2023-04-25 Public Safety Committee - Full Agenda-5236

City of Grand Rapids
Public Safety Committee

Regular Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, April 25, 2023, 12:30 PM
City Hall, 300 Monroe Ave NW, 9th Floor, City Commission Chambers
PUBLIC SAFETY ITEMS
1. Public Health and Safety Report and Next Steps

1
DATE: April 25, 2023
TO: Mark Washington, City Manager
FROM: Mary Kate Berens, Deputy City Manager

Executive Office
SUBJECT: Public Health and Safety Report and Next Steps
In December 2022 the City Commission referred issues around aggressive and misdemeanor
behavior issues occurring Downtown to the Public Safety Committee (PSC). Over the course of
the last several months, the Committee has received information about a variety of public health
and safety issues that occur downtown and in other areas of the City and specific City initiatives
to address those behaviors. The specific City actions identified in response are included in
Attachment 1a and described in more detail below. In addition, a number of community
engagement sessions were held in March to hear about health and safety issues from the
general public.
This memorandum includes an assessment of how existing City initiatives and the system
improvement work of partner organizations designed to better address root cause factors align
with the themes from the public around public health and safety and identifies areas where gaps
exist. Finally, the memo includes modifications in City practices that we intend to make to
address those gaps.
Community Feedback/Public Health and Safety Concerns:
Both through communication of concerns to the City Commission in late 2022, and then through
two general public engagement sessions and focus groups, all held in March 2023, the City has
received feedback about the factors that contribute to or detract from feelings of safety. The
March engagement sessions were intended as a broad conversation about health and safety,
observations about what safety means to them, ideas for ways to improve feelings of safety
where needed and how various stakeholders could contribute to this effort. Flagged here are
summary themes from the question about what tends to make people feel safe (or tends to
detract from that sense of safety). The full summary of all the facilitated questions can be found
as Attachment 1b. The major themes from these engagements capture a wide range of
expectations and experiences, summarized as follows:
• Some mentioned a desire to see police change tactics, asking permission to

examine private property and have greater transparency and less “random profiling.”
Others mentioned feeling safe in the presence of police foot patrols that respond
quickly to calls for support, particularly when officers know people in the
communities they serve in.
• Some mentioned anxiety when driving or walking around Grand Rapids, referencing
areas like Wealthy St., Division St., concerns when approached by strangers or
people who are visibly armed (civilians), with anxiety around carrying a purse.
Packet Pg. 2
1
Conversely, attendees mentioned feeling safe if they know the community they’re in
and the people there.
• Some associated feelings of safety with lights at night, water to drink, accessible
restrooms, and clean public spaces, with high foot traffic.
• Some mentioned anxiety when in spaces with mostly people who do not look like
them (i.e., women of color in a population that is mostly not people of color).
• Some mentioned feeling safe when businesses have proper private security systems
(with things like cameras, etc.) and “make it more inviting.”
• Some mentioned an employee’s piece of mind.
• Several mentioned the City’s HOT team.
• Some mentioned prompt police response, though others mentioned they
occasionally feel unsafe in the presence of uniformed police officers due to prior
experiences.
• Some referenced lighting in public spaces, along with more foot traffic and public
restrooms.
• Some distinguished between feelings of safety downtown compared to what makes
them feel safe in neighborhoods—i.e., they feel safer in their neighborhoods than
they may downtown based on knowing more people in their neighborhood, etc.
• Some attendees with experience staying in shelters expressed feeling a lack of
safety in those spaces.
• Some mentioned variations in feelings of safety by time of day—with higher feelings
of safety between 9p and 4:30p
• Some mentioned the visibility of police or private security on a regular basis as a
way to feel safer.
• (Summary from business owner communications): Persistent concerns about
harassment, public defecation, trespassing, and assault. Notes that despite
significant investment in technology and other responses, employees, visitors and
customers still express concern/lack of willingness to be downtown.
• (Summary from youth-focused engagement session): Youth sheltering is limited and
unsafe. Issue mentioned: fights, toileting in public, due to no facilities. Difficult
mixing ages in same shelter. Tents are safer for youth even in inclement weather.
Services are centralized in the downtown area and people know where to go. Need
places to go that are safe and non-threatening. There are 14 beds for males at Mel
Trotter. Females subject to sexual harassment. Don’t feel safer with police. A “red
van” stalks homeless women and children. No support to address abductions.
The March public engagement sessions included note takers for each table capturing the
facilitated discussion around question prompts. The full set of notes from those note takers is
available on request.
Key Related City Initiatives:
In December 2022 when asked to consider additional ordinances to enhance feelings of safety
in downtown and other commercial areas, the Commission received an overview of the full
range of existing City ordinances related to the conditions that were shared at the time. The
Manager directed the responsible staff and departments to improve education and awareness of
existing ordinances, and track, through reasonable means, complaints and responses to known
issues. Since that time, the City taken a number of steps, a few to highlight are:
Packet Pg. 3
1
• Prepared educational materials about codes and ordinances and who to call for
potential violations
• Used 311 as an intake point for complaints, with clear assignment of response to
the appropriate City departments. For the period of January 1 to March 31, 311
received:
o 73 total calls related to homelessness; of those:
▪ Times a caller reported a homeless encampment – 12
▪ Times a caller was seeking housing or homeless services – 4
• Continued staff support for the Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) including recent
approval to hire additional staff to backfill for what was originally intended as a
temporary assignment. This lends permanence to the team, which focuses on
partnering with Network 180 and other service providers in street outreach.
These efforts build relationship both with those needing services and with
adjacent businesses and residents. Those relationships are responsive to some
of the public safety themes, including compassion for those experiencing
homelessness, assistance in limiting or eliminating conditions that are unsafe for
both the individual sleeping outside and adjacent businesses, and connecting
people with the services that they need. During the period of January 1 to March
31, HOT accomplished the following (highlights):
o Jail and Emergency Department Diversions – 8
o Outreach Contacts – 1,200
o Substance Use Disorder (SUD) Screenings – 27
o Business and Agency Contacts – 83
• Continued our pro-active response to unlawful encampments using our code
enforcement process, with responses to 22 encampments during January 1 to
March 31 (responses always including notice and outreach to find available
resources and alternative shelter)
• Conducted emphasis patrols in City parks, reinforcing the dusk to dawn closure
hours for all parks users (absent a special event permit)
Some of the more persistent complaints that we have received relate to cleanliness of the right
of way and concern about accumulation of items and materials; public urination and defecation;
and trespass by individuals who also commit aggressive or destructive offenses. Following are
City protocols or improvements made specifically on these fronts:
Cleanliness in the Rights-of-Way and Public Parks
• Broadened cross-departmental awareness and understanding of existing ordinances,

particularly around Ordinance 65-12, 9-7-65 (Title IV, Chapter 51 – Streets, Article 1 -
Sec. 4.1. – Definitions) related to obstructions and transport of articles. GR HOT
continues to educate the public on ordinances related to activity on Monroe Center. Most
recently GR HOT has focused on this ordinance Ord. No. 65-12 as it relates to
obstructions incidental to the expeditious movement of articles and things to and from
abutting premises
• Added cleaning daily M-F along the following corridors (Note: moved from weekly to
daily cleaning and inspection in response to volume of complaints and anticipated
increase in need with spring/summer). This work includes coordination with HOT for the
storage and retrieval of any personal belongings, as needed:
o Monroe Center – end to end
Packet Pg. 4
1
o Division Avenue – Fulton Street to Cherry Street

o Bridge Street – Scribner Avenue to Stocking Avenue
o Alley – between Cherry Street and Williams Street
o Leonard Street – under US131
o Ann Street – under US131
o Continued financial support for storage of personal property in partnership with
Mel Trotter
• Commenced seasonal early morning maintenance and cleaning at downtown parks,
including Rosa Parks Circle
Public Urination/Defecation
• Daily (or as needed) cleaning of City parking ramps, with downtown ramps
impacted significantly
• Additional public restrooms are planned for installation, which may provide longer
term improvements, including at Heartside park (open during park hours upon
completion of construction); Veterans’ Park (open during park hours upon
completion of construction); and within the new alley plaza improvement adjacent
to Van Andel Arena (DGRI project)
Repetitive Trespass & Disorderly Conduct
• Working with property owners and private security along Skywalk on a number of
issues, including Crime Prevention through Environmental Design analysis of the
Skywalk and access/egress points
• Worked with City Attorney’s office to increase understanding of how to effectively
use video evidence in enforcement of trespass complaints (outreach and
education of business community to come)
• In response to incidents and complaints of disorderly behavior, even though
there was no significant increase in violent crime, Police Chief Eric Winstrom
increased police patrols in the central business district, resulting in increased
contact with businesses, citations, and arrests during the period of November 23
through January 19. This focused effort led to 50 citations and 52 arrests
(previously reported to PSC in February). While this focused enforcement is not
maintained at all times, it can be used as an emphasis patrol tool.
Actions to generally address feelings of safety
• By the end of April, Parks will have private security contracts underway to
provide mobile night patrol of 11 downtown district parks (Rosa Parks Circle,
Monument, Veteran’s, Heartside, Oakes, Canal, Sixth Street, Fish Ladder,
Lookout, Reservoir, and Belknap) and will visually inspect parks and adjacent
parking lots, instruct individuals in parks after dark to vacate, and communicate
with GRPD for enforcement assistance.
• City, with other partners, contracting for private security to be present on Monroe
Center, Skywalk, other downtown areas.
• Continued diversifying response capability for emergency calls, including HOT
and Mobile Crisis response units
Packet Pg. 5
1
Key Related Systems Improvement Work
Many of the themes we heard during the public engagement process, and the City’s own
experience in enforcing laws and ordinances over the years, point to failures in other safety net
systems as root causes. While not conflating criminality and homelessness, we must
acknowledge that some of the solutions to the conditions complained of as detracting from
public health and safety will be found through improvements to and increases in homelessness
response systems and resources, mental health systems and resources, and broader, barrier-
free access to stable housing. While not exhaustive, the Public Safety committee did receive
information about the current work plans of both the Continuum of Care (homelessness
response) and Housing Kent (backbone organization working on systems improvement across
the spectrum of housing)
Continuum of Care Systems Improvement Work
Courtney Myers-Keaton, Executive Director of the Continuum of Care (CoC) reported to the
PSC in February about the history, structure and strategic plan for the Continuum of Care. That
report is included here as Attachment 1c. Those initiatives most related to the public feedback
themes relate to outreach and availability of housing and improved shelter options. As a
reminder, the CoC is currently working on a street outreach alignment effort, led by Pine Rest,
to align agencies that perform street outreach around a housing first model. The CoC also has
committees working on permanent supportive housing, which would increase access to low-
barrier, permanent housing, and on built-for-zero or other efforts to eliminate homelessness for
families, youth and veterans.
Housing Kent Systems Improvement Work
Eureka People, Executive Director of Housing Kent, reported on the efforts of that backbone
organization in February as well. Attachment 1d is the full report provided to the PSC. Several
of the initiatives identified are aligned with delivering improvements that were identified as
needed in our public engagement sessions, including:
• Building a system map that identifies key providers, funding, processes and other
components of housing in Kent County
• Digging into eviction prevention programs and opportunities to divert evictions further
“upstream” in the process, both to help people stay in housing and to avoid the negative
impact of an eviction on future housing
• Development of a housing dashboard
• Convene a body with lived experience to contribute to the work across many fronts
Other Systems Improvement Work

While we did not provide detailed presentations to the PSC on all other related work efforts with
some connection to public health and safety, there are a number of other initiatives that address
key themes. Many participants in our community engagement meetings noted the need for
more accessible mental health supports. In addition to the co-response units the City has
launched with HOT and Mobile Crisis response, the new Behavioral Health Crisis Center is
anticipated to open later in 2023. This center is a partnership of Network 180 and Trinty Health
St. Mary’s and is expected to dramatically increase the speed of access to mental health
support for those in crisis.
A number of participants also spoke to the need to increase feelings of community and build
relationships between all those who reside and work in our neighborhoods. Again, this sort of
Packet Pg. 6
1
community-building work is going on throughout the City in many venues. A few efforts to
highlight include:
• Heartside Quality of Life work and on-going updates and engagement
• The City’s Community Master Plan update, with significant efforts at community
engagement. While the policies that will come from that update are focused on land
use, development and other features of the built environment, there is significant overlap
with the themes of what makes community gathering spaces feel welcoming and safe
• The City’s Neighborhood Summit program. This year’s Summit is May 20th, and this
year’s theme is Your City, Your Voice: Co-Creating Belonging with workshops
aligning to topics on belonging and inclusion, design work, and community collaboration
to address issues affecting our City.
Identified Gaps & Next Steps
Mapping the major public feedback themes to existing City initiatives and systems
improvements, we have identified a number of gaps between those efforts and expected
outcomes. Following is a summary of those gaps, as well as the steps we will take to address
those gaps:
• Trespassing – the enforcement process is difficult and timely response is

challenging given the transitory nature of the violation. We are working on
process improvements, and will update protocols to clarify noticing requirements
and the potential use of video evidence followed by education for businesses and
property owners.
• Accumulation of articles in the ROW/clean-up of human waste –
o Improved coordination between responsible parties for clean-up, so that
regardless of where a complaint comes in, the correct entity (City, DGRI or
private property owner) is informed and addresses the issue. Work to
commence this month.
o Continuing education to impacted businesses about the potential benefit of
installing cameras in locations where this is a persistent issue, and use of
video evidence in enforcement and prosecution
o As noted above, additional public restrooms are expected to come on-line
downtown. Those new facilities may help meet the need for available public
restrooms, or additional facilities may need to be considered in more
locations
• Skywalk improvements identified through CPTED, and adoption of uniform rules
of use – work already underway with adjacent owners
• Street outreach – while efforts are underway through the CoC to align street
outreach efforts across those member organizations around shared objectives
and metrics, there may remain gaps to ensure that the street outreach portion of
the homelessness response system can quickly connect those living unsheltered
with housing units and appropriate supports to remain housed. This work must
proceed quickly; additional assessment work will be needed to adapt policies,
practices and increase resources to improve the pace with which those living
unhoused are moved into permanent housing
• There were conflicting views expressed about the need for additional ordinances
to address issues of health and safety. While some expressed the belief that
there ought to be ways to limit things like sleeping in public rights-of-way, others
Packet Pg. 7
1
expressed concern about pursuing that course of action. While there is not
consensus on that point, it is clear that better public information is needed to
continually communicate about what is and is not allowed in public spaces.
Under the City’s current set of ordinances, it is permissible to sit or lie within
public rights-of-way, so long as one is not blocking passage or doorways or
presenting a safety hazard. This is separate from the accumulation of items in
the right-of-way, which is described above.
• Many of the solutions offered in our public engagement session offered ideas
that are in whole or in part already underway. This reveals a gap in
communication and transparency. We intend to report to this body quarterly on
the efforts and initiatives described here to allow for better public access to
information and to increase transparency and accountability
Following review of this information, the Public Safety Committee is anticipated to discuss the
staff-identified gaps and proposed next steps. The Committee may concur in that work, or may
recommend modifications or additions for consideration by the City Manager or the City
Commission.
Prepared by April Moayyer
Packet Pg. 8
1.a
Attachment: Attachment 1a: AO-2022-03 Downtown Health and Safety (Public Health and Safety Report and Next Steps)
DATE: December 15, 2022
TO: Eric Winstrom, Police Chief

John Lehman, Fire Chief
Kate Berens, Deputy City Manager
Doug Matthews, Assistant City Manager
Connie Bohatch, Managing Director
James Hurt, Managing Director
FROM: Mark Washington, City Manager
SUBJECT: City Manager Administrative Order 2022-03: Response to

Problematic Behaviors to Improve Health and Safety
Downtown and In Neighborhoods
The City’s “Safe Community” strategic priority is to make sure all people feel safe and
are safe at all times throughout our community. Ensuring safety for the unhoused
community involves a housing-first systemic approach that emphasizes getting people
into temporary shelter, supportive services, and permanent stable housing.
To date, the City has responded with the following:

• Continued funding for homeless service and shelter providers.
• Allocating funding and support for the Affordable Housing Fund.
• Participation in the Continuum of Care, Essential Needs Task Force, Housing
Kent and the Housing Stability Alliance and collective community-wide
coordination and commitment for ending homelessness.
• Partnership with Network180 and other social service providers to ensure we
address mental and behavioral health issues for the unhoused community.
• Creation of the Homeless Outreach Team (HOT).
• Partnership with Network180 for dedicated Mobile Crisis Response (co-response
team) services to support the Police Department in responding to mental health
calls.
• Enhanced focus on downtown public health issues, with the City’s Public Works
Department and Homeless Outreach Team partnering to improve
responsiveness to sanitation issues.
• Partnership with Mel Trotter Ministries to operate a storage program to reduce
the accumulation of personal belongings outdoors.
• Partnership with Downtown Grand Rapids Incorporated (DGRI) and others to
make environmental design changes in public spaces to increase lighting,
visibility and feeling of safety.
• Partnership with DGRI and independent City efforts to increase private security in
and around Monroe Center and downtown parks.
• Partnership with DGRI in creation of a stand-alone, 24/7, year-round public
restroom at Division and Weston.
1
Packet Pg. 9
1.a
• Improvements in Heartside Park that will include year-round public restroom

facilities and recently approved upgrades to Veteran’s Park historic building that
will include public restrooms.
• Funding for, and deployment of, public safety camera trailers at key times,
locations and events.
Despite these efforts and progress, reports of problematic situations and behaviors
have continued and calls for additional City responses have intensified. General
concerns on behalf of unhoused persons have included exposure to cold weather and
other hazards, as well as unmet mental and behavioral health needs. Specific
behavioral concerns related to downtown safety that have been expressed to the City
Commission include:
• Defecation and urination in public places

• Aggressive solicitation, including following and other threatening behavior
• Sleeping in public places, including at building entrances
• Leaving personal items unattended and general accumulation of items in public
places
• Public intoxication
• Physical assault
• Trespassing
• Littering
While there has been some public advocacy for the City Commission to create new
ordinance provisions to ban sitting or lying in public spaces and aggressive
panhandling, there was no interest by the City Commission in creating new ordinance
provisions as proposed but an overwhelming desire to utilize as many provisions as
possible in the current City Code to address recent concerns.
Chapter 152 “Disorderly Conduct” of the City Code includes multiple provisions that
regulate many of the reported types of problematic behaviors. They are as follows:
Section Offenses
9.132(1) Commit an assault or battery upon another person
9.132(2) Molest another person
9.132(4) Willfully obstruct free or uninterrupted passage in any street, on any
sidewalk, in any public place or in any other place to which the public is
admitted
9.133(1) Trespass upon the premises of another or unlawfully remain upon the
premises of another to the annoyance or disturbance of the lawful
occupants
9.133(2) Prowl about the premises of any other person in the nighttime without
authority or the permission of the owner of such premises
9.133(3) Lurk, lie in wait or be concealed in any business, yard or other
premises with intent to commit any crime or offense whatsoever
9.133(4) Willfully, wantonly or recklessly damage, destroy, alter or deface public
property or the property of any other person
9.133(5) Take or remove or attempt to take or remove any property not his or
her own
2
Packet Pg. 10
1.a
9.133(6) Obtain goods or money by fraud, trick or under false pretenses

9.133(7) Meddle with, tamper with, interfere with, move, damage or disconnect
any property not his or her own
9.133 Willfully, wantonly or recklessly damage, destroy, alter or deface public
property or the property of any other person
9.133(9) Expectorate, urinate, defecate or perform any other act which creates a
hazardous or deleterious condition in any public place or upon the
property of any other person. (This section shall not apply to public
restroom facilities.)
9.134(1) Be in a state of intoxication in a public place endangering directly the
safety of another person or property
9.134(2) Be in a state of intoxication in any public place in a manner that causes
a public disturbance
9.136(1) Engage in peeping in the windows of any inhabited place
9.136(2) Make an indecent exposure of his or her person
9.136(5) Loiter in any public building or in any other building or premises owned
by another person after having been requested to leave by the lawful
owner or occupant or a representative of the owner or occupant
9.137(1) Create or engage in any disturbance, fight or quarrel in a public place
Effective immediately, I am directing the Police Chief to utilize existing ordinances and
resources, consistent with applicable state and federal statutes and case law, to
respond, monitor, de-escalate, and – where necessary – take other enforcement actions
against violations that threaten public health and safety.
Other existing code references relevant to the reported problematic behaviors include
the following:
Section Offenses
Michigan Vehicle Code
257.676b (1) A person, without authority, shall not block, obstruct, impede, or
otherwise interfere with the normal flow of vehicular, streetcar, or
pedestrian traffic upon a public street or highway in this state, by
means of a barricade, object, or device, or with his or her person…. (4)
A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction.
International Fire Code
1003.6 Obstructions shall not be placed in the minimum width or require
capacity of a means of egress component (such as a doorway)
City Code, Chapter 25 “Solid Waste Management”
2.6 Litter and Accumulation - No person shall throw or deposit any
Garbage or Rubbish upon or into any street, alley or other property,
public or private. It shall be the duty of every occupant of property and
of every owner of unoccupied property at all times to maintain the
Premises occupied or owned by him or her, in a clean and orderly
condition, permitting no deposit or accumulation of Garbage or Rubbish
upon such Premises.
City Code, Chapter 41 “Parks and Recreation”
3.8 It shall be unlawful for any person, except those persons authorized by
the Director of Parks and Recreation, to enter, be in or remain within
3
Packet Pg. 11
1.a
the public parks after sunset on one day or before sunrise on the
following day
3.14 No person shall start, accelerate, furnish fuel to or approach an open
fire in any public park (does not apply to cooking food in a grill)
3.24 No person shall consume, possess, or bring into any City Park or other
area under the jurisdiction of the Parks and Recreation Department any
beer, wine, liquor, malt or any other alcoholic beverage (unless
permitted by the Director in designated locations)
3.25 No person shall camp, conduct or participate in an overnight outing or
any similar activities in a City Park or other area under the jurisdiction
of the Parks and Recreation Department. The use of tents, trailers,
motor homes is not permitted in City Parks.
City Code, Chapter 151 “Nuisances”
9.92 No person shall throw or deposit litter in or upon any street, sidewalk or
other public place within the City except in public receptacles
9.98 No person shall throw or deposit litter in any park within the City except
in public receptacles
9.108 Personal property of any kind, including but not limited to personal
belongings, interior furnishings and equipment, shall be deemed to be
abandoned, of no value and unlawful if placed at or left for more than
twenty-four (24) hours on any public right-of-way or on any part of a
property lying between the principal building and a public right-of-way,
except as specifically permitted
Effective immediately, I am directing all departments involved in enforcing these codes

to respond to, de-escalate and remedy violations of these codes and enforce them
when there is a threat to public health and safety.
Further, I am directing the Fire Chief, Assistant City Manager, and Managing Director of
Public Services to establish procedures and protocols for identifying, tagging, and
storing retrieved items that are left unattended.
Further, I am directing the Assistant City Manager and Managing Director of Public
Services to implement an intensified cleaning program in certain corridors throughout
the city.
Further, I am directing the Deputy City Manager to evaluate the effectiveness of these
intensified responses, consider potential adjustments, and report that information to me
on a bi-weekly basis.
Finally, all employees are expected to ensure that complaints/concerns are referred to
the appropriate department/area as outlined below and that they are responded to as
quickly as possible.
4
Packet Pg. 12
1.a
What’s Happening? What Can I Do?
Someone is creating a safety
concern, conducting illegal Contact GRPD at 616-456-3400 or 911 in emergencies.
activity, or is violent.
Contact the Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) at 616-456-4240 or
Someone is sleeping in an at grhot@grcity.us in non-emergency situations. HOT currently
alcove, on the sidewalk, or other operates from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. Call 911 if a person is non-
public space. responsive, needs medical attention, or another emergency
situation.
Contact GRPD at 616-456-3400 or 911 if the situation is actively
occurring.
For cleanup of the sidewalk or other public space, call 311 or 616-
456-3000 to submit a service request to Public Works.
Someone is urinating or
defecating outside in a public
For cleanup of private property, contact DGRI at 616-250-8263 to
space.
assist with cleaning in the Downtown Improvement District
boundaries.
Contact HOT at 616-456-4240 if the individual is believed to be

homeless.
Apart from cleaning done by property or business owners,
additional cleaning services and resources vary by location.
For cleanup of the sidewalk or other public space, call 311 or 616-
The area around the doorway or 456-3000 to submit a service request to Public Works
storefront is unclean.
For cleanup of private property, DGRI can assist in the Downtown
Improvement District (DID).
Next Step of West Michigan provides additional cleaning services

in the Burton/Division block of Burton Heights.
If a property owner or representative asks a person to leave the
property and they refuse, contact GRPD at 616-456-3400 or 911 in
emergencies. When an officer arrives, make the request again in
their presence. Trespassing can then be enforced. Maintain a
Someone refuses to leave or was record of individuals who are trespassed from the property.
banned from my property and
returned. If a person is banned from the location, be sure it has been
communicated to them. If they return, contact GRPD for
assistance. You will need to provide at least verbal confirmation to
the officer that the person was banned from the property. Maintain
a record of individuals who are banned from the property.
Someone is spending long Loitering is not illegal. People can typically remain on or in public
periods of time in a public space spaces. One exception is public parks cannot be used after dark
near my residence or business. unless otherwise approved by the Parks Director.
Someone asked me for food or Panhandling is not illegal in the State of Michigan or the City of
money in the street. Grand Rapids.
5
Packet Pg. 13
1.a
Lighting, cameras, space activation, targeted and routine cleaning,

and inaccessible electrical outlets help prevent unsafe and/or
undesirable behavior.
How to prevent crime and reduce
The City provides free CPTED (Crime Prevention Through
nuisance behavior near my
Environmental Design) Assessments. Contact Julie Niemchick at
property.
jniemchick@grand-rapids.mi.us for assistance.
Trespassing enforcement can be done on private property,

including parking lots, doorways, lobbies, private stairwells, etc.
Contact the Downtown Ambassador team with DGRI at 616-250-
8263.
Resources for cleaning and Services available in the Downtown Improvement District (DID) are
hospitality cleaning, maintenance (fix benches, trash cans, etc.),
beautification, hospitality, and limited graffiti removal.
Services available in the Downtown Development Authority (DDA)

are hospitality and limited graffiti removal.
General questions about Call 311 or contact Tammy Vincent, Homelessness Coordinator,
homelessness in Grand Rapids tvincent@grcity.us
This order is effective immediately and continues until further notice.
6
Packet Pg. 14
1.b
Grand Rapids Community Conversa�ons On Safety
Thema�c Summary
14 April 2023
Editor’s note: These notes represent comments repeatedly referenced in notes taken by facilitators at
Attachment: Attchamnet 1b: NCL summary report (Public Health and Safety Report and Next Steps)
each small group discussion table. Attention was paid to connecting related ideas into a single
statement. An unabridged collection of all notes taken in their original form is available upon request.
Monday, March 20 Public Session @Goei Center
- Approximately 80 atendees from the community, along with City staff and community partners,
atended the event at Goei Center.
- When asked why they had chosen to atend the session,
o some atendees focused on safety and cleanliness concerns in and around the
downtown area and a desire for more enforcement of laws governing problema�c
behavior in the central business district and on public transit.
o Other atendees focused on finding strategies to address the underlying needs of the
unhoused in Grand Rapids, from shelter to affordable housing to mental health, as well
as programming for parents and children in foster care.
o A few atendees also men�oned a desire for higher staffing and beter training for the
Grand Rapids police department.
- When asked what makes them feel safe,
o Some men�oned a desire to see police change tac�cs, asking permission to examine
private property and have greater transparency and less “random profiling.” Others
men�oned feeling safe in the presence of police foot patrols that respond quickly to calls
for support, par�cularly when officers know people in the communi�es they serve in.
o Some men�oned anxiety when driving or walking around Grand Rapids, referencing
areas like Wealthy St., Division St., concerns when approached by strangers or people
who are visibly armed (civilians), with anxiety around carrying a purse. Conversely,
atendees men�oned feeling safe if they know the community they’re in and the people
there.
o Some associated feelings of safety with lights at night, water to drink, accessible
restrooms, and clean public spaces, with high foot traffic.
o Some men�oned anxiety when in spaces with mostly people who do not look like them
(i.e., women of color in a popula�on that is mostly not people of color).
o Some men�oned feeling safe when businesses have proper private security systems
(with things like cameras, etc.) and “make it more invi�ng.”
- When asked for recommenda�ons, atendees offered several sugges�ons:
o More aten�on paid to affordable housing, including a reduc�on of bureaucracy and
poten�ally u�lizing abandoned buildings in places like Eastern & Franklin and Eastern &
Cherry) and efforts to address nega�ve effects of gentrifica�on
Packet Pg. 15
1.b
o A wider array of op�ons for the unhoused to turn to for emergency shelter; current
op�ons some�mes feel insufficiently safe or invi�ng, par�cularly for those batling
addic�ons.
o The presence of more community officers—i.e., either outreach officers or police officers
more familiar with the neighborhood
o Shi� funds away from enforcement and towards social services.
o More resources for mental health care, par�cularly for those who cannot afford it.
o More training for officers to allow for de-escala�on, more co-response involving officers
and mental health professionals
o Greater openness, dialogue, and more rela�onships across communi�es within Grand
Rapids
o Addi�onal outreach to engage the unhoused in dialogue.
o Reduce barriers to emergency shelter (i.e., op�ons for those with addic�on, etc.)
o Increased walkability across the City, allowing more people to develop rela�onships
o Free bus passes for the unhoused
o A hub for the unhoused to get resources even if sleeping outside (bathroom, showers,
case workers, mental health workers, etc.)
Tuesday, March 21st, Grand Rapids Chamber hosted business owner focus group
See Appendix A.
Tuesday, March 21st, United Way focus group with unhoused youth and young adults
See Appendix B.
Wednesday, March 22nd, Grand Rapids Public Library (downtown loca�on)
- Approximately 112 atendees from the community, along with City staff and community
partners, atended the event at the Downtown branch of the Grand Rapids Public Library.
Several iden�fied themselves as unhoused.
- When asked why they had chosen to atend the session,
o some atendees focused on safety and cleanliness concerns in and around the
downtown area and a desire for more enforcement of laws governing problema�c
behavior in the central business district and on public transit. Some of these
perspec�ves came from downtown residents, those who work downtown, and those
who are associated with downtown businesses.
o Other atendees focused on finding strategies and iden�fying more resources to address
the underlying needs of the unhoused in Grand Rapids, from shelter to affordable
housing to mental health, as well as programming for parents and children in foster care.
o Several atendees came from an area high school to learn more about local issues and
civic engagement.
o Several atendees who iden�fied as unhoused or homeless discussed a desire to feel
safer, with a more stable housing situa�on along with other needed resources and
services (educa�on, transporta�on, mental health care, safer shelter space, etc.)
o Several expressed opposi�on to a proposed ordinance to address safety concerns while
s�ll expressing interest in finding other solu�ons.
Packet Pg. 16
1.b
o Atendees expressed pride in its city and a desire for it to be safe for all, including visitors
and employees.
o Some expressed a desire to build rela�onships and partnerships to help provide security
and/or support for the unhoused.
- When asked how they would define safety,
o Some men�oned an employee’s piece of mind.
o Several men�oned the City’s HOT team.
o Some men�oned prompt police response, though others men�oned they occasionally
feel unsafe in the presence of uniformed police officers due to prior experiences.
o Some referenced ligh�ng in public spaces, along with more foot traffic and public
restrooms.
o Some dis�nguished between feelings of safety downtown compared to what makes
them feel safe in neighborhoods—i.e., they feel safer in their neighborhoods than they
may downtown based on knowing more people in their neighborhood, etc.
o Some atendees with experience staying in shelters expressed feeling a lack of safety in
those spaces.
o Some men�oned varia�ons in feelings of safety by �me of day—with higher feelings of
safety between 9p and 4:30p
o Some men�oned the visibility of police or private security on a regular basis as a way to
feel safer.
- When asked for recommenda�ons to address challenges iden�fied earlier in the conversa�on,
atendees offered several sugges�ons:
o Several suggested stronger partnerships and beter communica�on among organiza�ons
set up to serve the unhoused—combining shelter resources with job-related resources,
medical resources, educa�onal resources, transporta�on resources, and financial
educa�on/assistance.
o Several men�oned the significance of forming stronger rela�onships among Grand
Rapidians from different parts of the community or walks of life.
o Some suggested that the City con�nue its push for more housing affordable to those
who are currently unhoused.
o Several discussed the rela�onship between the unhoused and the police and the need
for beter police training to de-escalate situa�ons involving the unhoused and beter
relate to them.
o Some suggested that business owners and employees be given similar training in de-
escala�on.
o Several called for beter condi�ons at exis�ng shelters—improved sleeping
arrangements, more sanitary condi�ons, more access for those who may be struggling
with substance abuse, etc.—along with broader access to showers, bathrooms, lockers,
and clean environments for the unhoused.
o Several reinforced the value of the HOT (Homeless Outreach Team) as a key player in
ensuring safety for all and called for its expansion (in staffing, hours of service, etc.).
o Several called for broader access to mental health services for all.
o Some suggested that some of the police department’s current budget be redirected to
social services for the unhoused.
Packet Pg. 17
1.b
Appendix A: Chamber of Commerce Focus Group Notes
This mee�ng involved 16 members who were invited by the Vice President of Government Affairs, Josh
Lunger. Larry Schooler and Benita Duran of the Na�onal Civic League facilitated this conversa�on that
involved approximately 18 members, 12 in person and 6 members on zoom.
The mee�ng opened with comments from Kate Berens, Deputy City Manager, who provided context for
the discussion that followed. She outlined the process of the Public Safety Commitee and the desire to
seek input that would help inform the discussions of the Public Safety Commitee that were scheduled to
follow in April.
Themes and general comments
Economic Issues
There was concern expressed related to the changes that business owners are experiencing downtown.
Some members expressed concern about the loss of business, foot traffic, downtown diners, and impact
on local retail tax base.
Related to workers downtown, businesses are experiencing added costs for security of their employees –
keyed entry devices at doors, security for a�er-hours access and walking employees to their parked
vehicles.
Long-term investments for businesses downtown are at risk in addi�on to the loss of talent and or
difficulty in hiring employees who want to work downtown.
People vote with their feet and don’t come back – if they have an unsafe or unpleasant experience
downtown.
Concern about the loss of tax base and also paying for district improvements.
Safety
Concerns expressed related to employees, visitors, and residents of downtown
Things have changed in the past two years – now most banks and offices must lock their front doors
otherwise risk random people coming into buildings, damaging property or injuring people.
Cleanliness
Observa�ons and direct experiences shared related to toile�ng in public and other surprising and
inappropriate behavior.
Live /Work Spaces
Packet Pg. 18
1.b
Many changes have had to be implemented for safe access to offices and buildings.
There have been staffing decreases due to Covid and fewer people in offices in the past 2 years; and not
seeing a return in equal numbers.
Behavior in public spaces
Sense of empowerment without consequences, by this new popula�on camping and sleeping in the
downtown area.’
Mental health issues need to be addressed and supported.
Members have iden�fied a popula�on of 61 people who do not desire shelter or a permanent place to
call home. This subgroup is an issue.
Policy issues
Members at this mee�ng were aligned on the issues that are needed here.
Leadership and Act with urgency
Address sleeping on sidewalks and public spaces.
Address pan handling – look at other ci�es for models. (though it is noted that at earlier �me, a member
expressed that we don’t want to be like Portland or Aus�n, we want to shape policies and prac�ces that
address what we need now.
Bring the sheriffs’ offer back to the table.
Look at improving wrap around services for the ‘61’ and iden�fy the gaps.
Packet Pg. 19
1.b
Appendix B: Focus Group With Unhoused Youth/Young Adults at United Way
Summary Notes
21 March 2023
This small group roundtable was organized by Director of Coali�on to End Homelessness, Courtney
Myers-Keaton. There were seven members of this group along with the staff of the Youth Collec�ve,
Housing Kent and Ms. Myers-Keaton. Larry Schooler and Benita Duran led the conversa�on on behalf of
the Na�onal Civic League and probed a range of issues and ques�ons.
Issues of young adults who are unhoused or experiencing homelessness on occasion are:
Services and Safety:
Support services exist, but you have to know who to talk with and/or where to go.
Youth sheltering is limited and unsafe. Issue men�oned: fights, toile�ng in public, due to no facili�es.
Difficult mixing ages in same shelter. Tents are safer for youth even in inclement weather. Services are
centralized in the downtown area and people know where to go. Need places to go that are safe and
non-threatening. There are 14 beds for males at Mel Troter. Females subject to sexual harassment.
Don’t feel safer with police. A “red van” stalks homeless women and children. No support to address
abduc�ons.
A “good night’s sleep” is four hours without being woken up. Minimum six for some. Bedding and a few
belongings are carried and stored.
Cleanliness:
Toilets are needed – access to them is very limited. Some�mes when there’s one at a site, the owners
padlock the doors. Try to use restaurant restrooms but requires buying something. Very difficult and
stressful to look for a place to wash hands and face, and use a toilet. Some�mes it is a tense situa�on
between property owners.
Jail matresses are dirty. Lice has been an issue in the past at jail.
Won’t o�en find accessible restrooms. Dig a hole for it. 6:30p bathrooms locked, o�en completely
locked in winter. Finding porta poty is a hot commodity. Some�mes construc�on workers padlock it.
Observa�ons of people they meet:
Many are from Chicago, Florida. Small influx. People say they are put on buses from Detroit, Ann Arbor.
A one-way bus �cket is $30. A health system in N. Michigan gives rides to homeless shelter. The
reputa�on of GR is that it has more resources.
Final comments:
Hard to relate to us (young people who are unhoused). Discrimina�on is real, and it is even harder for
youth of color. Can’t just push homelessness away. Remember everyone is human. Not an easy lifestyle,
not a choice for many. Have some compassion. Ask us what we need and what can work more o�en.
Packet Pg. 20
1.c
Attachment: Attachment 1c: CTEH - Public Safety - Briefing of Services to Unhoused 2-7-
Grand Rapids Area Coalition to End
Homelessness Overview
Public Safety Committee
February 7, 2023
Packet Pg. 21
1
1.c
Grand Rapid Coalition to End Homelessness
Mission
To make homelessness in Kent County rare, brief, and non-recurring
Work
To provide community leadership and build capacity in the homeless response
and prevention system through cross sector engagement, collaborative planning,
Courtney Myers-Keaton
education, and equity focused solutions.
CTEH Director
~60 partner agencies
Packet Pg. 22
2
Roles & Responsibilities of a CoC
1.c
CoC Systems Operation and Planning
Designing and operating a HMIS; reporting data to HUD
Developing and maintaining a Coordinated Entry System
Conducting Point-In-Time (PIT) and Housing Inventory Count (HIC)
Governance and Structure
Preparing Annual CoC Program Application to HUD
3 Pg. 23
Packet
1.c
Coalition Membership
• A Mother’s Touch • Exodus Place • Kent County • REAP
• Access of West MI • Fair Housing Center Community Action
• Safe Haven
• Arbor Circle • Family Promise • Essential Needs Task
Force (ENTF) • Senior Neighbors
• AYA Youth Collective • Fountain Street Church
• Kent District Library • The Salvation Army
• Bethany Christian Services • Garfield Park NA
• Genesis • Kent ISD • Veterans Health
• Catherine’s Health Center
Administration
• City of Grand Rapids • GLIDE • Legal Aid
• Well House
• City of Wyoming • Grand Rapids Housing
Commission • LINC Up
• YWCA
• Cherry Health
• GRPL • MDHHS
• Community Rebuilders • Network180
• Grand Rapids Street Medicine • Mel Trotter
• Covenant House • Individual community
• Health Net • Noors Heaven members
• Degage Ministries
• United Way
• Disability Advocates • North Kent Connect • Youth Action Board
• Hispanic Center
• Dwelling Place • Pine Rest • Veterans Action Board
• ICCF
4 Pg. 24
Packet
COMMITTEES & DESCRIPTIONS
1.c
Packet Pg. 25
Packet
1.c
6 Pg. 26
1.c
Project Types
• Street Outreach
Agencies include: Pine Rest, Arbor Circle, AYA, network180, Mel Trotter, VA, HOT
• Rapid Re-housing – short-term rental assistance to help resolve episodes of
homelessness
Agencies include: Community Rebuilders, ICCF, The Salvation Army, Grand Rapids Housing
Commission, Arbor Circle
• Permanent Supportive Housing – long-term rental assistance coupled with supportive
services
Agencies include: Community Rebuilders, Dwelling Place, ICCF
• Transitional Housing – temporary housing up to 24 months and may include supportive
services
Agencies include: YWCA, Safe Haven, Community Rebuilders, AYA, Covenant House
• Emergency Shelter
Agencies include: Mel Trotter, Degage, Family Promise, ICCF, Community Rebuilders
7 Pg. 27
Packet
1.c
Street Outreach Lead Agency:
Pine Rest (New Community Role)
• Establish shared community standards and procedures for conducting
street outreach including outreach coverage and coordination.
• Ensure coverage and efficiencies in outreach to meet the following
benchmark: 90% or more of unsheltered people are included on the
community by-name list.
• Additionally, street outreach programs must conduct housing-focused
outreach and engagement to include locating, identifying, and building
relationships with unsheltered persons living in places not meant for
human habilitation and assist them in accessing emergency shelter,
physical and behavioral health services, permanent housing through
linkage to the community’s Coordinated Entry system, and additional
supports based on individual need.
8 Pg. 28
Packet
Day centers
Other resources
Heartside, Mel Trotter, Degage
Packet
1.c
9 Pg. 29
1.c
10-year plan and what has worked
Shift to housing first
Rapid re-rehousing
Centralized intake
10 Pg. 30
Packet
1.c
HOUSING FIRST
Evidence-based approach to ending homelessness based on the following main
premises:
• Homelessness is a crisis in housing and can be solved with the provision of
housing;
• All people can be successful in housing, no matter their history with housing or
life factors;
• There are no pre-conditions necessary to becoming housed, no classes,
treatments, or time requirements are necessary to become “ready” for housing;
• Support services should be tailored to each person’s unique needs and desires to
ensure success in housing;
• After a person is housed, other challenges in life become easier to address. A
stable foundation is critical to progress in life;
• All people experiencing homelessness should be treated with dignity and
respect and have the right to self-determination.
11 Pg. 31
Packet
1.c
HUD CoC Program Competition
Overview Current Funding
 Provides funding for efforts to quickly rehouse
homeless individuals and families $7,376,285
 Annual local competition process
Funds:
• Ensure adequate supply of permanent housing for
• $100,000 – HMIS
target populations – chronically-homeless, youth,
• $504,577 – Supportive Services Only
families, veterans, domestic violence
• $1,827,017 – Joint Transitional Housing & Rapid
 Community collaborative application competes Rehousing
with CoC’s across the country to retain and • $4,545,323 – Permanent Supportive Housing and
increase funding Rapid Rehousing
• $399,368 – Transitional Housing
• $221,289 – Planning (3% of total)
Bonus: $825,776
12 Pg. 32
Packet
2022
Priority
Ranking
Projects and
Packet
1.c
13 Pg. 33
1.c
DATA OVERVIEW
All data is from the Homeless Management Information System
Packet Pg. 34
Point-In-Time Count
Kent County – Homelessness Data
Packet
1.c
15 Pg. 35
1.c
Kent County – Homelessness Data
Point-In-Time Count 2023
PRELIMINARY DATA
• Emergency shelter: 844 individuals (287 in families)
• Transitional housing: 84 individuals
• Unsheltered: 114 (current estimate)
• 94: Grand Rapids
• Total estimate not including data from Victim Service Providers: 1042
16 Pg. 36
Packet
1.c
Vitals Data
• Average length of time homeless
• # of people prevented from becoming homeless
• # of individuals and families securing permanent housing
• # of individuals and families returning to homelessness
• # households experiencing homelessness
• Overall equity in each of the above Vitals*
17 Pg. 37
Packet
52
60
64
1.c
Packet Pg. 38
Packet
1.c
19 Pg. 39
1.c
January 1 – December 31, 2021
Individual Count
9000
8,048 8000
8048 8048 8048
Individuals 7000
who have had 6000 5678
at least one 5000
episode of 4000
homelessness 3000
2366
2000
937
1000
0
Adults Children Youth 20 Pg. 40
Packet
1.c
January 1 – December 31, 2021
Household Count
6000
5,282 5000
5282 5282 5282
Households 4265
who have had 4000
at least one 3000

episode of
homelessness 2000
1061
1000
96
0
Singles Families Child Only 21 Pg. 41
Packet
1.c
October 1,2020 – September 30, 2021
Emergency 2,963 506 HH exited 21% permanent
Shelter/Safe households to permanent destinations
sheltered housing
Haven
3,387 506 197 HH exited
Rapid Re- households to permanent
89% permanent
Households Housing housed housing
destinations
Served
Permanent 145 41 HH exited 48% permanent
Supportive households to permanent
destinations
housed housing
Housing
Transitional 148 23 HH exited 52% permanent

households to permanent destinations
Housing housed housing
22 Pg. 42
Packet
1.c
THANK YOU
For questions or more information, please contact:
Courtney Myers-Keaton
cmyers-keaton@hwmuw.org
Packet Pg. 43
February 7, 2023
Public Safety
Packet
1.d
1 Pg. 44
Attachment: Attachment 1d: Housing Kent- Public Safety - Briefing of Services to

1.d

Overview
01 Housing Stability
Alliance/Housing Kent
02 The Housing System
03 A Pathway Forward
2 Pg. 45
Packet
The Housing
Community Plan
Stability Alliance
1.d
Packet Pg. 463

1.d

Shared Vision
Every person  Increase affordable housing

stably housed—or  Dissolve homelessness
housed by choice  Eliminate racial disparities
4 Pg. 47
Packet
1.d

The Housing Stability Continuum illustrates the variety of housing situations
that occur in Kent County. It’s important to understand the different types
of housing instability because there are different solutions required for
each. Through enduring dedication, skill, and effort, countless individuals
and organizations have made improvements along the continuum. But large
systemic problems cannot be solved by any one organization. It will take all
of us working together.
Packet Pg. 48
1.d
Housing Kent
How do we ensure the

housing system produces
equitable outcomes for
all?
How do we ensure How do we ensure How do we ensure a

homelessness is rare, people have access to strong regional housing
Parts of the System
brief, and a one-time resources to meet basic market at every price

occurrence? needs? point?
Permanent Housing
Essential Needs Taskforce
Continuum of Care (CoC) Coordinating Council (PHCC)
(ENTF)
+ Housing Next
Packet Pg. 49
1.d

We facilitate partnerships
and collaboration that
ensure the housing system
works for everyone.
7 Pg. 50
Packet
Overview
02 The Housing System
Packet
1.d
8 Pg. 51

1.d
HUD
Government Planning
Media
Agencies Commission

PRIVATE SECTOR
County
Real Estate PUBLIC SECTOR Lobbyists Assessor
Agents
Office
Suppliers & Elected

Landowners Voters Location
Retailers Officials
General Crime &

Developers Credit Bureau
Public Safety
The Housing System

Banks & Policy & Housing Transporta-
Homeowners Appraisers
Other Lenders Legislation Preferences tion
Individuals &
Employers Sellers Compliance Income Neighborhood
Families
Qualifications
Buyers Landlords Housing Kent Affordability Schools
for Housing
Economic
Property
Renters KConnect Stability and Healthcare
Taxes
Savings
Other
Wrap-around Affordable Wealth Homeowners
HSA Household
Services Housing Building Insurance
Expenses
Housing Homelessnes
Home
Educational s Credit Score
Maintenance
Services Response
Advocates
Prevention
and Activists
SOCIAL SECTOR HOUSING BY CHOICE

Philanthropy (Individual & Family Factors)
Packet Pg. 52
1.d
HUD
Government Planning
Media
Agencies Commission

PRIVATE SECTOR
01
County
System Actors
Agents
Office
Suppliers & Elected

Retailers Officials
General Crime &

Public Safety
02
Process + Structures
Individuals &
Families
Qualifications
for Housing
Economic
Property
03
Taxes
Savings
Culture
Other
HSA Household
Expenses
Housing Homelessnes
Home
Maintenance
Services Response
Advocates
Prevention
and Activists

Packet Pg. 53
1.d
HUD
Government Planning
Media
Agencies Commission

PRIVATE SECTOR
County
Agents
Office
Suppliers & Elected

Retailers Officials
General Crime &

Public Safety
Where might we gain

alignment?
Individuals &
Families
Qualifications
for Housing
Economic
Property
Taxes
Savings
Other
HSA Household
Expenses
Housing Homelessnes
Home
Maintenance
Services Response
Advocates
Prevention
and Activists

Packet Pg. 54
1.d

Goal - Housing Expenses < 30% of the household budget
Families Stably Housed

22,000 families with children
11,000
Packet Pg. 55
1.d
Families always have access

to safe shelter
37% increase
from 2017 to 2019
Functional Zero
2017 2019 2029
Packet Pg. 56
1.d
Housing expenses do not cost-

burden renters
OWNERS 82% 18%
Households that rent their RENTERS 54% 46%

residence are cost-burdened at
much higher rates. About 18% of
homeowners are cost-burdened,
compared to almost half of renters. stable cost-burdened
Grand Rapids/Kent County, Michigan Housing Needs Assessment, Bowen National Research, May 29, 2020
Packet Pg. 57
1.d

1 in 6 Race does
not determine
outcomes.
African American children in Kent
County\ were in the homeless system in
2019, compared to 1 in 130 White
children.
Grand Rapids/Kent County, Michigan Housing Needs Assessment,

Bowen National Research, May 29, 2020
15 Pg. 58
Packet
1.d
VISION
Kent County,
Top 10 in Equitable Top 10

Homeownership in
the Country
The White homeownership rate is 76.5% and the

Black homeownership rate is 36%, representing a
40.5 percentage point gap. This gap represents a
ranking of 144 of 149 compared to U.S. counties
with at least 20,000 African American households.
American households.
American Community Survey Estimates by County from 2017 to 2020
CURRENT RANK
Kent County, 144 of
14916 Pg. 59
Packet
Overview
03 A Pathway Forward
Packet
1.d
17 Pg. 60

We need a collective shift
from silos to system building
Packet
1.d
18 Pg. 61

1.d
Common Scenario

Every actor in the system
has at least one lever and
is exerting tremendous
effort.
19 Pg. 62
Packet
1.d

“Everyone is working
but no one knows what
anyone else is doing.”
—Municipal staffer during Housing Kent Listening Tour
20 Pg. 63
Packet
1.d
One Consequence

Pressure often gets
exerted on a single
lever to solve a
system problem.
21 Pg. 64
Packet
1.d
Ideal State

All levers are pulled in a
coordinated sequence
that achieves outcomes.
22 Pg. 65
Packet
A Solution
and coordination
System alignment
Packet
1.d
23 Pg. 66

How We Help
Packet
1.d
24 Pg. 67

1.d
2023 Strategic Framework

Version: 02/04/23
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Everyone in Kent Design Process

Tell the Story of Help optimize Redesign the Develop and
County is stably Cycles of Iteration
Housing in Kent homeless system Kent County grow the HSA
housed or housed
County response Eviction System Network Discover
by choice by:
Define
 Increasing affordable housing
 Dissolving homelessness MEASURES MEASURES MEASURES MEASURES
System Map, Dashboard 1.0, System Efficiency and Eviction Prevention Plan, Convenings, Councils, and Develop
 Eliminating racial disparities Data-Sharing Agreements, Effectiveness of Coordinated Lived Experience Action Teams; Public
Decision Making and Strategic Entry, Community Housing Participation, Formation of Awareness; Representation,
Learning, System Costs Connect 1.0/2.0 Support, Key Private-Public Partnerships Calls to Action Deliver
Programs Scaling
Backbone Governance
Housing Kent Core Strategies
System Shared Community Public Will Building Investment &

Building Measurement Engagement & Advocacy Sustainability
25 Pg. 68
Packet
1.d
Key Milestones by Quarter

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Current State Mapping Kent County Eviction Kent County Lived Annual Report – State of
and Analysis - (This is Prevention Plan Experience Council for Housing in Kent County
the baseline for key Housing
stakeholders, data Kent County Housing Convening –
systems, funder Dashboard 1.0 (Beta) Convening - Banks Municipalities
requests, structures,
processes, and other key Kent County Policy HSA Convening Convening – Developers
system components.) Agenda with Short-Term
Policy Wins Housing Policy Summit
HSA Convening
HSA Convening HSA Convening
Housing Kent Open
House
Infrastructure Board of Trustees

Board and committees provide oversight and strategic
direction
Housing Kent is a system-building nonprofit working to
ensure all Kent County residents attain safe, high-
Councils, conveners, and actions teams work collectively quality, affordable housing. Supporting a network of
Housing Stability Alliance private and public sector organizations known as the
to achieve outcomes and shared accountability for results
Housing Stability Alliance, we seek to increase
Staff facilitate partnerships and core strategies for affordable housing, dissolve homelessness, and
Housing Kent
improved system alignment and coordination 26 Pg. 69
eliminate racial disparities in the housing Packet
system.
1.d
Our Process 1. Make the system visible

2. Bring a representative group of
stakeholders together
3. Identify the gaps
4. Co-create solutions (starting with what

is already working)
5. Agree on how to measure progress
6. Determine who is going to do what
7. Pilot or scale
8. Make continuous improvement

Iterative, not linear
Centered on individuals most impacted 9. Maintain transparency and
Adaptive, responsive to change
accountability for results
27 Pg. 70
Packet
1.d

Thank You
HAVE QUESTIONS?
Please contact Eureka People at Eureka@housingkent.org
©2023 Housing Kent. All Rights Reserved
28 Pg. 71
Packet

2023-04-25 Public Safety Committee - Full Agenda-5236

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

2023-04-25 Public Safety Committee - Full Agenda-5236

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2023-04-25 Public Safety Committee - Full Agenda-5236

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

City of Grand Rapids

Public Safety Committee

PUBLIC SAFETY ITEMS

1. Public Health and Safety Report and Next Steps

DATE: April 25, 2023

TO: Mark Washington, City Manager

FROM: Mary Kate Berens, Deputy City Manager

SUBJECT: Public Health and Safety Report and Next Steps

Community Feedback/Public Health and Safety Concerns:

• Some mentioned a desire to see police change tactics, asking permission to

Key Related City Initiatives:

Cleanliness in the Rights-of-Way and Public Parks

• Broadened cross-departmental awareness and understanding of existing ordinances,

o Division Avenue – Fulton Street to Cherry Street

Repetitive Trespass & Disorderly Conduct

Actions to generally address feelings of safety

Key Related Systems Improvement Work

Continuum of Care Systems Improvement Work

Housing Kent Systems Improvement Work

Other Systems Improvement Work

Identified Gaps & Next Steps

• Trespassing – the enforcement process is difficult and timely response is

Prepared by April Moayyer

TO: Eric Winstrom, Police Chief

FROM: Mark Washington, City Manager

SUBJECT: City Manager Administrative Order 2022-03: Response to

To date, the City has responded with the following:

• Improvements in Heartside Park that will include year-round public restroom

• Defecation and urination in public places

9.133(6) Obtain goods or money by fraud, trick or under false pretenses

Effective immediately, I am directing all departments involved in enforcing these codes

What’s Happening? What Can I Do?

Contact HOT at 616-456-4240 if the individual is believed to be

Next Step of West Michigan provides additional cleaning services

Lighting, cameras, space activation, targeted and routine cleaning,

Trespassing enforcement can be done on private property,

Services available in the Downtown Development Authority (DDA)

This order is effective immediately and continues until further notice.

Grand Rapids Community Conversa�ons On Safety

Monday, March 20 Public Session @Goei Center

Wednesday, March 22nd, Grand Rapids Public Library (downtown loca�on)

Appendix A: Chamber of Commerce Focus Group Notes

Themes and general comments

Concerns expressed related to employees, visitors, and residents of downtown

Live /Work Spaces

Behavior in public spaces

Mental health issues need to be addressed and supported.

Leadership and Act with urgency

Address sleeping on sidewalks and public spaces.

Bring the sheriﬀs’ oﬀer back to the table.

Appendix B: Focus Group With Unhoused Youth/Young Adults at United Way

Services and Safety:

Observa�ons of people they meet:

Designing and operating a HMIS; reporting data to HUD

Developing and maintaining a Coordinated Entry System

Conducting Point-In-Time (PIT) and Housing Inventory Count (HIC)

Governance and Structure

Preparing Annual CoC Program Application to HUD

Street Outreach Lead Agency: