Board sends Oakmore safe-camping proposal back to staff amid concern over $11.7M price tag and ongoing operating costs

San Joaquin County staff presented a conceptual design Jan. 13 for a proposed safe-camping site on the former Oakmore Golf Course, a 67.25-acre parcel the county acquired in December 2024 for $9.6 million. The conceptual plan described 70 emergency sleeping cabins arranged in pods, accessible walkways, office and classroom trailers, shower and restroom trailers, perimeter fencing and paved emergency access.

Staff estimated the capital cost at approximately $11.7 million and annual operating costs around $4 million. The presentation said construction would take 21–24 months (including design and procurement) and that the county expects partial reimbursement of construction costs under federal programs (an estimated 40–50% for some components) but that most operating costs would be supported by the general fund with only minimal offsets from non-county sources.

Supervisors raised multiple concerns during discussion: the county’s budget outlook and projected departmental shortfalls, the high per-unit replacement and maintenance costs for temporary shelters, building-code constraints cited from the 2022 California Building Code Appendix P that limit the use of tents where heating is needed, floodplain and site feasibility issues, and opportunity cost given competing capital needs on the county’s long-range plan. Several board members noted the county had previously pursued lower-cost tent-based models elsewhere and that changing regulatory and safety requirements had increased costs.

After debate, the board amended the proposed board order, striking direction to continue development of the safe-camping site at Oakmore and instead directed staff to study alternative uses for the property and return with recommendations. The motion to modify the order and direct staff passed 5–0.

What comes next: Staff will undertake a feasibility study with Public Works and other departments to evaluate whether county operations and facilities (including potential warehousing or departmental relocation) are feasible at the Oakmore site and to present alternatives to the board. The motion does not close the door on county-led homeless services, but it removes the current development direction and requests new analysis.