Guest Opinion | Sonja K. Berndt: City Needs to do Better With ARPA Funds

Recently, our City received a lifeline from the federal government in extraordinary funds pursuant to the American Rescue Plan Act (“ARPA”) — $26 million this year and $26 million next year.  The federal guidance for expending these funds specifically states “these resources lay the foundation for a strong, equitable economic recovery, not only by providing immediate economic stabilization for households and businesses, but also by addressing the systemic public health and economic challenges that may have contributed to more severe impacts of the pandemic among low-income communities and people of color.”  [Emphasis added.]  

Eligible uses of these funds include critical programs that our City’s most vulnerable and marginalized residents need to move forward from the pandemic such as

• Assistance to households facing negative economic impacts due to COVID-19, including food assistance, rent/mortgage assistance, and job training.
• Uses that address the disproportionate impacts of the pandemic on low-income communities and people of color, who faced higher rates of infection, hospitalization, death, and unemployment, such as
• Programs that facilitate access to health and social services;
• Programs that address housing insecurity and lack of affordable housing;
• Programs that address the impacts of COVID-19 on education and child health; and
• Evidence-based community violence intervention programs to prevent violence and mitigate the increase in violence during the pandemic. 

Our City’s Imprudent and Inequitable Choices for Appropriating ARPA Funds

At the August 16 City Council meeting, staff presented their recommendations for appropriating the remaining $25 million in ARPA funds.  Staff recommended that programs specifically for our most vulnerable and marginalized residents and those disproportionately impacted by the pandemic receive only 7.8% of the ARPA funds.  In contrast, staff recommended that the largest appropriations include the following: 

• $9.8 Million to the General Fund “to backfill revenue losses, maintain essential services, and eliminate the projected operating deficit for FY22.”  (Staff Report, p. 3.)  What was not clear from staff’s presentation is that this “backfilling” to the General Fund facilitates an additional $10 million to “backstop,” the Rose Bowl Operating Company, which has already received $22.5 million from the General Fund reserves for FY 21 and FY22.  (Staff Report, p. 1 & Attachment A.)  Further, staff never mentioned that giving this money back to the General Fund does little for social programs for vulnerable and marginalized residents.  Our Housing and Public Health Departments receive very little from the General Fund. 
• $8.539 million for sidewalk improvements, traffic signals, bridge enhancements and other capital improvements.  Neither staff nor the Council discussed whether any of these capital improvements are necessary at a time when many are still suffering the economic effects of the pandemic.  The only justification given at the Council meeting was that these projects had already been approved and were delayed due to the pandemic.  
• $2 million to remodel Fire Station 38.  Staff asserted that the improvements (remodeling the kitchen and dining and living areas, etc.) are “necessary to maintain operational standards of the facility.” There was no showing to support that assertion and the Council asked no questions about it.  

Residents left out of staff’s recommendations for meaningful ARPA funds include the following:

Persons experiencing homelessness.  Staff recommended only $400,000 for bridge housing and specifically limited that to students of Pasadena City College experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.  Inexplicably, staff left out the 85% of our persons experiencing homelessness who are aged 25 and over.  (2020 Homeless Count.)  We have nearly 300 unsheltered persons experiencing homelessness per the 2020 Homeless Count and possibly thousands who are housing insecure and in desperate need of assistance.  

Renters at risk of eviction due to unpaid rent accrued during COVID-19.  Staff recommended a mere $150,000 for eviction prevention legal services for persons at risk of being evicted when the rent moratorium ends at the end of next month.  Neither staff nor the Council was moved by the pleas of community members for more funding for our housing-insecure renters.

Neighborhoods experiencing violence.  Staff recommended only $200,000 for community violence prevention/intervention efforts.  The Public Safety Committee received a presentation last July showing the value of violence prevention and intervention programs.  But there was no discussion of whether the small appropriation recommended was sufficient to make a significant community impact for a sustained period of time. 

Persons suffering a mental health or substance use disorder crisis.  For many months, the community urged the City to explore a mobile crisis intervention unit like CAHOOTS (Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets) that would be available 24-7 to handle non-life-threatening calls for service for persons experiencing a mental health or substance use disorder crisis, with no uniformed police officer present. This would avoid needless altercations involving persons suffering from mental illness and/or a substance use disorder crisis and a waste of taxpayer funds resulting from arresting these persons for assaulting a police officer who should not have been deployed in the first place.  Last June 14th, the Council promised the community that CAHOOTS would be agendized at the Public Safety Committee, but Mayor Gordo has not done so.  A CAHOOTS-model program has been shown to provide significant cost savings.  

Despite 57 letters in opposition to the staff recommendations and many live speakers at the meeting, only Councilmember Kennedy voted against staff’s recommendations, strongly arguing for more funding for our most vulnerable residents (Vice Mayor Wilson was absent).  Councilmember Hampton urged more funding for our most vulnerable residents with the next $26 million we receive in ARPA funding, but that is not expected until mid-next year.  Several Councilmembers as well as staff focused on the figure of $39.6 million the City had already spent in “COVID response expenditures” for our entire City (presumably including financial help for small businesses, costs related to setting up an alternate care facility at the Pasadena Convention Center, COVID testing, food assistance, etc.).  But that is certainly not a valid justification for failing to meet the continued basic needs of our vulnerable and marginalized residents, which have not magically disappeared.     

What Can We Do to Ensure that Our City Will Not Continue to Leave Behind Our Most Vulnerable and Marginalized Residents in the Post-Pandemic Economic Recovery?

We elect Councilmembers to make decisions that are beneficial to the community as a whole, particularly those community members who are most vulnerable and marginalized, including people of color, whose voices are not heard and who are often overlooked.  Where and when does justice start for these folks?  We need to ask our City staff and leaders:  Do you not value our vulnerable and marginalized community members, or are they simply the easiest to dispose of and ignore?  We need Councilmembers besides Councilmember Kennedy to push back on funding decisions that fail to address the needs of our vulnerable and marginalized community members.   

The City expects to receive another $26 million in ARPA funds next June.  In the meantime, we need to demand more funding for those most in need, both now and when our City receives the ARPA funding next year.  Contact Mayor Gordo and the City Council and tell them that the staff recommendations they approved are unacceptable, and that there are far more urgent needs in our community.  You can also contact our City’s Housing and Public Health Departments to ask specifically what the needs of our most vulnerable folks are and what specific funding is needed to meet them.  Finally, we can and should organize and show our leaders that we are united in our resolve to assist our most vulnerable and marginalized residents and to promote community equity.