Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Burbank Council withdraws earlier grant request and shifts focus on Front Street site to housing options
Summary
After staff reported an $8 million-plus funding shortfall and ongoing operating costs for a proposed Front Street homeless solutions center, the council unanimously withdrew a prior $3.45 million trust grant request and directed staff to pursue alternatives — notably permanent supportive or affordable housing and an RFQ/RFP process to identify partners.
Burbank’s City Council voted unanimously April 7 to withdraw a previous $3,450,000 grant request linked to a planned Front Street homeless solutions center and to direct staff to explore alternative uses for the city-owned site. Assistant Community Development Director Simone McFarland told the council the project as designed — about 52 tiny-home suites, 17 safe-parking stalls and an on-site service hub — now faces a funding gap “of more than $8 million,” plus estimated annual operating costs of roughly $1.6 million.
Why it matters: Council members said they supported the goal of offering a locally run facility that could move people off the street, but they said county funding rules and Measure A/LCASa restrictions changed the financing landscape. McFarland said the county’s new formula and the limited local return constrain how the city can use Measure A money for operations and services.
Council asked staff to pivot toward housing-first alternatives that are more likely to attract layered capital and ongoing service funding. “Given the restrictions, affordable and permanent supportive housing represents a strong and practical path forward,” McFarland said, noting that the city can strengthen a housing project’s viability by contributing the site.
What the council directed: Staff was asked to withdraw the prior housing trust application tied to the homeless solutions center and to return with a plan that could include: issuing an RFQ/RFP under the surplus-land process to find qualified development partners; analyzing options for permanent supportive housing (PSH) and affordable housing; identifying how Measure A, local solutions funds and housing-trust dollars could be layered; and estimating likely operating-cost models and partners.
Voices from the meeting: “The project currently faces a funding gap of more than $8 million with ongoing operational costs estimated at $1.6 million annually,” Simone McFarland told council. Outreach supervisor Bob Newman described the city’s current field work and services, and residents who regularly assist people living outdoors said a durable, staffed building would best meet needs.
Next steps: Staff will research developer models and PSH examples, consult organizations that operate PSH, and return with recommended RFQ/RFP language and a financial layering plan — including whether and how local solutions funds could cover ongoing services — before any final commitment on the site. The council’s vote preserves the city’s allocation in the regional housing trust and redirects staff to seek proposals better matched to current funding realities.
