Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homeless Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves CDBG/ESG funding after lengthy public debate over We Care shelter in Turlock
Summary
County staff recommended FY25–26 CDBG and ESG awards, including a $172,007.15 priority allocation for substance abuse treatment from the CDBG public‑services set‑aside. The Board approved the recommendations unanimously after public commenters and nonprofit representatives disputed program outcomes and capacity for the Turlock‑based shelter We Care.
Anna San Nicolas, deputy director for community development in the Planning Department, presented staff recommendations for the county’s FY25–26 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) public‑services awards and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) (presentation summarized Sept. 9, 2025). She explained the NOFA/scoring process, panel review, and HUD rules that guided the recommendations, and said the committee prioritized substance‑use treatment for 50% of the CDBG public‑services allocation (roughly $345,000 total; the 50% set‑aside equals $172,007.15).
Staff recommended funding for six public‑service applicants, listing We Care for a substance‑use counseling and treatment program (top CDBG public‑services score), Center for Human Services (housing stability navigation and low‑barrier youth shelter), Children’s Crisis Center (trauma recovery and guardian programs), CASA (direct services for foster youth), Turlock Gospel Mission (kitchen expansion) and Project Sentinel (mandated housing services funded from administration dollars at $25,000). ESG recommendations included required rapid rehousing funding and support for shelter operations (Center for Human Services low‑barrier youth shelter, Haven and We Care for rapid rehousing). The staff recommendation included the usual 7.5% administrative set‑aside permitted by HUD.
The funding item drew extended public comment. Advocates, including Julie Fox and Steven (last name unclear in the transcript), described We Care’s shelter evolution from an ad hoc warehouse to a brick‑and‑mortar program and urged the Board to fund rapid rehousing and substance‑use services. We Care board president Sandy Singh gave program statistics, saying the rapid rehousing program moved seven people to permanent housing last year and that the organization provided a range of wraparound services including assistance obtaining IDs and linking clients to healthcare.
Other community members, notably Ron Broadgroom and David Fransen, disputed We Care’s readiness to run HUD‑funded rapid rehousing, raised concerns about unspent prior awards, questioned whether the organization had the required 100% matching funds for rapid rehousing, and noted local municipal code and shelter‑operation issues in Turlock. Broadgroom noted prior grant funds that had not been fully expended and argued for focusing funds on agencies with demonstrable outcomes. Supporters and system partners — including speakers from the county’s community system of care — responded that the grant review process was inclusive and that funded providers are active participants in the continuum of care.
Board members discussed measurement requirements and program accountability. Supervisors reiterated that HUD reimbursement rules require documentation (dollar‑for‑dollar proof of matching funds on reimbursement requests) and that staff will monitor outcomes quarterly and reconcile at year‑end. After discussion, a motion to approve the staff recommendations carried unanimously.
The Board did not authorize programmatic changes beyond the funding recommendations; staff were authorized to negotiate technical modifications consistent with HUD guidelines and to return as required for additional actions.
