Ah politics can be so fun unless when it turns to “blood sport” and people decide to take something totally out of context and then “gotcha.”

Let me explain.
For instance, take the issue of the City’s proposed reuse of Schroeder Army Hall at Willow and Grand.

About two years ago, the City formed a citizen committee that included people from the 5th Council District to review the applications of how the property could be reused.

As part of the federal conditions to reuse the property, the City must accommodate homeless needs in the CITY (not a specific council district). The City was not given a choice. Either put a homeless project on the army site or find another site for them or give the property back to the feds.

The citizen committee selected the City’s application to reuse the property as a police substation — which would substantially increase public safety presence in that part of the City.

Of the three applications from homeless providers, the committee approved an application from Mental Health America to provide a day time facility for mentally ill homeless. (This term is somewhat redundant as many homeless have a mental illness.) The reason the committee chose this application is that it did not feel having full time housing for homeless was appropriate.

MHA applied for a facility on site with the police substation. That was not acceptable for a variety of reasons.

Up until that point, City Council was told not to become involved in advocating or opposing any aspect of this reuse so that it was clear the applications were selected by the citizen committee without influence by the City which also was an applicant to use the property.

I told staff repeatedly that I supported a police substation — in fact, I had publicly stated so and also supported moving the police academy to Schroder Hall because they already had a pistol range in one of the army buildings.

I also told staff that I did not want a homeless facility there.

In November 2007, City staff came to my office with good news and not so good news.

Good news: The citizen committee had approved the application to reuse Schroeder army hall for a police substation.

The not so good news: unless we put the homeless program on the same site as the police substation, the City didn’t have anywhere else to put the program and the City would lose control to the feds about how the property would be used.

During this conversation with staff, I asked them to tell me all of the properties that were offered to MHA. They did and they told me that MHA refused all of them and that again, without the support of the homeless provider, the City would not be able to use the land at Schroder Army Hall and the feds would decide who got the property.

Because I was on the City’s Board of Health and Human Services when it purchased its current site on Grand Avenue (across from Schroeder Hall), I remembered that the City also purchased property right behind the Health Department and that lot might be a suitable location for a homeless program because it was FURTHER from the nearest residence in Artcraft Manor.

I was adamant that a homeless program could not be placed anywhere near Willow because of the neighborhood and businesses.

Community Development staff had not been aware the property was owned by the City and stated they would go back to MHA to see if the property behind the Health Department (where homeless can already received medical care and where the City’s Homeless Coordinator works) could be used.

MHA apparently agreed and City staff presented the application to the City Council with two proposals:

1. Approve the application to use all of the Schroeder Army Hall property for a Long Beach Police Substation and accommodate the homeless by locating MHA on a lot behind the City’s Department of Health and Human Services; or
2. Deny the application for use of all of the Schroeder Army Hall property for a Long Beach Police Substation and deny accommodating the homeless by denying the location of MHA on a lot behind the City’s Department of Health and Human Services.

Staff brought the proposals to the City Council on December 18th. The Council voted for the first proposal on an 8-1 vote.

During debate on the council issue, staff clearly told the Council and the public that should the Council reject proposal #1 that the property would revert back to the federal government and the federal government would totally decide who would get the property and could potentially allow a homeless provider to occupy a great deal or all of Schroder Army Hall and the City of Long Beach would not be able to do anything about it.

So now, those who are opposed to this project are contending that it is my fault there will be a homeless program behind the Health Department because I remembered the City owned that property and told that fact to Community Development.

Let me set it straight:

• I have repeatedly told City staff that I do not want a homeless program in or around Artcraft Manor (the residences that are .5 miles from the proposed MHA facility).
• I repeatedly told staff that under no circumstances that if we were forced by the feds to have a homeless program that it would be on Willow because of the proximity to residences and businesses. Location of the homeless program on Willow was taken off the table.
• I have asked staff repeatedly to find another site for the homeless program.
• I was told, as were all other council people, that there was no other suitable location other than Schroeder Army Hall property because ALL other parcels of land offered to the homeless provider were not adquate.
• In order to keep the feds from ordering the City to put a homeless program on the Willow property, I asked City staff if they knew there was a parcel behind the City Health Department that the City owned.

Maybe I should have kept my mouth shut about the property behind the Health Department. If I had, what we would be faced with now, is the potential of a homeless program for the mentally ill on the corner of Willow and Grand just steps away from the first street accessible in Artcraft Manor. Instead, what is being proposed is that this program will be .5 miles away from that accessible street– surrounded by industrial buildings and adjacent to the Health Department.

Do I like the fact that the City is being forced to have this homeless program? Absolutely not.

I guess we could take our chances and tell the federal government we are using the property only for a police substation and do not choose to accommodate the homeless in order to get the property.

At this point, I am not willing to risk losing the property and potentially having most of it or all of it used for homeless services. (I know there are readers who believe this is a “bullying technique” aimed at making citizens accept what we do because we “threaten that worse things can happen.” But I have to rely upon City staff who tell me this can happen.)

So unless the City can come up with the money to buy another piece of land to give to the homeless provider, I see we have three choices:

1. Make certain that every available security measure is put into place so if and when the homeless program is placed on Burnett behind the Health Department, the area is secure (with a police substation just steps away too);
2. Tell the feds the City doesn’t believe it needs to accomodate the homeless in order to use the army property and hope to god city staff isn’t right that the feds will take back the property and accommodate the homeless in their own way; or
3. Tell the feds the City doesn’t want the 5 acres because we don’t like the strings that are attached and again, hope to god city staff isn’t right that the feds will take back the property and accommodate the homeless or whomever else without the City having any say whatsoever.