why not just continue using this land by changing the name to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which would NOT need a Public Vote to OBTAIN the Building Permits to build the BCHD HLC RCFE facility. Anyone who THINKS that is NOT what is going to transpire IS kidding themselves! In 6- months when this "Temporary Use Permit" is going to expire OR IF the BCHD location is granted the Shelter Crisis Declaration (Something that the Kingsdale property COULD also apply for) THAT will be their segue/GOLDEN TICKET to getting their RCFE build without ANY further PUBLIC input or review!!! Who ever IN their Right Mind would think of putting any type of Homeless Shelter in the parking lot behind a building FOR THE GOOD OF THE HOMELESS??? IT is not for the good of the Homeless or for the Good of the Tax payers of the three beach cities, Especially Redondo Beach. IT IS ALL FOR THE GOOD OF TOM BAKLAY AND BCHD!!!
Those who are saying the Kingsdale location is successful line are simply using that because it’s not in THEIR backyard. If that’s the case and you want to keep it at Kingsdale you better be putting it in other parts of town as well. You don’t put something this unpopular in one area permanently, that is absolutely unfair regardless of where it is. If you keep it, you better be rotating it or taking it elsewhere altogether. There obviously ISN’T a perfect location in Redondo Beach as you see over and over again and you will NEVER make everyone happy so the perfect solution is a rotating shelter District by District. If you can’t do that, then we had a 6 month trail and it should be done and over with now. Must be moved from Kingsdale, that was your promise.
I am empathetic to those opposing BCHD however Kingsdale has taken the brunt of this mess as you introduced it here and it must be relocated. It was promised it would move after 6 months and that is exactly what should be happening. You are on video and official minutes stating just that. Move homeless shelter out of Kingsdale and either relocate or shut down. Simple.
I support moving the shelters to the BCHD location. This location is zoned for this purpose. The mayor and council promised to move it anyway. Do what politicians usually don't do, follow through with your promise.
Using the Shelter Crisis Declaration makes sense. To adequately help solve the homeless crisis, a highly successful city like ours should be setting the standard. We should have a shelter in each district. Why would we move the Kingsdale shelter if it has been successful? Try to find a way to make both locations work. Amend the zoning if needed. Ask the county to continue an emergency declaration due to homelessness even if the Covid-19 crisis has waned. Much of this issue is beyond on city's or one county's control, please continue to work with our sister cities and LA County to develop a coordinated response.
I support discussion (minus the toxic discourse which undermines any progress) of where to move the pallet shelter where we have lived out our 6+ months of negative impacts, some pretty serious, plus the daily visual impact at the Kingsdale location. It is absolutely in and a part of my neighborhood, way too close to families and in my daily life as I go for groceries, sundries, dental and more, every day. My neighbors and I have been living with this major impact on our quality of life for too long now. In that spirit it does need to be moved.
It is said through well studied analysis in looking at our city as a whole, that the least impacting location for placement is the Metro lot, south side of Marine, within city boundaries. It is fairly well hidden from view, MUCH further away from any Redondo Beach homes, further from major retail, it's clean, fenced in and the neighboring industrial complexes have security for better safety than what is currently being experienced for families on 182nd St. To continue to ignore and dismiss the value of these families' safety would be devastating and shameful. This needs to be more of a priority.
If that spot can't work, then in keeping the promise to move after 6 months, consider as 2nd choice a pre-approved So Redondo location, although I would not wish any of the impacts we have had to live through at Kingsdale onto any other Redondo Beach family so please ensure it goes somewhere more isolated than the Kingsdale. We can't continue in this vein as a city.
Note, the unbearable impacts I refer to are not necessarily coming from INSIDE the facility, but rather the fringe. One of the talking points defending its current location is in defense of those who occupy the pallet homes. That is missing the point, which is that impacts are on the OUTSIDE of the facility, brought on by those who cannot or will not agree to the protocols to be accepted into the program.
If none of the above can work, then I suggest considering going outside city limits possibly partnering with another city that has more open land so these unintended unavoidable consequences don't have to be inflicted on anymore Redondo Beach families. Thank you
The work done to create, manage and ultimately find permanent housing for over 25 people via the pallet shelter is extremely admirable. It is most definitely a step in the right direction. However, it is not a system without flaws. While there are regulations to deter loitering within 500 ft. of the current shelter, there has been a significant uptick in the homeless population in Redondo Beach. The act of being homeless is not a crime, but part of the reason we are seeing an increase in the homeless population in Redondo Beach (and all over California) is because many convicted felons are being released early from prisons due to lack of funds. That means that we are also seeing an increase in convicted sex offenders on our streets. Is the BCHD parking lot (that is completely surrounded by residential homes and elementary schools) really the best place for the next location? The parking lot of Dominguez Park (just down the street from the BCHD) has become its own homeless encampment. The playground is decorated in graffitti, there is trash all over the ground and I've personally witnessed drug use in the parking lot. If the shelter is relocated to BCHD, I anticipate the encampment at that park to only increase in size. I'm not saying move it to North Redondo vs. South Redondo, but what I am saying, is it needs to be away from so many schools and residential areas. The pallet shelters are making great strides to help those who want to be helped, but what about others who don't want help and prefer living on the streets? They unfortunately end up loitering the in area.
And if it is only a trial move for 6 months, what will happen at the end? How much are these moves costing RB taxpayers? Why not just find a permanent location AWAY from so many residential homes and schools? I urge you to please reconsider this move. This is not what is best for our community. One question that did come to mind, do Target Corporation attorneys have anything to do with the pressure to move? I imagine that the Redondo Beach Target does not want to be located immediately next to a homeless shelter? I just wonder if there is more the the story that we are hearing...
Redondo Beach should be extremely proud of the pallet shelter program, and the fact that other cities are looking to emulate what we are doing here. The program is a shining example of how to address the growing homeless crisis in a manner that is both humane and effective. However, when the City Council originally voted to place the pallet houses in North Redondo first for six months, and then move them to South Redondo, many of us in North Redondo questioned whether or not that would actually happen. City Council should make good on their promise and move the pallet shelter to South Redondo. We are one Redondo and should work together as one city to address the homeless crisis.
I have watched the success of the Pallet Project with pride for RB. It has been amazingly successful. If the Pallets are moved to BCHD, I worry that it will be visible to all the obstructors that use the gym everyday. It will not be a danger to the folks at Silverado. For the safety of the Project it might be better at the Shelter Site 1-2A. The folks will have a beautiful view of the water, and be safe from protestors.
We don’t need homeless shelters anywhere in North Redondo OR south Redondo. Redondo beach is a family friendly and child friendly community, and in the last year, the number of homeless walking around North Redondo has multiplied. I’m sick of it! Our children should be able to ride a bike around the neighborhood or play at Anderson Park without having to worry for their safety. It’s absolutely ridiculous that we pay these kind of taxes to house those less fortunate, who in turn put our children in danger and take away our freedom to take a walk.
Kingsdale area has done it’s share. The pallet shelters need to move from Kingsdale as promised. It’s already past the six months. There are many negative impacts to the area businesses, families, children, schools, and parks. To be fair other locations should be explored. Also this doesn’t seem to be an emergency when the homeless count in 2020 was 176 and 2021 was down to 92. 71% in south and 29% in north. 35% from Redondo Beach.
I support moving the pallet shelter from the Kingsdale location but as an alternative to BCHD use the vacant lot near the main post office on Catalina. Seems like a better solution for those concerned about proximity to schools. If you can't move it shut it down as you promised.
I see no reason to approve an inferior solution, such as pallet shelters, when BCHD has 140 rooms leftover from the 200 hospital rooms from the failed South Bay Hospital. BCHDs consultants state that best practice allows the 514 building to be used for another 25 years. Security and services using inside rooms and the existing cafeteria would be much more effective than pallet shelters. Kill the pallet shelter move and takeover our publicly purchased and owned South Bay Hospital rooms.
I am a 7 year resident of Paulina Avenue. I am writing to you today to oppose the recommendation for the pallet shelter to be moved to the Beach Cities Health District location. The City will incur costly moving expenses that can be better allocated to other services to our residents. The current pallet shelter was created using the blending and braiding of County and Cares ACT funds. Both funds might not be available again so the City would be making a premature financial decision without even knowing the fiscal impact.
I would also like to bring to your attention that there are 4 schools within .25 radius of this proposed site. (Towers, Beryl, Parras, and Redondo Union) Thee high school alone has 3000 kids. The sheer number of students that could be impacted, in addition to the residents that could be impacted from the Beach Cities location doesn't sound like a wise choice. While I understand it can be a challenge to find the perfect fit, I challenge the City to find locations that have minimal impacts to students and residents.
Lastly, I request that you do extensive community outreach to the surrounding schools, residents and other stakeholders who could potentially be impacted BEFORE you make a decision to move the pallet shelter or add an additional one.
I strongly oppose the move given the proximity to 4 schools, cancer patients receiving treatment at BCHD and residents that are closer to BCHD than any other potential location for the pallet housing. The discussion should focus on not whether someone gets housing, but who qualifies for housing in redondo’s borders, and specifically what steps are taken to screen the risk of each person (assuming they are allowed in close proximity to residents, etc). This is something that we as a community need to establish. Unhoused individuals that pose no threat to the community and have some nexus to our community shouldn’t be an issue, but many unhoused individuals have mental or drug issues that make them a greater risk to our community, our children and our elderly. What type of screening or predictive analytics are being done to ensure that the people admitted to these facilities (in close proximity to residences) pose no threat to our community/public safety? How are we as a city working on some intake assessment that proactively protects public safety? If someone is deemed unsafe based on an assessment and data analysis they should be removed from any community until they receive treatment and or mental health care AWAY from residents. So much of the focus has been on housing first, but none of the conversation has focused on public safety and how we are protecting our community. Why are the rights of unhoused individuals that ALSO pose a risk to public safety put above the rights of those paying for their housing? If we pay, when do we have a say about who gets to stay and who has to go? The progression of the homeless issue will eventually revolve around assessing risk and then determining who can stay in ANY community. How else do you protect public safety? After the fact policing will not suffice…proactive management will help put residents at ease about who is allowed to stay in their neighborhood.
The City must al least consider a move of the present Kingsdale homeless shelter but it MUST NOT consider the BCHD location.
The BCHD location is surrounded by many residences, commercial businesses and is in the walking path for school children attending RUHS, Parras, Beryl and Towers schools. There must be other neutral locations that will better serve the homeless and not put the residents at any risk. BCHD already recognizes the risks by informing their tenants of the possible move and telling them there will be "on-site security around the clock". Why is that necessary unless there are security and safety risks?
I would like to report what the situation is like as someone who lives walking distance to the current shelter and can provide an in depth experience. Contrary to what your staff say who do not have a grasp of the situation as they are not the ones there 24/7, the homeless influx has happened in the area. There has undeniably been a significant increase of transients at/near the location. There is also a crazy increase of trash left all over the streets. Your ordinance is also unsuccessful as I have seen plenty of overnight campers on Kingsdale. What else would you expect?
For lack of better words, it was nothing short of INCOMPETENT to have placed this by a residential area, right by schools, a park and the largest commercial retailer in our City, our Galleria. Urging you to remove this from Kingsdale immediately.
City council, the city attorney and the mayor must be held accountable for moving the shelter as promised. The Kingsdale location has done its share, housing the pallet shelter for OVER the allowed 6 months. The local area and businesses have all had major adverse effects from the current location and operation of the shelter. The current Kingsdale site IS located within 200 yards of a neighborhood, a park, and two RBUSD schools. Since the opening of the shelter of Kingsdale, students have been witness to various crime, quality of life, and emotional traumas that NONE OF US CONSENTED TO and which we opposed from the initial suggestion of this site. Let's remind the council that this site is THE CLOSEST TO ANY RBUSD SCHOOLS, AND WAS THE MOST EXPENSIVE TO BUILD OUT. Now it's time to make the decision to move the shelter as promised. Council said it could easily be moved and must follow through despite costs to move.
It is unfair to the students and families that we solely endure the increase in crime and safety issues related to the location of the shelter on Kingsdale. Students have seen homeless people overdose in the front yards, had their belongings and toys stolen from the front yards in broad daylight, been cussed and yelled at by belligerent individuals, and three neighbors had their cars vandalized by a homeless individual. Middle schoolers(who often walk themselves to Adams) have to manage dealing with homeless individuals under the influence and defecating on the sidewalk. The area is littered with trash.One neighbor said "in the 27 years I've lived here, I've never seen problems with the homeless until the shelter." (Three of his car windows and door were smashed by a homeless man recently.) Don't be fooled, this is a result of the shelters proximity to our homes and schools. If one actually does the research you can hear over and over again about the negative issues the local businesses have endured since the shelter was put at Kingsdale. Having to hire armed security, employee safety concerns related to homeless threats in staff parking lots, loss sales, theft, etc etc.
Council MUST move the shelter from Kingsdale as promised.
I support the city moving the pallet shelter from the Kingsdale location to the proposed location at the BCHD. The original agreement that the city council made to establish the pallet shelter was that it would be at Kingsdale for six months then moved another location in South Redondo or shut down. It is past time for the council to keep its word. The Kingsdale neighborhood has done it’s share.
There has been a significant increase in issues involving the homeless since the shelter opened to both the residents and the businesses in the Kingsdale area. However, I do believe that the Redondo Beach P.D. could have been more proactive in mitigating these issues with a greater police presence in the area and been more responsive to calls from the area businesses and residents. Harbor Interfaith and City Net should have done a better job managing the area around the shelter.
Moving the pallet homes to the BCHD site would allow council to keep its’s word to move the shelter, give the police and service organizations another shot at better managing the area around the shelter and buying more time for the city to consider other locations for the pallet homes to be rotated to.
Locating the Pallet Shelter adjacent to the Galleria undermines the efforts being made to revitalize the area to once again make it a huge revenue generator for the city.
No location in the city is ideal for this project. The pallet homes should be rotated between the five districts, each hosting for a six month period.
Finally it appears that the E Comments from the July 6th cancelled meeting regarding this issue were not included this time around. Most of these comments were from those that supported moving the shelter out of Kingsdale. Seems that once again the concerns of the nearby businesses and the residents that live near the current shelter are being ignored.
By allowing the BCHD to "use" or obtain a "Temporary Use Permit" for housing Homeless individuals ON Publicly Owned land that is not Zoned for habitation would create a Slippery Slope, that WILL lead into the "argument" that well... this land is already being used for HOUSING FOLKS... SO why not just continue using this land by changing the name to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) which would NOT need a Public Vote to OBTAIN the Building Permits to build the BCHD HLC RCFE facility. Anyone who THINKS that is NOT what is going to transpire IS kidding themselves! In 6- months when this "Temporary Use Permit" is going to expire OR IF the BCHD location is granted the Shelter Crisis Declaration (Something that the Kingsdale property COULD also apply for) THAT will be their segue/GOLDEN TICKET to getting their RCFE build without ANY further PUBLIC input or review!!! Who ever IN their Right Mind would think of putting any type of Homeless Shelter in the parking lot behind a building FOR THE GOOD OF THE HOMELESS??? IT is not for the good of the Homeless or for the Good of the Tax payers of the three beach cities, Especially Redondo Beach. IT IS ALL FOR THE GOOD OF TOM BAKLAY AND BCHD!!!
Those who are saying the Kingsdale location is successful line are simply using that because it’s not in THEIR backyard. If that’s the case and you want to keep it at Kingsdale you better be putting it in other parts of town as well. You don’t put something this unpopular in one area permanently, that is absolutely unfair regardless of where it is. If you keep it, you better be rotating it or taking it elsewhere altogether. There obviously ISN’T a perfect location in Redondo Beach as you see over and over again and you will NEVER make everyone happy so the perfect solution is a rotating shelter District by District. If you can’t do that, then we had a 6 month trail and it should be done and over with now. Must be moved from Kingsdale, that was your promise.
I am empathetic to those opposing BCHD however Kingsdale has taken the brunt of this mess as you introduced it here and it must be relocated. It was promised it would move after 6 months and that is exactly what should be happening. You are on video and official minutes stating just that. Move homeless shelter out of Kingsdale and either relocate or shut down. Simple.
I support moving the shelters to the BCHD location. This location is zoned for this purpose. The mayor and council promised to move it anyway. Do what politicians usually don't do, follow through with your promise.
Using the Shelter Crisis Declaration makes sense. To adequately help solve the homeless crisis, a highly successful city like ours should be setting the standard. We should have a shelter in each district. Why would we move the Kingsdale shelter if it has been successful? Try to find a way to make both locations work. Amend the zoning if needed. Ask the county to continue an emergency declaration due to homelessness even if the Covid-19 crisis has waned. Much of this issue is beyond on city's or one county's control, please continue to work with our sister cities and LA County to develop a coordinated response.
I support discussion (minus the toxic discourse which undermines any progress) of where to move the pallet shelter where we have lived out our 6+ months of negative impacts, some pretty serious, plus the daily visual impact at the Kingsdale location. It is absolutely in and a part of my neighborhood, way too close to families and in my daily life as I go for groceries, sundries, dental and more, every day. My neighbors and I have been living with this major impact on our quality of life for too long now. In that spirit it does need to be moved.
It is said through well studied analysis in looking at our city as a whole, that the least impacting location for placement is the Metro lot, south side of Marine, within city boundaries. It is fairly well hidden from view, MUCH further away from any Redondo Beach homes, further from major retail, it's clean, fenced in and the neighboring industrial complexes have security for better safety than what is currently being experienced for families on 182nd St. To continue to ignore and dismiss the value of these families' safety would be devastating and shameful. This needs to be more of a priority.
If that spot can't work, then in keeping the promise to move after 6 months, consider as 2nd choice a pre-approved So Redondo location, although I would not wish any of the impacts we have had to live through at Kingsdale onto any other Redondo Beach family so please ensure it goes somewhere more isolated than the Kingsdale. We can't continue in this vein as a city.
Note, the unbearable impacts I refer to are not necessarily coming from INSIDE the facility, but rather the fringe. One of the talking points defending its current location is in defense of those who occupy the pallet homes. That is missing the point, which is that impacts are on the OUTSIDE of the facility, brought on by those who cannot or will not agree to the protocols to be accepted into the program.
If none of the above can work, then I suggest considering going outside city limits possibly partnering with another city that has more open land so these unintended unavoidable consequences don't have to be inflicted on anymore Redondo Beach families. Thank you
The work done to create, manage and ultimately find permanent housing for over 25 people via the pallet shelter is extremely admirable. It is most definitely a step in the right direction. However, it is not a system without flaws. While there are regulations to deter loitering within 500 ft. of the current shelter, there has been a significant uptick in the homeless population in Redondo Beach. The act of being homeless is not a crime, but part of the reason we are seeing an increase in the homeless population in Redondo Beach (and all over California) is because many convicted felons are being released early from prisons due to lack of funds. That means that we are also seeing an increase in convicted sex offenders on our streets. Is the BCHD parking lot (that is completely surrounded by residential homes and elementary schools) really the best place for the next location? The parking lot of Dominguez Park (just down the street from the BCHD) has become its own homeless encampment. The playground is decorated in graffitti, there is trash all over the ground and I've personally witnessed drug use in the parking lot. If the shelter is relocated to BCHD, I anticipate the encampment at that park to only increase in size. I'm not saying move it to North Redondo vs. South Redondo, but what I am saying, is it needs to be away from so many schools and residential areas. The pallet shelters are making great strides to help those who want to be helped, but what about others who don't want help and prefer living on the streets? They unfortunately end up loitering the in area.
And if it is only a trial move for 6 months, what will happen at the end? How much are these moves costing RB taxpayers? Why not just find a permanent location AWAY from so many residential homes and schools? I urge you to please reconsider this move. This is not what is best for our community. One question that did come to mind, do Target Corporation attorneys have anything to do with the pressure to move? I imagine that the Redondo Beach Target does not want to be located immediately next to a homeless shelter? I just wonder if there is more the the story that we are hearing...
Redondo Beach should be extremely proud of the pallet shelter program, and the fact that other cities are looking to emulate what we are doing here. The program is a shining example of how to address the growing homeless crisis in a manner that is both humane and effective. However, when the City Council originally voted to place the pallet houses in North Redondo first for six months, and then move them to South Redondo, many of us in North Redondo questioned whether or not that would actually happen. City Council should make good on their promise and move the pallet shelter to South Redondo. We are one Redondo and should work together as one city to address the homeless crisis.
I have watched the success of the Pallet Project with pride for RB. It has been amazingly successful. If the Pallets are moved to BCHD, I worry that it will be visible to all the obstructors that use the gym everyday. It will not be a danger to the folks at Silverado. For the safety of the Project it might be better at the Shelter Site 1-2A. The folks will have a beautiful view of the water, and be safe from protestors.
We don’t need homeless shelters anywhere in North Redondo OR south Redondo. Redondo beach is a family friendly and child friendly community, and in the last year, the number of homeless walking around North Redondo has multiplied. I’m sick of it! Our children should be able to ride a bike around the neighborhood or play at Anderson Park without having to worry for their safety. It’s absolutely ridiculous that we pay these kind of taxes to house those less fortunate, who in turn put our children in danger and take away our freedom to take a walk.
We DON'T need a homeless encampment at BCHD. It is too close to schools and private homes.