DRUG/MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING CENTER MAY BE COMING TO ARCADIA

This week, the California Department of Health Care Services released $3.3 billion dollars in bonds toward expanding the State’s “Behavioral Health Infrastructure”. Included in that funding is a line item of $54 million for converting the existing Extended Stay America Hotel in Arcadia into a substance abuse disorder facility known as CRI-Help Arcadia.

See right for a copy of a Facebook post made by Cri-Help celebrating the funding and announcing an expected opening “in 2027”.

We had received a call in early January inquiring about the site as a potential conversion, but had strongly discouraged them, citing the community response to the Elara Project

on Live Oak. From January until now, we had not heard anything further, so we expected that the idea may have died (CRI-Help had stated that they do not like going into communities where they will not be welcomed). Unfortunately, it seems that they were simply awaiting

funding from the State. Here are some details that we can glean at this time on their proposal:

Bricks/Cri-Help Arcadia:

• Address: Extended Stay America Arcadia, 401 E Santa Clara St, Arcadia, CA

• Proposed Usage: Substance Abuse Disorder Facility

• Project Scope: Conversion of existing Extended Stay America hotel into Substance Abuse Disorder recovery facility

• Number of Beds: 140 (124 residential, 16 detox)

• The company is Bricks Behavior Health Foundation: https://www.bricksfoundation.org/

As we told these folks back in January, I would expect that this will create a lot of concern in the community when the proposal is known. Be aware that these types of conversions and uses are generally considered a “use-by-right” under state regulations these days; therefore, it is not likely that they would need a full entitlement review and City staff would likely be compelled approve the conversion ministerially. Meaning, there probably isn’t much we could do to stop the project, if we wanted to. We could only ensure that it met all health and safety codes and operated in a manner that didn’t negatively impact the area. The rendering shown in the post seems to be generic and not representative of the Arcadia site specifically, but it is similar to what they told us in January would be the layout of the site. They seem to anticipate the construction of a large perimeter fence and to convert most of the parking lot

into a recreation area. These items would require a review and permitting of some kind. Keep in mind, though, that while we might be able to maintain the number of parking spaces, we shouldn’t expect to be able to outlaw the use altogether, if this is ultimately determined to be a use-by-right. We have not received any applications or seen anything formal from this group yet, so I can’t tell you for sure that this will not need any use entitlements or public

review, but I did want to ensure that you know this is potentially coming our way and that a more likely outcome is that this could be approved without the public processes we typically require.

We reached out to our contacts from January expressing frustration and surprise and were told the following in response:

Our intention is to work collaboratively with your team, Arcadia residents, and other stakeholders so that we do not disrupt the neighborhood and that our presence is a value added to an established community…At this time, we would very much appreciate the opportunity to reconnect with you and your team and discuss our vision and proposed plan for the site.

We will be setting up meetings with their team as quickly as possible to review their plans in detail and to see whether it meets state requirements for a use-by-right or if it would be a more robust review process. Regardless, we would also work to ensure that they have a communications plan in place so the public can be aware of this transition well in advance of its opening.

On a financial note, the current hotel generates about $260,000 of transient occupancy taxes each year, which would go away if this conversion happened. It could also possibly be exempted from property taxes as a non-profit use serving charitable purposes.

MOTEL 6 MAY BE SOLD FOR NEW HOUSING PROJECT

On a related note, we have heard that the Motel 6 is in escrow with a local developer, who would want to raze the site and build new multifamily housing there. The developer has successfully built low density, market rate, multifamily projects in Arcadia over the years, so it might be a lower impact use than the current motel use. We are also hearing that the same developer may acquire the nearby CA Thoroughbred Association site for a similar development; if that happened, these two sites could be a nice transitional buffer to the new hotels coming to the immediate area. Motel 6 brings in $290,000 annually in hotel taxes, so we’d also have to plan for that loss in future years; however, that amount would be partially offset by an increase in property values. But all of this is highly speculative at this point.

For now, just keep in mind that you will likely be hearing chatter about this motel going away (and people possibly confusing this site with the one mentioned above).

GOVERNOR RELEASES MODEL ORDINANCE ON HOMELESSNESS

Earlier this week, Governor Newsom released a model ordinance to address homelessness locally. He did this at the same time as he encouraged cities to clear all encampments in their communities, so many assumed that the ordinance would be aggressive in encouraging enforcement. While we agree with the sentiment that encampments should be prevented and addressed when they arise, the model ordinance sends some mixed messages on that front.

We have an established “care first” approach here, where we always offer services before going to enforcement efforts. However, we are always willing to use enforcement as a tool if care is refused. Specifically, this sentiment in the model ordinance is problematic:

No person should face criminal punishment for sleeping outside when they have nowhere else to go. Policies that prohibit individuals from sleeping outside anywhere in the jurisdiction without offering adequate indoor shelter, effectively banishing homeless individuals from the jurisdiction’s borders, are both inhumane and impose externalities on neighboring jurisdictions, which must face the costs and challenges of an increased unsheltered homeless population.

The model ordinance would be a backslide from the results of the Grants Pass case and be similar to how they were under the Boise Decision, where if you don’t have a shelter bed available, you wouldn’t prohibit camping. We think that is not advisable, since we have been able to be more successful in getting people into housing and care facilities when the alternative was fines or jail. Going back to a place where the homeless person could choose to stay on the street in Arcadia would make things harder and less effective. Therefore, while we are in the process of updating our homelessness ordinances to comport fully with Grants Pass, we do not advise adopting the state’s model ordinance in its entirety. One positive thing in the model ordinance is that it establishes as a goal a 48-hour notice period to

vacate an encampment; our current standard is 72 hours. Having a statewide standard that is shorter and more aggressive would be helpful, so we probably will include that in our updated ordinance.