Riverside unlikely to reconsider $20.1 million grant it rejected for homeless housing – Press Enterprise

Homeless advocates face an uphill battle in their efforts to get the Riverside City Council to reconsider its rejection of $20.1 million to convert a motel into homeless housing.

They’ve got to get one of the four council members who voted against the project to change their mind and ask for a second vote.

RELATED: Riverside is sending back $20.1 million homeless housing state grant

Only a council member who voted on the winning side of a proposal can bring it back to the council, Riverside officials said. That would have to happen no later than the end of February.

Furthermore, three of the four elected leaders who opposed the project in January, said in interviews that they would not move to have the project revisited.

Still, advocates are asking the council to reconsider its rejection of state dollars to transform a motel on University Avenue into permanent homeless housing.

On Tuesday, Jan. 13, council members voted against accepting money that would have converted the Quality Inn Motel, at 1590 University Ave., into 114 studio apartments for residents who are homeless, have physical disabilities or have lower incomes. If the project were to be built, the city would buy the motel and convert it to housing.

In line with their votes last year on whether to seek state money for the project, Councilmembers Clarissa Cervantes, Jim Perry and Steve Hemenway voted earlier this month to accept the money.

Councilmember Chuck Conder, who was absent from the May meeting that resulted in a split vote on the city’s application for the state funds, this month joined Councilmembers Philip Falcone, Steven Robillard and Sean Mill in opposing the project.

In May, Mayor Patricia Lock Dawson cast the tie-breaking vote to send the city’s application for state funds forward. In November, the city learned it had won the grant.

Lock Dawson could not immediately be reached Friday, Jan. 30.

Falcone, Robillard and Mill said they will not move to bring the project back. Conder could not be reached for comment.

Mill said that his opposition to the project comes from his belief that the “housing first” model to address homelessness has “always been a failure.”

“Housing first” is an approach aimed at reducing homelessness by focusing on providing permanent housing without prerequisites on those needing a place to live.

Falcone said Friday, Jan. 30, that he deeply values the rules and procedures of the council and thus would not bring the item back for reconsideration.

A reconsideration can only occur “when new facts have come to light that will make the previous vote null and void,” said Falcone, the chair of the council’s Rules/Processes Committee. “I am not aware of any new facts on this topic since the initial vote that would legally permit a reconsideration.”

Robillard said Friday that his “position has not changed” and he had no plans to bring the proposal back.

Meanwhile, 32 agencies have sent letters in support for the project, Cervantes said. They include the United Way and the office of her sister, state Sen. Sabrina Cervantes, D-Riverside.

Vonya Quarles, executive director of Starting Over Inc., a nonprofit group in Riverside that provides transitional housing, has been vocal in her support of the project and wants the council to reconsider.

“The funding can be used to provide dignified housing solutions for people who want it,” Quarles said Monday, Jan. 26. “This is $20 million extra dollars that the city wouldn’t have to spend to address one of the most complex issues we face.”

Mill, who has not changed his opposition to the project since May, doubled down on his decision Monday.

Mill previously referred to “housing first” as a failure because it gives someone a house without requiring treatment.

Mill’s concern lies with the need to get mental health and substance abuse help for homeless people before simply giving them housing.

“We need to go forward with what’s working, but we also need to stop doing what’s not working and put together a hybrid approach,” Mill said. “Bring in housing first, along with treatment and transitional housing, and I’m not going to change my position on this project, because this project doesn’t offer that.”

Mill said the housing should have prerequisites for residents — such as sobriety, participation in treatment or compliance in mental health programs — especially for those with documented mental health and substance abuse disorders.

He added that he was advocating for using other state tools, such as California Senate Bill 43, which expands the definition of “gravely disabled,” and CARE Court, a framework to get support forpeople with mental health and substance disorders support, rather than the $20.1 million grant.

“My goal is recovery, accountability and safer neighborhoods,” Mill said. “Not permanent street management.”