Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Angelo council backs partnership to develop ‘Rock Rose’ service campus for unhoused residents
Summary
The San Angelo City Council on June 17 voted 7‑0 to adopt a resolution supporting a partnership with the Concho Valley Community Action Agency to develop the Concho Valley Rock Rose Community Campus on 11.8 acres of city‑owned property.
Get email alerts on the Homelessness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Angelo City Council on June 17 voted 7‑0 to adopt a resolution supporting a partnership with the Concho Valley Community Action Agency to develop the Concho Valley Rock Rose Community Campus on 11.8 acres of city‑owned property.
The resolution backs a plan led by CVCAA to create a service campus organizers say would provide daily coordinated services, case management, noncongregate shelter and a mix of micro and tiny homes to move people from acute homelessness toward stable housing. Mike Burnett, executive director of Concho Valley Community Action Agency, told the council the project is “a call to action” and that “the need is urgent and the time is now.”
CVCAA presented data showing local housing and shelter shortfalls. Burnett said a one‑day point‑in‑time count recorded 173 people experiencing homelessness in the Concho Valley; multiplying that count by two or three, he said, yields an estimated 275–350 people unhoused on any given night in San Angelo, including roughly 100–120 who are chronically homeless. Burnett said the campus plan would serve a broader population of low‑income residents as well, projecting the initiative could assist roughly 12,000 people annually once fully operating.
Organizers described the campus design as a front “service” zone for daily case management, partner agency offices and large‑scale food distribution, and a secured, controlled‑access center with micro‑homes, hygiene facilities, permanent supportive housing units and transitional tiny homes. Burnett said the full project would cost an estimated $27–30 million and would be built in phases as philanthropic, foundation and governmental funding is obtained.
Public safety and operations leaders told the council they expect a campus to reduce pressure on emergency services. San Angelo Police Chief Justin Griffith said the campus would give police and other responders a place to refer people who want help, rather than repeatedly moving people between sites. “This provides a place where rules can be followed,” Griffith said. Burnett and other presenters described ongoing coordination with police, fire and the local mental‑health authority on security and service design.
Local nonprofit leaders and service providers spoke in support. David Ingram of Russ Street Ministries called the campus “a navigation day on steroids” and said he looked forward to a permanent site where agencies can coordinate every day. Brent Jenkins of the Concho Valley Regional Food Bank said the model is “not merely providing a roof over someone’s head. We’re offering a foundation where they can rebuild.” Stephanie Hamby of Galley Community Development Corporation said the campus would let partner agencies “get with them where they are,” reducing duplication and helping people keep appointments and paperwork.
Organizers said the campus would use a continuum‑of‑care model: residents enter under individualized case plans and progress from micro‑homes to permanent supportive housing as they stabilize. Burnett noted national examples — Community First and Esperanza in Austin — as operational models and said outside consultants have found strong community support for CVCAA to lead the project.
The council’s resolution supports continued collaboration between the city and CVCAA on planning and does not itself transfer property or obligate city funds. Burnett said additional approvals and funding steps would be required before construction or operation. Councilmembers followed with questions about security design, phasing and funding; Burnett and staff said site fencing, controlled access, an active case‑management presence, and phased capital fundraising are central to the plan.
Organizers asked the council to view the action as the next step in a planning process rather than a final commitment. After public comment, the council adopted the resolution 7‑0.
Next steps identified by presenters include continuing detailed design with partner agencies, finalizing a fundraising/capital campaign strategy and coordinating any required permitting and security plans with city staff and public‑safety agencies.

