Neighbors demand changes at the Nav Center; Farr vote gives ESS another year, $2.3M

Presenter: The county commissioners hear public comment about the Navigation Center. Taxpayers ask why so much money is flowing to an out-of-state corporation, while local businesses deal with theft, drug use, and unsupervised Level 3 sex offenders. On June 2, Charlie Rojas:

Charlie Rojas: Charlie Rojas. I have three questions for you, including to you, Commissioner Farr. Are you aware that there is a razor-wire-topped barrier wall between Navigation Center and the Riviera Center? Okay, I’m going to take that, that you don’t know. So that kind of answers the other questions.

None of you have bothered to ask the owners of the Riviera Center why they were compelled—or the businesses there, why they were compelled—to put that barrier there.

We’ve been living there in that area for many, many years. And when it was the VA clinic, there was never any barrier there at all.

So I have to ask you why you have not done your job. That is a major business that provides quite a lot of tax revenue. And the city—both the city and the county—I know, are in financial trouble.

So why have you not bothered to ask or follow up with a situation that’s going on down there, that will directly affect the capacity for you guys to do your job? For this county and city to do their jobs? Because without that tax revenue, we’re not going to be able to get that thing going.

So of course property values are going to fall. And maybe that’s the whole point. Is this a device to try and lower property values—or that property value—to the point that some developer can come in, buy it on the cheap, and redevelop it?

It’s a question I’ve been asked and I’ve been asking for quite some time. And nobody seems to answer or even attempt to answer. But at this point in time, I don’t think I have much of a choice.

We have a serious situation going on down there that’s directly affecting our capacity to even function, because I know my wife, before she died, used that venue quite a number of times. 

Sorry, I’m getting emotional because I just remember her going there quite a lot and now she’s gone.

So anyway, I would ask you folks to please do your damn jobs. Go in there, talk to the owners, talk to the businesses, and find out why they are requiring or why they’re compelled to put in that barrier and what is going on down there.

Presenter: Janet Ayres:

Janet Ayres: I’m here to speak to the Navigation Center and the costs, both social, societal, financial, and the message it sends to citizens that are living near that place.

Are you, all five commissioners, I’d like to know if you’re aware that there is razor wire strung up around that site? And all the years that that served, that building served the VA very well, there was never a strand of razor wire.

It’s supposed to be a voluntary low-barrier or no-barrier site. The evening I drove there to check out the number of cars, there were 11 cars. The parking lot was not filled up.

The little security guard building that taxpayer dollars paid for, the big heavyset security guard came out from the building. I asked him where the security guard was for that house.

He said, ‘That would be me, but there’s not enough money for me to go out there and guard from that location.’ He’s in there.

I’m here to implore, encourage all of the commissioners to put a stop to this nonsense. These people were running out of money. I am taxed to death. I’m 73 and I’m paying close to—too much money in property taxes. I’m—I’m emptied out. I’m emptied out.

The county must tighten up their belts, just like us citizens, the common people. Not the PERS people, but the common people. And I encourage you to put a ‘No’ and stop the insanity.

Relocate it if you must, but use some economy in it. The weather’s nice. You can do tents that are managed. And if they’re putting razor wire up around the building, something’s not working well for that NGO to run that operation. 

John Crowder: John Crowder, I live in Santa Clara. 

I want to talk about safety and I want to talk about decisions. So 11 months ago there was quite a bit of time spent by you folks and the community to talk about the Navigation Center. And I know you were presented a lot of information from one of your organizations on how great the Navigation Center was working.

I don’t know if a lot of time was spent on the effect on the community, but probably I think 20 people that did public comment. And they were very upset about what was going on there.

And, so now eleven months later and you made the decision to move forward with it because it was beyond the June 30 or July 1 contact. So what are you going to do now?

You have a commercial area. I know one of the fast-food companies there has had to move their soft drink area inside because it was a revolving door of people coming in and just using it and leaving.

One of the businesses there now has a piece of plywood across their window. You’ve heard about the razor wire.

So let’s go back to safety. I think the responsibility of you five folks and the county is to provide safety for the residents. The residents of the community are the people that live there, not the transient people that come in.

I’m aware that you have a contract, and I guess it’s good for 10 years. The building has to be used because of state funds. So, moving forward, what can you do?

My suggestion is you void the contract with the existing client that’s in there. And I think you still have to use it for the same type of use. Eleven months ago, somebody said they could do the same job for between 20% and 25% of the cost.

So get people in there that you know their past history and maybe go back to that person that said that they could do it for substantially less money— might help your budget— and the key is to make a decision. And that decision has to be made, not necessarily for the people in the facility, but the residents of the community that pay the tax dollars.

It’s a great community, and right now it’s going downhill. It’s really going downhill. So you have a decision to make. I hope it’s the right decision for the people of the community. 

Presenter: Carl Darwin:

Carl Darwin: Well, I’d like to first start off by saying ‘Amen!’ to everything the previous speakers have said.  I really support the idea of Pastor Gabe getting in there and running that thing. I feel like there’s been several disqualifying factors with the current NGO that’s running that show.

First and foremost, the fact that they didn’t change their policy on Level 3 sex offenders until they were called out. And I know that because I was at the meeting in River Road. That policy never changed until they were called out.

I won’t name any names, but there was a Level 3 sex offender on the corner of Silver (Lane) and River Road for months on end that was 100% in interactions with high schoolers. It’s not appropriate. It probably was illegal.

There was nobody babysitting these Level 3 sex offenders. There’s been multiple Level 3 sex offenders in there. They claim as of last year that they changed their policy.

But that’s a disqualifying factor. That is a lack of judgment for the community well-being. It’s a lack of judgment for the safety of our children. Right there, full stop, disqualification.

Beyond that, at the last meeting that we had a year ago, or a little less than a year ago, the lady mentioned that they’re on their third director. That’s a disqualifying factor. They’re just rotating (directors). The buck never stops because they just get a new buck.

That’s not okay. They need to be held to account. And if you’ve got a new director, there’s nobody being held to account.

I’d like to point out that Gabe’s not gone anywhere. Gabe’s been here doing the good work for years and years and years. The buck stops at Gabe.

Our community deserves better. We deserve to have a program that is not feckless, that’s not destroying the nearby businesses and community, one that assures safety for our children that are less than a quarter mile away.

We deserve to have a shopping center that’s not wrapped in barbed wire and razor wire. And I’d like to point out they put that razor wire up so that people couldn’t sit back in the back there and do drugs.

But there are people right across the alley from the Navigation Center, where all those dumpsters are lined, that get in between the dumpsters and do drugs right across from the facility. It’s not okay. We can do better. Our tax dollars demand it, and our neighborhood does.

Presenter: Founder of Everyone Village, Pastor Gabe: 

Gabe Piechowicz: Gabe Piechowicz, father of three, Lane County resident out in Elmira, founder, executive director of Everyone Village.

I stood up here a little less than a year ago, and we talked about the same exact thing, and I’m excited to be back here today.

Thank you for your comments, folks in that neighborhood, and I’m here to suggest that this is the team. This is totally the team. You’re on the team, you’re on the team, you’re on the team, you’re on the team, you’re on the team, you’re on the team. I’m on the team. We’re on the team. 

We can do better. Absolutely. I have zero doubt in my mind. Furthermore, we can do better for a much, much affordable price point. I’ve been through it tooth and nail, pick and comb, more than any of you have. Maybe you’ve done it more than I have, but you’re over a lot more than I am, so I doubt it.

We don’t need to spend $2.3 million for that. What you just described, we’re spending $2.3 million a year for that.

So my suggestion is water under the bridge. We don’t gain anything by coming at each other over past things—things we could have done better, should have, would have, could have. 

I don’t live that way. I hope you don’t either. I live with: What do we have in front of us today that is actually real, and what possibilities do we have together? I don’t know that there’s a single aspect of what’s in consternation phase with the county right now and its leadership that could get better quickly, more quickly than the Navigation Center story.

Absolutely. I know of myself and Everyone Village as a provider is fully capable of doing a good job with that program as deemed the requirements by the state. Absolutely, we can meet all those and we can do so for far less.

There isn’t direct correlation comparables. The county is going to come in later with some administrators. They’re going to start talking to you about ‘acuity.’ It’s not enough to explain the discrepancy between our funding allotment as per county suggestions for $722,000 for the next year compared to $2.3 million. That gap is too large to be explained solely by acuity. A little bit. Not all of it.

So those funds in such a tight economic time, my suggestion is let’s roll up our sleeves. Let’s be deft. Let’s be strategic. Let’s be a little bit risky because demanding times require that kind of leadership. And I know those leaders are in this room.

So I’m excited to see what we can do better starting today, going forward into the next year. And there is no need whatsoever, in my opinion—and I know a little bit about the sheltering game and what’s going on over there, and I talk to all the people all the time, from clients, folks still living on the street, all the way up to administrators of these sorts of programs—we can definitely do better.

And we’re happy to help in whatever way possible. And we know what we’re talking about. We’ve just signed a contract to work with an organization of business owners in the downtown core to bring the downtown core back to health. 

Everyone Village has a model that works, we’re happy to share it, and we’re happy to do whatever it takes to make this better for everybody, and I can’t wait to see what we do. Thanks, gang.

Presenter: After the presentation later in the day, Commissioner Pat Farr: 

Commissioner Pat Farr: You know, Charlie Rojas this morning asked me—he didn’t ask these guys, he asked me—if I knew about the triple concertina barbed wire around Dollar Tree.

No, I didn’t. I see it all over town. I’ve not seen it there. But why did he ask me specifically? He didn’t ask anybody else. He didn’t ask you. He asked me.

I’ve got an answer to that. This is all our wheelhouse. We’re all in the same wheelhouse. But I’ve been in this wheelhouse longer, both in Bethel and in River Road. And I’ve seen the effects of time in Bethel and in River Road and in Southwest Eugene.

And the pipeline has grown bigger. More people are entering the pipeline and I’m not going to apologize for our inability to address that. Everybody from Seattle to Los Angeles to San Diego has an inability to address the pipeline.

It’s a matter of housing. It’s a matter of behavioral health treatment. It’s a matter of drug use. All things that are somewhat beyond our control, certainly beyond our absolute control.

So we’re here today, here at this point in time, with the pipeline unalterable. But how do we respond to that pipeline?

Now, from my perspective, right now you’re asking us: Do we renew the contract with a new RFP or the other two options?

From my perspective, we’ve seen a significant evolution in both the service model and facility adaptation from providers in Lane County. And the providers include Everyone Village. It includes Reveille. It includes Ideal Option. It includes our deflection program.

And over the last year, a lot’s happened. My gosh, if you drive down Highway 99 and talk to any member of the Gilbert family who’ve lived there since before I did—and I’ve been there half a century—they’ll say, ‘What has happened here on Highway 99? Why is this looking like this the way it is today?’

Well, it’s because of this pipeline. And it’s not just in River Road, surrounding the Navigation Center, and it’s not just in Bethel, surrounding Dusk to Dawn and other programs that we have in Bethel. It’s all over. It’s in Providence, Rhode Island. It’s everywhere.

So not to make excuses for that, but we are here in Lane County, here in Eugene, and we have a number of different services that can provide wonderful results. 

If anybody has questions about the effectiveness and the foresight and the results of Everyone Village, I’m going to take them on a personal tour with permission of Gabe, and I’ll show them what’s happening there. It’s amazing what is happening there for about this much compared to what government spends. For a very small amount of money.

If anybody questions the effectiveness of Reveille Foundation and the work that they’re doing both with our deflection program and with veterans in general, I’ll take them on a tour and I’ll show them. There’s no question here. They’re doing a fantastic job on a dime. 

If anybody has questions about Ideal Option, I’ll take them on a tour and show them what they’re doing.

If anybody has questions about our deflection program, I’ll show them all of those things. All of these things are positive things, and over the course of the last year, all of these have evolved to a point in time right now where they really are providing a higher level of service and a more effective model than each one of those was providing a year ago. And it’s marvelous to see that.

So here we are at this point in time, and we have a choice before us. Do we renew the ESS contract for a year and extend it through 2028, or continue it through 2028, or do we look at something different?

Well, I believe a year ago we couldn’t have looked at something different, because we didn’t have the exact same picture that we have today. Today we have a better picture, a clearer picture. A year from now it’ll be clearer yet, I’m sure, but we can’t wait another year.

My leaning is toward renewing the ESS contract for one year and issue a new RFP for the contract to start in 7-1-27.

Now, we’re looking at issuing the new RFP sometime in February, March, whenever it may be. I’d like to hasten that as much as possible to start getting the elements of what may be going into the RFP and program.

And we have a great deal of insight. A great lot of information from Gabe and from Clint and from John and from all of the people who are providing tremendous services about how can we get the Navigation Center to the highest and best use in that particular location. That’s what we need to look at.

So I’d like to, and I’ve talked to Kachina (Inman, Lane County Health & Human Services) about this. I’ve talked to you all about this, about: How do we aggressively, in the next year—by the end of the coming year—have something in place that really does take advantage of all of the wonderful, remarkable, mind-boggling services that are happening.

If you drive out to Everyone Village, if you’ve not been there in six months, you’ll be awed at what you see out there. Absolutely. People who are coming through the system and coming out at the end of it better than they went in. Far better than they went in. And with steps along the way. Nobody disagrees with that.

So what I would like to see is a very aggressive look at what is going to go into the new RFP. What do we ask for when the time comes to issue the RFP? And what are we going to expect in return?

I have a couple of questions surrounding that, but you don’t need to answer this right now. But as we put out this new RFP, is it possible, in your estimation, with that one facility that we have, to have multiple providers inside that same facility providing different types of service?

Now, Kate (Budd, Lane County Health & Human Services division manager), you and I have talked about the diversity of options for shelter. We’ve got to have that because of the diversity of people who are in shelter.

And you don’t need to go into details on that, but is it possible to provide, have multiple providers inside the same facility? Certainly not in a great room concept the way we more or less have out there, but divide it up a little bit more. That’s one question that I have.

Another question is: How frequently are people evicted from the Navigation Center compared to how frequently are people evicted from Reveille, for instance? I know the answers to this, more or less, but it’s going to be interesting to get those numbers in place. 

Because eviction, once somebody is evicted, where do they go? Okay, you’re out of the Navigation Center, where do you go? You’re out of Reveille, where do you go? 

Well, let’s not answer that here today, but the answer is, if you ask the Gilbert family: ‘They hang around the Gilbert Center on Highway 99.’ You know, if you ask the people who live on River Road: ‘They hang around the business facility right there on River Road.’ It’s wherever they go and wherever they have been. 

So I’m not going to go into too much detail there, but my bias on this is to get in place a really aggressive set of questions for people to begin to answer so that by the time we get to the end of this year, we have something that’s far more concrete than we’re looking at today, far more effective than we’re looking at today, and far more diverse than we have in place today. Thanks. 

Presenter: Commissioner David Loveall.

Commissioner David Loveall: I appreciate your words, Commissioner Farr. Thank you. It encapsulated a lot of my thoughts and a lot of my questions. And I certainly don’t want to be here being the naysayer for 75 people who need services that we provide. 

I’m here to also address the needs of the community and to balance that argument as well. I agree with an aggressive approach. I think the choice to close the center could be adapted to maybe we do something more aggressive than what we thought or imagined.

I mean, let’s face it: This is a messy situation and sometimes messy situations require some messy solutions to get better and I think we’re kind of at that juncture right now.

I’m a little, I’ve got to confess, I’m a little disappointed. I thought that after our Dec. 9 meeting, after we had instructed and put out some guidance about what the board had head nods to do, that we would be at this place where we’re at now months ago, probably within February of this year, deciding about an RFP to get to a decision today so that we could make a change.

That was my hope as board chair last year to get that. And I’m disappointed we’re not there.

So I’m just going to put that out there because now we’re going to punt this down the road another year. And so we’re going to have, you know, a year’s worth of emails from the community, some disservices, some damages, some broken windows, the businesses are going to move out. I mean, the collateral damage to that, I think, is more extensive than we’re laying claim to.

So that’s why I’m disappointed. So the questions that I want to ask are from the constituents’ point of view is, you know:  What stage are we at? We’re not at the stage where we’re developing an RFP, because apparently we dropped the ball on that after Dec. 9.

So, and we’re not looking at trying to fund this with any kinds of apples-to-apples comparison, because we’re trying to determine if the state funding model per bed is the same model we’re going to use going forward. But the fact remains is that we have some discussion around this, how it functions.

And so the question I have firstly is: Do all the housing programs do front-door assessments? I noticed that one slide you had up there, James, was a comparison, let’s say, to Everyone Village and to the Navigational Center that there was this stark comparison about front-door assessments.

To my knowledge, Everyone Village doesn’t do front-door assessment when people come in. They just take them. They take them, they work with them, they get them where they’re at, and they create a path of success for them.

So I think that comparison to the public is maybe an unfair comparison or not an accurate comparison. I think the survey too, if I’m going to challenge the survey, we claim to have 187 people that have come out of this program, but we surveyed 10. I think that’s a little anemic as far as pulling data from that. So that concerns me.

And then the other thing is the security model that tends to ebb and flow with the Nav Center. When I was over there visiting, man, it was crystal polished and, you know, Navy, what I’d call ‘Navy spick-and-span.’ And a week later, it’s different. Then somebody comes to visit, it gets clean again. And a week later, there’s cars that are being disrepaired in the parking lot.

And so that ebb and flow, non-consistency concerns me as well.

The other thing is the amount of people that the Navigational Center says it puts into permanent housing. How many of those percentages of people succeed? We don’t know. We don’t know the recidivism behind that. And so that data is also lacking in the decision.

So if I was to just put out a feeling of what I would like to do, as Commissioner Farr said, the success of the deflection, Reveille, other agencies, I would almost be inclined to give a 90-day notice to ESS and put those agencies, the deflection, under Clint Riley’s direction, Gabe Piechowicz under Everyone Village, and give them a shot for six months while we do an RFP process, including them in the RFP process.

But I think we need a turnabout of events, because I just don’t think another year is going to bear well with the community. So I would support a different plan moving forward, because at this point in the game, I don’t support any of them. 

Presenter: Commissioner Laurie Trieger:

Commissioner Laurie Trieger: Move approval of Order 26-06-02-06 in the matter of adding funds up to $2,328,924 and extending the contract with Equitable Social Solutions for Navigation Center operations through June 30, 2027 and delegating authority to the county administrator, their designee, or subdelegate to execute contract documents. (I’ll second.)

Would it suit to amend the motion to say adding the funds, etc. Navigation Center through June 30, 2027 ‘with the understanding a new RFP will be issued in appropriate advance of that deadline?’ (That’s fine, yes.) Would that satisfy Commissioner?

Commissioner Pat Farr: Does that lock you into the new RFP? Yes, I think it does, yeah… So it’s remarkable what we’re seeing, the evolution and in between now and the time the RFP is issued. I think I’ll be able—I think I’ll have a clearer picture of what we can do, either with the Navigation Center or with everything surrounding the Navigation Center.

So the picture is getting clearer and clearer all the time, as long as we have this point in time where by this time next year, we’re looking at a different model for the Navigation Center, potentially. We have at least considered a different model for the Navigation Center. Thank you.

Presenter: Commissioner Heather Buch:

Commissioner Heather Buch: I think there’s an opportunity for us to make a leap in the quality of the metrics that is presented based on the people we serve rather than the beds or the building or the house. Because ultimately it is about the humans that we are trying to help. 

So if there’s a way to advance that through partnerships with other institutions, I think that will help the larger conversation because oftentimes agencies are used to using the type of metrics they’ve used in the past year after year. 

But we know in this particular realm, when we’re talking about humans, we need to continually question the metrics that we’re using—if they’re accurate, if they give us the full picture—and circumstances change in the community, with the population that we’re serving, year after year. 

So however we can advance those quality of metrics, I will be very supportive of.

In addition to that, we have already had a conversation about a local preference. I’m still a fan of a local preference, but we decided not to move forward with that at this point. 

You also mentioned when we’re looking at RFPs, it is very important to me that we are providing people with a living wage and benefits. And when we’re reviewing different entities or different RFPs that are coming in, I want to see if we are actually providing that when they submit their applications.

Because different entities do it different ways. Some people can’t afford to provide benefits in these nonprofits that we help fund. But we know that. We have a model that does it and I just want to make it crystal clear that that’s very important to me going forward.

Presenter: Commissioner Ryan Ceniga:

Commissioner Ryan Ceniga: So just to clarify, we have a motion to approve Order 26-06-02-06 in the matter of adding funds up to $2,328,924 and extending the contract with Equitable Social Solutions for Navigation Center operations through June 30, 2027 with a RFP to be issued before then. All those in favor, signify with an aye. (Aye.) All those against, say nay. (Nay. Nay.)

Motion carries 3-2 with Loveall and Ceniga in nay. Thank you very much.

Presenter: Lane County once again chooses to send your tax dollars to an out-of-state corporation. Charlie Rojas may have singled out Commissioner Farr because he was the deciding vote June 2, as on CleanLane, which he has explained by saying it was his opportunity to promote a business from Bethel to work on a showcase project to benefit their own hometown.

At the end of the Tuesday meeting, the commissioners returned from executive session with an announcement on CleanLane: 

Commissioner Pat Farr: The majority of the Board of County Commissioners is reaffirming the county’s continued commitment to the CleanLane project, including pursuing final land use approval for the Goshen site. 

Additionally, the county reaffirms its desire to potentially shift the project site from Goshen to Short Mountain. 

The county reaffirms its prior direction to county counsel to continue to pursue a contract amendment that shifts the project location and schedule to Short Mountain without burdening the county with additional obligations that are not contained in the current CleanLane contract—what one might call ‘a clean amendment.’ Counsel? (Thank you, Commissioner.)

Presenter: Public comments say ‘Hey, we can’t afford the extra administrative costs tacked on by these out-of-state corporations.’ The county says sure, we’ll look at hiring local experts and promoting another hometown success—next time.