Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sacramento County leaders hear semi‑annual homelessness report as officials press for funding and shelter throughput
Summary
County housing and behavioral‑health directors told the Board of Supervisors the homelessness system has expanded outreach and shelter capacity but still lacks the vouchers and permanent housing needed to match demand; supervisors pushed for concrete funding plans and clearer throughput metrics.
County housing staff presented a semi‑annual homelessness update April 7, describing expanded outreach teams and new shelter capacity while warning that funding and permanent housing shortfalls risk slowing progress.
Emily Hawking, director of the county Department of Homelessness and Housing, summarized system changes including 58 county‑wide walk‑in sites, expanded outreach HEART teams and a shift toward non‑congregate shelter models. Hawking said roughly 7,200 people have passed through county‑funded shelter programs in the past five years and that about 2,200 people have been rehoused through county efforts, while noting long stays and limited throughput create bottlenecks.
The report said the county has increased varied shelter and treatment capacity — including interim and bridge housing and behavioral‑health residential beds — but that restoring a broader funding base is essential. “Right now the average stay in shelter is nine months,” Hawking told supervisors, noting the county needs more vouchers and affordable units so shelter beds can serve more people annually.
Ryan Quist, behavioral‑health director, highlighted investments in treatment capacity and in programs that link people directly from unsheltered settings into permanent housing. He said the county has added substance‑use and sub‑acute treatment beds, expanded crisis services and grown the behavioral‑health housing portfolio from 159 to roughly 583 units since 2019.
Supervisors pressed for more granular data: Supervisor Desmond asked for cost‑per‑client and clearer year‑by‑year outcomes; Supervisor Hume urged distinguishing which people in shelters are employable or have disabilities that affect housing readiness. Officials acknowledged limits in point‑in‑time counts and differences across data sources, and staff said the county is seeking more detailed annual breakdowns and gap analyses to use in regional advocacy for funding.
Public commenters and partner speakers urged faster action and more prevention funding. Jessica Perkins, a parent leader and former unhoused resident, said investments in prevention and supportive services are critical. Scott Kingston of a regional business group urged a coordinated approach between city and county agencies.
The board’s discussion centered on how to move more people from shelter into permanent housing, whether to reprioritize funds toward rapid rehousing or toward supportive housing, and how to coordinate with municipalities. Hawking said the county is pursuing a mix of strategies — more vouchers, gap funding for new projects and targeted prevention — but that a multi‑year funding commitment would be required to close the shortfall. The Board did not vote on new allocations during the hearing; supervisors asked staff for follow‑up analyses and year‑by‑year outcome tables.
The county plans to continue system changes including the Watt Avenue site and other Safe Stay communities and to present more detailed multi‑year budget needs and performance metrics in coming months.
