Sacramento took its boldest step to address the homeless crisis. But will it work? | Opinion

Five Sacramento leaders Tuesday night took the most important step yet in the city’s battle against homelessness. Four City Council members and Mayor Darrell Steinberg directed City Manager Howard Chan to establish new managed homeless encampments, hopefully starting within 30 to 60 days.

Finally, there is reason to hope for real incremental change that benefits those who live on the streets and those of us who are lucky to live indoors.

It was one of the most revealing council exchanges in the recent history of the chamber. Some fared better than others.

Opinion

On this historic night, the outgoing mayor was no lame duck. This may have been the toughest majority Steinberg has ever had to muster in his seven years as mayor. But he did it.

Steinberg offered scant details about this “Safe Ground” plan in the official proposal to establish these new city-sanctioned encampments. He offered no plan on how each site will be managed. He suggested no criteria for Chan to select the sites.

This was part of the sophisticated strategy behind what Steinberg sought to accomplish.

Sacramento’s political history has shown that when council members get involved in trying to select new shelter sites or managed encampment sites, nothing happens. The unvarnished delegation of power to a manager who can get it done, combined with the public’s intensifying sense of urgency for the city to do something, were his two greatest arguments. And they prevailed.

“This is like a fire,” Steinberg said at the beginning of the meeting. “This is an emergency. Treat it like an emergency.”

The mayor’s premise is that Sacramento is better off with city-designated encampment locations than the unmanaged, shifting chaos that too many neighborhoods face today. Safe Ground is a more stable landscape. It also dramatically improves the ability of social service providers to connect regularly with those in need, gain their trust and hopefully open the door to tailored social services. It is the option that can make a difference in a matter of months, not years.

Sacramento has lacked the political will to get this done before, so Steinberg and the council majority want Chan to get started immediately instead of letting the process get bogged down by conditions and calls to study the issue further. It’s not that we don’t favor transparency in government decisions, we do. But calls for transparency in the past became vehicles for obstructionism. In this case, the transparency will have to come as the process moves along because Sacramento can’t wait any longer.

Each City Council member faced different repercussions from the mayor’s proposal. Chan’s plan, given the ambitious unofficial timetable, is to look at vacant city-owned land.

“They are vacant for a reason,” Chan told the council. “They are not located in our central district. I want to be clear about it. How do we implement this quickly?”

While Chan said there are hundreds of city-owned parcels throughout Sacramento, it was clear that some council members were acutely aware that the truly suitable parcels were in their districts, and they happened to vote accordingly.

“The majority of it will land in District 2,” said Councilman Sean Loloee of North Sacramento. He voted no.

Councilwoman Mai Vang of South Sacramento’s District 8 was “actually in agreement” with Loloee — a rare occurrence — for the same reason. She voted no. “Safe ground has to be distributed throughout the city.”

Steinberg was conceptually supportive of distribution, but not enough to require that in delegating site selection to Chan.

Why? It would slow progress down.

“If we are saying that the highest priority item of this council is to have these sites geographically dispersed, it will drive the timeline,” Chan said. “I promise you that.”

Councilman Eric Guerra, who represents District 6, voted yes, citing the mandate of November’s Measure O for the city to make progress. “District 6 doesn’t have any viable public land,” he added.

Council members Rick Jennings, Caity Maple and Katie Valenzuela gave Steinberg the slim majority he needed.

“It is kind of amazing that we are here,” said Maple of District 5.

“I think it is a great plan,” said Jennings of District 7.

For Valenzuela, who represents District 4, the vote was a milestone in “how far we have come.” But she still had questions. She said she would love to know about “sites being considered. If we can see a list.”

Chan did not take the bait. “We are compiling some lists,” he said but offered no details.

It was the complete loss of political control that seemed to lead to the two remaining no votes, Karina Talamantes of District 3 and Lisa Kaplan of District 1.

“The city elected us to be accountable,” said Kaplan, who challenged the mayor’s notion to look beyond the short-term cost of his proposal. “Money is an object. What about our city employees? We are in the middle of negotiating with all of our unions. Do we spend it all on the unhoused or look at what the city employees deserve?”

During Talamantes’ exchange with the mayor, the meeting turned personal.

“People are going to be upset about the site locations we propose,” Talamantes said. Regardless, she wanted control. “We are a brand-new council,” she said. “Allow us to identify the sites ourselves. Talk to our neighbors. Don’t force this on us.”

History is simply not on Talamantes’ side, as previous attempts to establish legalized encampments in the city died because objections such as hers prevailed. Meanwhile, a homeless problem became a homeless crisis in Sacramento. A slim majority of the council was not going to let this tough decision stall again, even if a majority of those voting yes may very well not have encampments in their districts.

In frustration, Talamantes turned on Steinberg. “The city has done no good neighborhood policies with my community. When was the last time, mayor, you went out to District 3?”

The last time she invited him, the mayor replied in an exchange with interruptions.

The meeting proceeded. Guerra gave Steinberg his majority with some new conditions. He wanted Chan to design buffer zones and policies to inform and engage neighbors of Safe Ground encampments. He also wanted the county to follow through on its commitment to provide services for mental health and addiction treatment to the extent the city can enable it.

With the outcome clear, Kaplan in her closing returned to the mayor’s exchange with Talamantes.

“I was offended by how you were treating her,” Kaplan said. “We women need to stand up when we feel our opinion is not being valued and heard for what it is.”

Steinberg stayed calm. He had lost two pounds of political flesh by then in the process, one from the personally critical question from Talamantes and then the critique from Kaplan. During a session when Steinberg valiantly tried to maintain chamber decorum, right down to silencing the phone line of “bigots” during public comment, the mayor would not be thrown off his game and incur a self-inflicted wound.

He was gracious.

In his signature calm voice, the mayor showed complete command of the moment.

“If I interrupted you and was rude to you in any way, I apologize,” he said to Talamantes. “I do my very best to run this dais to respect everybody. I do. And I think, by and large, I think I do a pretty good job of it. I’m sorry.”

And with that, the Sacramento City Council voted.

How this experiment in homeless management goes, setting up encampment sites in places unknown, with management strategies unknown, is anybody’s guess. But one thing is certain. Steinberg guided Sacramento to a milestone achievement.

“Your tenacity,” Valenzuela said, “is to be commended.”