Nearly eight months after the county board chose a Southside Road location for a permanent homeless shelter in San Benito County, supervisors Tuesday reversed course and opted for a different site along Flynn Road.
Board members reversed course in a 3-2 vote before a crowd packing the supervisors’ chambers and chose a location along Flynn Road near the county jail as the preferred site. Supervisors Jerry Muenzer, Jaime De La Cruz and Robert Rivas supported the move.
It was a change of vote for De La Cruz and Rivas who both initially supported the Southside Road location designated as the preferred site since February. Supervisors Margie Barrios and Anthony Botelho continued their staunch support for the Southside Road location.
A wave of neighborhood opposition, though, eventually led to the reconsideration Tuesday and the reversal.
Supervisors have just over three years to finish the homeless shelter project in order to receive the full $1.5 million in federal Community Development Block Grant funds awarded to the county for a permanent shelter.
They have to pick a preferred site in order to move ahead on environmental reviews of that location and alternatives. With Flynn Road as the preferred site, the alternative locations are now Southside Road, Community Road near many existing social services and McCloskey Road.
Choosing that preferred site Tuesday was perceived as a must in order to get moving on the appropriate schedule. Botelho, for one, expressed frustration during the meeting at the prospective reversal and its implications on tightening the time frame.
“Where and how did we get so distracted?” Botelho told the crowd before public speakers took to the podium, some lambasting the board’s approach to the earlier decision. “It’s been months since we decided on Southside Road and nothing’s been started.”
Part of the reason for that delay has been the growing opposition from neighbors, many of whom complained that they weren’t informed about the shelter possibility.
Barrios, the board chairwoman, took time in between comments to respond to complaints about transparency.
“No application has been made so there’s no obligation from the county to inform folks of that,” Barrios said.
That statement in particular affected one neighbor of the Southside Road location who later spoke. Veronica Martinez called the board’s prior actions “unilateral” and questioned why the county failed to inform the most affected neighbors.
“I feel very disrespected by this board and I need to remind you that you’re elected officials,” Martinez said. “And right now, you’re not representing the people that live in Riverview Estates.”
Many of the residents, like Martinez, expressed their concerns about children’s safety in the area with a permanent homeless shelter there, while supporters of the Southside Road location reinforced how there haven’t been major issues thus far with the migrant camp there for many years.
But area residents like Ana Gomez weren’t convinced and labeled the prior preference for Southside Road—on the property of a blighted, closed convalescent hospital owned by the county—as an issue of race.
Gomez pointed out how the residential neighborhood is largely affordable housing.
“We also have the migrant camp,” she said. “The shelters and the trailers were there. Now they’re thinking of building a shelter there. In my terms, it’s called segregation.”
While a large majority of public speakers were against the Southside site, others spoke out attempting to keep the homeless shelter away from their neighborhoods or businesses in the three other areas, too.
Rich Hershey rebutted a point broached at the meeting about lacking residences near Flynn Road and said there were about 65 homes in the area. He said many of the residents are seniors.
“To have homeless people in that area, that’s not a good idea,” he said.
Then there were others who merely had a community interest. Lisa Tobias of Tres Pinos contended Southside Road “really isn’t suitable for this” while pointing out there are county offices out there, many children in the area and the old hospital that she called a “disaster.” She estimated that the proposed site is about two and a half miles from the closest services such as local stores.
“So they’re going to be traveling through agricultural fields and homes and neighborhoods just to get to Target,” she said.
Resident Marty Richman latched on to the convalescent hospital building as well. He suggested the county use $3.4 million from a coming state reimbursement—over a past tax debt disagreement—to tear it down.
“Take the hospital down,” he said. “It’s an insult to the county. It’s the most blighted piece of property in this county, and you own it.”
Jackie McAbee from McAbee Trucking noted how her family serves the agricultural community that could be affected with a homeless shelter on McCloskey Road. She was concerned about health issues with a shelter close to farms and also hazardous materials on her family business property.
“It’s not just about the location,” she said. “You need to think about the viable businesses that have supported the community that are going to be affected as well.”
Jim Dassel, owner of Dassel’s Petroleum, said it’s important to keep in mind neighbors wherever the shelter goes.
“That facility, regardless of where you put it, should not impact the neighbors,” he said. “I do not envy your decision, but that’s why you’re up there.”
Local farmer Joe Tonascia, who said he would have property affected by any of the four locations, echoed Dassel’s sentiments on the tough decision.
“This is one of those deals where you’re damned if you do and you’re damned if you don’t,” he said.
Facing opposition in every direction, it was De La Cruz and Rivas who swung away from Southside Road as the chosen location and toward the Flynn Road site.
Rivas said he has had time to dwell on the February decision. He also said involved interests should focus the debate more on the needs of the homeless.
He said the Southside Road location is too far from services and other needs of the homeless and called it a “lousy site.”
“This location is truly in rural San Benito County,” he said.
