Pasadena faces a moral crisis: should city land be used to house homeless seniors or for commerce?

Waiting in the basement to present our views to the
City Council

On Monday, Feb 5, over 25 people showed up at the Pasadena City Council, calling for lower fees for ADUs ("granny flats") and for the city-owned property on the corner of Orange Grove Blvd and Fair Oaks to be used for permanent supportive housing for homeless seniors. On Sunday my wife Jill went to 11 churches and got over 127 signatures from people in this area supporting this position.  17  came to City Hall and pulled cards to speak, on behalf of this viewpoint, though fewer actually spoke because we were  placed at the end of the agenda and most left by 11 pm after waiting four and a half hours. The only persons who spoke against using this site for affordable housing for homeless seniors was Mustang Sally (an eccentric and perhaps mentally ill woman who hates immigrants and loves soldiers and Donald Trump) and Councilmember Gordo. Gordo wanted the City to develop a plan to use this property for commercial development. Councilmember McAustin strongly disagreed. The  vote was tabled until the next Council meeting.

A burning moral question facing the City Council is: What is more important, commercial development or the lives of our homeless seniors? 

This is not just a question of economics, it is a life-and-death question for many of our city's most vulerable residents. That’s a question I hope that City Council members will take seriously and I hope prayerfully (many are people of faith who attend church and synagogue). 

First, I want to commend the City Council for finally taking action on the Heritage Square property after letting it be virtually unused for 15 years. I could ask why the City Council has waited so long to do something about this vital piece of land, but I don’t want to cast blame. I will say that it is the responsibility of the City Council to make sure that City property is used in the best interests of the whole community. 

McAustin helping to build housing for low-income people
on Women's Construction Day

I want to commend Margaret McAustin, a City Council member from District 5 who supports permanent supportive housing such as the one being proposed and also supported "Marv's Place (she is shown here in a Women's Construction Day house build). I also commend our outstanding Housing Director Bill Huang for doing an excellent job in providing nine options for the use of this land, as requested by Council, and recommending permanent supportive housing for seniors as the best and most feasible option. Bill made it clear that we have a golden opportunity to create 69 units of   This would meet a huge need in our city.

Marv's place is a beautiful award-winning example of permanent
supportive housing for homeless families which was built in part thanks
to Margaret McAustin;s support. Other City Councilmembers
are reluctant to allow housing for the homeless in their districts.

permanent supportive housing for homeless seniors, of whom there are approximately 80 living on the streets of our city. This housing will no doubt save the lives of this vulnerable population, most of whom are destined to die on the streets if they are not housed. He also said it might be possible to include up to 49% affordable housing for people who are very low income but not homeless, though to be competitive, we need to make as much of this property for homeless people as possible.

Mr Gordo wants this area to be developed as a commercial site, even though it would mean a loss of HUD funding as well as the loss of an opportunity to do what the community wants and needs. He says that we already have "too much" affordable housing in this area, thereby violating a city housing philosophy of not “saturating” one area with "too much" affordable housing ("too much" is a subjective term, since no hard-and-fast policies or rules have been set).  It should be pointed out that the other three corners of this intersection are used for commercial purposes, and Orange Grove from Los Robles to Lincoln is almost all commercial. Yet Mr. Gordo isn't concerned about "a saturation" of commercial properties. 

As usual, Mr. Gordo claims that he supports affordable housing while proposing policies that thwart its construction. If he is sincere, I  urge him to find land either in his own district or persuade Council members in other districts, to provide land for permanent affordable housing. As he knows only too well, this is a "hard sell."

Victor Gordo (right) owns and profits from ADUs but has proposed high fees
and an "affordability covenant" that would make it nearly impossible for others
to afford building them. He also prefers commercial development rather
than housing for homeless seniors, who will die on the street without it. 

I also wonder why Mr. Gordo (District 5) feels he knows best what  District 3 needs, despite what the residents there say they want and need. This is Mr. Kennedy's district; and as I mentioned, residents have made it clear they want housing for homeless seniors. So apparently, does Councilman Kennedy.

While I believe that avoiding “saturation” is good housing philosophy, it is not a Divine Mandate. In this case, there is a higher moral principle involved, which is why churches and people of conscience support using the land for homeless seniors.

Our religious tradition teaches us that when we can have the power to do good or avoid evil, and we fail to do so, we are responsible for the outcome. If we have the power to create affordable housing for homeless seniors, and fail to do, we are morally responsible for what happens to these seniors, including their deaths.

Each year homeless seniors die on the streets of Pasadena. That’s a sad fact. All Saints Church has an annual memorial service for homeless people who have died in our city, and it’s very moving. I encourage Council members to go to this service, which is very inspiring and attracts people of many faiths.  It is hard to imagine anything more tragic than dying like a dog on the streets of our city. When you go to the All Saints service, you have a chance to meet and get know our homeless residents and it will open your heart and mind.

Fortunately, we have the power to do something about this tragedy. We can build this housing on this site, as many homeless advocates recommended. This is not just good policy, it is also our moral responsibility.

If the Council decides that the Heritage Square location is better suited for commercial development, then it has a moral responsibility to insure that somewhere else in the city 69 units of permanent affordable housing are built for homeless people. It might be also be possible to develop this corner with mixed use, including some commercial use, but we still have a responsibility to produce 69 units of affordable housing for the homeless at this site or somewhere else in the city. There is land available in other areas, but so far City Council members have been unwilling to allow this land to be used for permanent supportive housing for homeless people due to NIMBYISM. Council member McAustin is a notable exception and she deserves commendation. I strongly feel that unless the Council figures out how to create 69 units of housing for the homeless, this property should not be used for commercial purposes.

It is immoral to build to build a shoe store or a mini mart when we could have built housing for homeless seniors on the same site. Human life is far more precious than profit.