Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cobb officials hear data-driven push to shift funds from shelter to housing programs
Summary
Cobb County officials received a multi‑agency briefing May 27 that framed homelessness as a housing‑market and system‑capacity problem and recommended shifting more resources toward rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing.
Get email alerts on the Homelessness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cobb County officials received a multi-agency briefing May 27 on the county’s homeless population, system capacity and recommended investments to move more people from emergency shelter into permanent housing.
The County Manager introduced the Cobb Homeless Alliance and said the presentation would include nonprofit and law‑enforcement perspectives. Melanie Keegan, speaking for the Cobb Homeless Alliance, summarized county and homelessness data and how the Continuum of Care collects and reports those figures to HUD.
Keegan said countywide housing costs are rising faster than incomes and described two distinct groups in the homeless population: people actively seeking services and a separate subset of single adults who are unsheltered and not seeking help. “There are 2 sort of differences in our homeless populations,” she said.
Keegan said county statistics the alliance submitted to HUD show that (as reported to the board): the 2023 median household income for Cobb County was “almost a hundred thousand dollars,” the county’s vacancy rate is about 5.6% (below state and national averages), median gross rent is nearly $1,800, and roughly half of county renters spend 30% or more of income on housing; 25% are “severely cost burdened.” Keegan reported that about 87,000 Cobb households qualify for federal housing assistance but only about 7,000 households are receiving subsidized units reported in the inventory she presented.
Keegan described the Continuum’s 2024 coordinated‑entry contacts as roughly 1,067 households seeking services (including about 718 single‑adult households and about 300 households of adults with children, which together represented about 979 individuals). She said the Continuum’s 2024 unsheltered point‑in‑time work produced 283 total responses (including observations), and that on a typical night she estimated somewhere between 350 and 400 people were unsheltered countywide. Keegan noted that point‑in‑time and housing‑inventory counts are snapshots that vary with methodology and outreach effort.
Dr. Matthew Lyons of Kennesaw State University presented results from a year‑long system‑modeling project done with the Cobb Homeless Alliance. Lyons said the model showed the majority of people enter the system through emergency shelter and that relatively few shelter residents exit to permanent housing. Based on modeled exit rates, Lyons said the “best bank for our buck would be to invest in rapid rehousing programs and permanent supportive housing programs,” because those program types yield higher rates of exits to stable housing.
Kimberly Roberts, managing director of the Cobb County CDBG Program Office, then reviewed HUD funding streams that support housing and homelessness work in Cobb — Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) and the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) — and summarized how those grants may be allocated. Roberts said the county’s approximate 2024 allocations were about $3.4 million in CDBG, about $1.2 million in HOME and roughly $269,000 in ESG; she said 2025 allocations were expected to be at similar levels (Roberts reported 2025 ESG at about $278,000 and the county’s HOME and CDBG amounts as largely level year to year). Roberts also reviewed program caps and set‑asides (for example, HOME requires a CHDO set‑aside; CDBG public‑service funding is limited by HUD to a percentage of the grant) and noted the county’s Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) summarizes outcomes.
A law‑enforcement representative described field coordination among county, municipal and sheriff’s agencies and discussed enforcement and outreach at encampments, particularly along the Bells Ferry corridor. The speaker said officers try to provide resource information and avoid incarceration when people will accept services, but also described unsheltered individuals who decline services and the resulting operational challenges. “It’s not everybody needs to go to jail,” the speaker said, describing outreach and citation options and asking the board to consider ordinances and interjurisdictional coordination that would make enforcement and cleanups more practicable on private parcels.
Board members asked clarifying questions about data sources, HUD program rules and survey methodology. Commissioners requested follow‑up briefings and additional details: Commissioner Burrell asked about income sources for low‑income households; Commissioner Gamble asked about tracking people who reenter the system after exiting (recidivism); and Commissioner Allen stressed including Cobb and Marietta school systems in follow‑up planning because the alliance reported that school registries show 2,022 Cobb County students and 535 Marietta students experiencing homelessness (numbers the alliance said reflect doubled‑up and motel situations that HUD’s sheltered/unsheltered definitions treat differently).
Presenters proposed next steps but no formal county motions or votes were taken. Recommended next steps included: convening a homeless action subcommittee or strategic planning sessions with stakeholders and Board representatives, setting shared countywide goals and benchmarks, coordinating funding streams and directing future county funding toward projects aligned with outcome metrics, and aligning ordinances across jurisdictions for consistent enforcement. Keegan and Lyons emphasized that investments in rapid rehousing and permanent supportive housing would increase exits to permanent destinations in the model’s scenarios.
The presentation closed with the board scheduling follow‑up conversations between the alliance and individual commissioners to review the data and proposed next steps.
Ending: The board took no formal action at the work session; presenters asked for additional guidance from individual commissioners and proposed a coordinated funding and planning process to pursue the modeling recommendations.

