City idles over ‘safe parking’ plan

Council calls for more information; Facilities Committee to report back in September|

Car-bound homeless people will have to turn off the ignition for the night somewhere else this summer, as the Sonoma City Council cooled its engines Monday night on a proposal to launch a “safe parking” program in Sonoma.

The Council at its June 27 meeting considered a proposal by Sonoma homeless advocates to reserve five parking spaces outside the Haven shelter at 151 First St. W. While everyone on the Council voiced their sympathy for the homeless, some were clearly skeptical of the program. Nevertheless, council members didn’t entirely close the door on the possibility of launching a pilot program to test the safe-parking waters.

The Council sent the matter back to the Facilities Committee – for a second time - to seek out more information on the results of similar homeless parking programs taking place in Santa Rosa under the auspices of Catholic Charities.

Only Councilmember Rachel Hundley seemed ready to move forward on the proposal. “There are certainly a lot of concerns there, but there is a possibility of solutions,” said Hundley, urging city officials to sit down and “work out a plan.” “It’s not something we should brush off.”

The safe-parking proposal was first brought before the Council June 6 by Kathy King, director of Sonoma Overnight Support, which runs the 10-bed Haven homeless shelter. Kings says the shelter already has a 30-person waiting list for services and having five safe-parking spaces would allow the nonprofit to serve some of the 10 to 15 Sonomans King estimates are currently living in their cars. The program would be run by Haven staff, who would vet and register clients, and monitored by Catholic Charities, at no cost to the city, say program supporters.

According to city staff, implementing the program would require the Council to amend an ordinance which prohibits “camping” in the city limits.

King said similar Catholic Charities programs in the county have been successful, adding that eight sites have either renewed their program or expanded the number of parking spaces.

“(Launch) a pilot program starting in August and test it out, see if it works,” said King, who stressed that most of the safe-parking clients would likely be women.

Homeless advocate Barbara Mahon implored the Council to go beyond any personal or governmental “paralysis” and “do the right thing.”

“I am challenging you as a human being to tell the world Sonoma is willing to take some small risk,” said Mahon.

The Council, however, was a bit more risk averse than Mahon likely prefers.

Councilmember David Cook, who is part of the Facilities Committee along with Councilmember Gary Edwards, said he supports a safe-parking program, but would like to “try to find a better spot,” pointing out that the Haven shares its parking lot with the Police Department and the Field of Dreams.

Councilmember Madolyn Agrimonti, meanwhile, observed that Sonoma Overnight Support’s mission has “exploded.”

“I don’t think the City is ready to undertake that,” said Agrimonti, about the increasing service needs SOS seems to be experiencing. “Five parking spaces is not going to do it.”

Mayor Laurie Gallian said she still needed more information, echoing her response from when the proposal was first brought before the Council on June 6, and wondered if amending the camping ordinance would result in “people living in RVs on the Plaza.”

In the end, the Council agreed that the Facilities Committee should further review the status of the other safe-parking programs in the County and report back in September.

“A couple of months from now it’s going to start chilling down,” observed Facilities Committee member Edwards. “I would like to come back before it gets cold so at least there’s a possibility that people don’t freeze to death.”

Email Jason at jason.walsh@sonomanews.com.

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.