It was a week of mixed blessings for the Casa Esperanza homeless shelter on Cacique Street. At long last, the 12-bed detox facility in the shelter’s two front rooms were finally closed down and the operation reopened last Friday in a bigger, better, and more therapeutic single family home on Placido Avenue in downtown Santa Barbara right off West Figueroa Street.
The relocation effort was many years in the making and involved a bureaucratically complex dance between many governmental entities. But the end result will provide 14-day detox accommodations for those without means far from the maddening crowd of the Cacique Street homeless shelter where drugs and alcohol are never hard to obtain. The new facility will offer a highly structured detox regimen with constant in-home supervision in a refurbished residence replete with a backyard. Mayor Helene Schneider described last Friday’s open house as “fantastic,” noting that the new location will provide a much better environment for those dealing with addiction issues.
The deal would not have happened had the City Council not voted a year ago to spend $865,000 of Redevelopment Agency funds to buy the home on behalf of the Santa Barbara Housing Authority, which in turn will lease the property to the Council on Alcohol and Drug Addiction, which will operate on funds provided by the county’s Department of Alcohol, Drugs and Mental Health. Because there are more rooms in the new facility than at Casa Esperanza, there be greater flexibility in maintaining the sexual separation of the clients. As a practical effect, that means women seeking to detox will not have to be shipped to facilities in Lompoc and Santa Maria as had been the case when the facility was located at Casa Esperanza.
And for Santa Barbara’s homeless shelter, it frees up two big rooms, one of which will be used to provide health services and the other for job and social-service orientation for new arrivals. In addition, it will allow Casa managers to redesign the shelter such that clients have only one way to enter and another way to exit. Currently, clients enter and exit at the same location at Casa, making it difficult for managers to know — or control — who’s coming and going.
For supporters of the Casa, this signifies a marked improvement in the delivery of services at not one but two locations. But for the Milpas Community Association (MCA), long critical of Casa’s collateral impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods, it’s a case of too little too late. This Monday, MCA director Sharon Byrne dropped copies of a 170-page document written in the dense language of a land-use consultant alleging various ways the Casa shelter has violated the terms and conditions of its conditional use permit. Byrne and the MCA want the city’s Planning Commission to hold a full scale hearing on the matter within 60 days, and not just issue a brief report.
Byrne contends that the Casa management has failed to do adequate outreach to neighboring residents and businesses to ensure its clients don’t disrupt the neighborhood. She claimed, for example, that a recently adopted program to release homeless jail inmates to Casa has led to violent encounters between shelter guests and local business owners. “We’re not just talking about peeing in the doorway,” Byrne said. “We’ve beyond that. We’re talking assaults.” Likewise, Byrne said Casa managers have failed to provide clear enough direction to guests as to what conduct in the neighborhood will be tolerated. She acknowledged Casa does have a “good neighbor” policy but said it was too squishy and wordy for the average person to know what’s expected.
Casa executive Mike Foley said the good neighbor policy extends along Milpas Street all the way from Canon Perdido to Cabrillo Boulevard and includes the possibility of expulsion. He said the jail-release program is hardly exclusive to the Casa. And he added that two clients are required to patrol the area for trash and report on any offensive behavior by street people they encounter. Casa personnel, he added, regularly meet with neighboring business owners to ensure due security precautions are being taken.
That being said, Foley stated he hadn’t had time to digest MCA’s bill of particulars and could not properly respond. Likewise, city Community Development chief Paul Casey said his office will thoroughly investigate the allegations before deciding the appropriate course of action. Whether the Planning Commission holds a special hearing on the shelter within the next 60 days, as MCA demands, has yet to be determined. But every two years, the Planning Commission reviews the shelter for compliance with the terms of its conditional use permit, and that hearing is scheduled to take place this September.



Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Myspace





Previous Month



Comments
Government Acronym Incest:
RDA buys house for SBHA to lease to CADA with funds (taxes) from SBC ADMH.
I hope MCA demands are addressed ASAP so they aren't SOL.
local_sb (anonymous profile)
July 3, 2012 at 9:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Detox is a medical term. Does this place have around the clock medical supervision?
taz (anonymous profile)
July 3, 2012 at 10:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I see some people are continuing their charm offensive that has been just so effective in the past. But this advocacy they really are promoting at other websites to spread around the homeless problem to other places is gonna fly like a Lead Zeppelin.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
July 3, 2012 at 10:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I really don't want to hear anything more about addiction and alcoholism from Sharon Byrne until she has been seriously addicted to a drug for at least one year.
Why does she never have actual proof for her allegations? Where's the upset businessowner? Could they be false?
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 3, 2012 at 11:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think it is great news about the new detox center. This will be very helpful for many of the friends on the streets. As far as Casa, I think we need to continue to rally around them to support them and also peace make between business owners and those who use the shelter services. More community involvement will perhaps help.
Jeff Shaffer
syncman (anonymous profile)
July 4, 2012 at 6:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)
One thing that that is never mentioned in these articles is that the detox attached to Casa used to be co-ed...and that it was a CADA decision to stop admitting women because, apparently, the waiting list for men was longer. Okay, but it's very difficult to get a woman to agree to detox for various reasons and sometimes the only opportunity you have is at that very moment...and when you have to make them wait until one of the north county detox facilities has an opening, then you lose that opportunity, and another woman remains in her own personal hell.
As far as Casa contributing to the Milpas mess...well, has anyone actually looked around that area? The homeless and other disenfranchised were hanging around down there long before Casa opened. Why? Because it's a crappy neighborhood. The further you go down Milpas the more industrialized, unattractive and...well, raggedy...the area becomes, and it's easy for unattractive, raggedy people to blend in there. Casa Esperanza is nothing more than a target for the Milpas haters who need an object to point their fingers at. That neighborhood has always sucked, and Casa provides a convenient scapegoat.
realitycheck447 (anonymous profile)
July 4, 2012 at 11:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Without the "Milpas mess", Sharon Byrne would have nothing to talk about.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 4, 2012 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I'd rather look at Milpas with its old buildings than look at glitzy upscale State Street.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 4, 2012 at 3:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Amen Bill.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 4, 2012 at 3:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I like the Jeff Shaffer/syncman suggestions; making peace with Casa Esperanzas neighbors and community involvement but I don't know how that would work.
I am sympathetic to the Milpas area residents and business that have been delegated this burden of social services function. These services should be distributed throughout the city, county, state, evenly. We need a national strategy so that liberally inclined communities don't end up bearing the burden of our national issues.
We must keep in mind that this marriage of government, non-profit social services and business is the by-product of our dissolution of state run social services in favor of non-profits and religious organizations. Businesses 30 years ago were adamant that government was the problem; centralized, bloated, lazy, overpaid and over-bearing. So now we have the same business types complaining about the new replacement system that is of their doing.
Ironically the city is taking the lead by moving services throughout the city. Opposition, stonewalling and scapegoating has been instigated by the same conservative leaders and council members who have no solutions. Conservative council members use the issues to get elected but have no real strategies or are at least conflicted. For evolving solutions consider changing your vote next time for more reasonable and solution oriented candidates.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 4, 2012 at 11:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The drunk bums are there because the abundantly nearby booze and convenience stores sell cheap malt liquor in 40 ounce bottles.
Which came first, the bum or the booze?
The panhandler, or the enabler?
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
July 5, 2012 at 11:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I'm happy to give a hand to anyone who wants help, but I refuse to let them drag me down.
John_Adams makes the point, that applies to all of the State St. area.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 5, 2012 at 12:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Unless you work next door to Casa then you need to shut mouths you know nothing. Just people that only know how to talk out of the side of your neck. Sick and tried of Casa and it's excuses. They need to be gone already.
greynoso (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2012 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I know proper English grammar.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2012 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Bad grammar is somethng up of which I will not put". -Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill- (1874-1965)
billclausen (anonymous profile)
July 6, 2012 at 7 p.m. (Suggest removal)
As a business owner located very close to Casa, I’m simply stunned to find out that their permit requires neighborhood watch and outreach. Very simply said, they have failed. To say that we spend our entire day dealing with their clients would not even begin to explain what a problem it is. Just yesterday I watched a man leave Casa and proceed to attack, kick and hit every parked car on the street. Those car owners will never know what happened and it simply isn’t possible for me to monitor this full time. You may be asking why I didnt call the police. In fact I had called the police earlier that day when a woman beat her boyfriend until his head was bleeding. We have cut back our 911 calls to “life threatening” only. Some days are busier than others and we have to determine if starting a bonfire on our neighbors property after hours should be considered life threatening. I cannot and will not make this my full time job. However by no choice of my own, it is now my part time responsibility. All day long while running a business in a struggling economy, I stand humiliated in front of my customers while parades of homeless and mentally I’ll people walk through my parking lot. I silently pray they won’t stop. But around half of them do. Before I am judged for being intolerant I want to point out that how I feel towards the homeless in neither here nor there. What is significant is that my customers should feel safe at my business and I should be able to maintain a professional atmosphere. Because regardless of the fact that I’m tolerant or not, I cannot force my customers to be tolerant and they may simply choose to go elsewhere. I do want to end by letting people know that our police department has been very helpful and on task. Mike McGrew in particular came out and cleaned up the area on a Saturday by asking people to move on. This blame lies solely on the staff of Casa Esperanza and their lack of concern for business owners. I am not the enemy. I did everything right. I give back to my community, I employee several families and I am raising a family myself. We specifically asked the shelter to have 24 hour roaming patrol and nothing changed. Imagine our surprise to find out that this was a condition of their permit all along. As for the prisoners now being brought into the area by Casa, I can only say this; we went 9 years without ever being robbed. Recently during daylight hours someone broke a window and ripped the cash register out of the counter. Not only did we lose more money than we can afford to, but we had to spend more upgrading our security system. We are a target and Casa Esperanza is supplying the ammunition.
dagny (anonymous profile)
July 7, 2012 at 1:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well said, dagny. This is exactly how it is in the area. I should know as I too am a close neighbor to the shelter. To those who poo-poo these kinds of conditions, you don't know what's going on, so quit acting like you do. To john_adams (what a terrible disservice you've done that American patriarch by stealing his name) do some homework. Only ONE business in the immediate area around Casa Esperanza sells alcohol, and he's responsible in his sales practices, as I've seen him run homeless out of his store. The other 18 businesses in the surrounding area that the shelter is supposed to patrol according to their permit (I've read it), do not sell alcohol and yet they are overrun with criminal activity from Casa Esperanza clientele. We've spent thousands on security systems too, and called the police repeatedly. We too are stunned to find out the shelter is supposed to enforce behavior in the area. It has never happened. Their security guard smokes cigarettes and watches as the transients sell drugs and fight on our property. We called their main desk and they asked us how we got this number???? It's way past time for this to stop.
dogsnsand (anonymous profile)
July 8, 2012 at 12:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
'Patrol' seems vague. So a private organization or citizens have no authority to control other individuals. The state or government can act under the law. Constitutional rights may trump your personal thoughts or perceptions. When a crime is committed a police response is appropriate. But preemptive action could get the city in trouble.
The nation already locks and disappears quite a bit of its citizens in jails and prisons. Businesses need to hire people from the U.S.A who know their rights rather than for several decades now use imported hungry, subservient and exotic euro-asian-aussie accented imported labor. Discount our own people to not pay living wages or hiring at all results in some of this mess.
So what are the solutions. Revoke Casa Esperanzas' permit? That would at least disperse the problem throughout the city and the burden could wake up Santa Barbara citizenry. But the problem is beyond our own city limits. The non-profit model isn't working. We need housing, healthcare, dental care, mental care. Nationally.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 8, 2012 at 6:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
DonMcDermott says "Opposition, stonewalling and scapegoating has been instigated by the same conservative leaders and council members who have no solutions. Conservative council members use the issues to get elected but have no real strategies or are at least conflicted. For evolving solutions consider changing your vote next time for more reasonable and solution oriented candidates."
Comment posted to The Independent's "mini" article By Emily Einolander July 5, 2012 - Susan Warnstrom Retires - After years working as 4th District Supervisor Joni Gray’s executive assistant, Susan Warnstrom has retired. Warnstrom was active on the board of the Lompoc Housing and Community Development Corporation (LHCDC) .....
This is irresponsible reporting - check your facts!
This corrupt corporation was formed in 1990 - not 2006 - according to their tax return!
Sue Warnstrom is just the first person to be "thrown under the bus". Her involvement in LHCDC and the ongoing reporting of this incident and her position as the assistant to the 4th District Supervisor was/is creating issues for Joni Gray and her run for re-election.
Sue Warnstrom was the VP of this defunct corp for years prior to becoming it's President in 2010.
For many more details including the Grand Jury Report, links to the numerous articles published, (including in this paper) go to: http://lhcdcinfo.com/
Please sign the petition to the County District Attorney, Joyce Dudley, requesting an investigation, posted there!
The City of Lompoc and the County of Santa Barbara taxpayers should be up-in-arms demanding answers to exactly where their funds awarded to LHCDC have gone! That tab is still open and running.....!
As DonMcDermott also stated “For evolving solutions consider changing your vote next time…..” Good advice – we cannot afford to repeat the mistake made in the primary by uninformed voters awarding Joni the majority of their votes be repeated in the general election!
To view the full comments posted to that article go to: http://www.independent.com/news/2012/...
Go to: http://lhcdcinfo.com/ Get the facts! Sign the petition to the County District Attorney, Joyce Dudley, requesting an investigation of LHCDC linked there!
OffTheBeat (anonymous profile)
July 8, 2012 at 1:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The reason Casa Esperanza opened at that location to begin with, was because it was a shambles. It is that neighborhood in which the people who need their help are.
Not to discount negative experiences people may be having, but without the shelter it could be worse.
Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
July 9, 2012 at 2:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The location was due to availability, the commercial zone not directly affecting residences. There are many well-intentioned individuals and groups involved. The downtown business groups and most at city hall were hopeful to get our problem moved out of the downtown core where we cater to transient-tourists who bring amusement park like sums of money to spend unlike than locals who work here for slave wages while living in overpriced rentals and illegal garage units. We have a balance problem.
I guess you could say that the Casa Esperanza area was a "shambles" before and currently is but still no one wants uses that add further degradation whether residential or commercial. Most expect their residential and commercial districts to improve.
So the solution needs to be be federal, promote the general Welfare. Promote housing, medical, dental, mental health social services and we'll solve our little old problems here in tiny little Santa Barbara.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
DonMcDermott (anonymous profile)
July 9, 2012 at 6:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)