Vallejo council allocates $600K more to finish Broadway supportive housing project

VALLEJO - The Vallejo City Council voted Tuesday to contribute more than half a million dollars from awards the city received in settlements of opioid lawsuits to complete a long-delayed supportive housing project on Broadway Street in north Vallejo.

The council voted 5-1, with Mayor Andrea Sorce opposed and Vice Mayor Peter Bregenzer absent, to approve $642,860 from the 2025-26 budget’s opioid settlement fund, largely to cover operational and start-up costs and a construction gap on the long-awaited project. The funds come from a state pool, including about $1.3 million to Vallejo, from settlements of lawsuits against opioid manufacturers.

It’s been a long road to opening the project for housing people who have been unsheltered, which has been under construction since 2022. It required a $6 million council bailout last year to resume stalled construction. The project’s total budget had ballooned from $15 to $26 million and an audit found that the city and developer had mismanaged the project. 

When completed, the project is expected to offer 47 permanent supportive homes and case management assistance for 15 years, and will follow the “housing first” model which allows people to get sheltered, including with their pets, and access services including employment and behavioral health assistance. The city now expects the project to be fully open sometime this month. However, the city says that for construction to be considered fully complete, it needs to cover some additional costs. 

Assistant to the city manager Natalie Peterson told the council that the item was previously brought June 3, during the 2024-25 budget cycle, but an agreement was not reached in time to secure the funds before that budget period closed. She said the opioid settlement funds can be used to finish the project since at least one Broadway occupant will meet the requirements for substance use support. The county’s most recent point in time count found that 23% of unhoused people countywide report substance use issues.

However, Sorce said she voted against the funding the first time it was discussed, and maintained her opposition. She said she thought the budget amendment would be a “stretch” of the opioid settlement fund to use it for closing costs such as the project’s construction gap.

The council also unanimously voted to hold a special meeting before going on a monthlong recess in order to vote again to approve the funds and get the housing center open. Councilmember Tonia Lediju said that the council ought to move with urgency to ensure that the project opens without further delay.

“I think it’s unconscionable that we think it’s OK to delay this any further,” Lediju said. “The fact of the matter is, prior to this we had approved these funds, and it’s back before us really due to process. We do need to figure out how we’re going to move forward quickly to help 30 individuals off of the street from being unhoused.”

Councilmember Helen-Marie Gordon asked to make an emergency budget amendment to expedite the approval process, but City Attorney Veronica Nebb said the city charter requires a two-step vote to approve the funds fully. The council will likely meet for that vote Aug. 12.

The only public commenter, resident William Baker, criticized the funding amendment request being on the agenda while lacking several attachments that should have been public. He said that the item should be continued since the staff report did not contain two items which should have been included as evidence for the funding request, which City Manager Andrew Murray confirmed.

“I felt the public should be made aware and be able to look at information, so [it] has the opportunity to speak to what is being presented,” Baker said. “There were no numbers available until 5 this afternoon.”

Murray said the presentation materials which were accidentally not publicized Monday were distributed to the public Tuesday as supplemental materials. The materials are identical to the item discussed during last year’s budget cycle which did not get a two-step approval process, Murray said. 

Baker also pointed out that $1.5 million from the county and $500,000 from California’s Department of Housing and Community Development only become available when the building is finished. Peterson told the council that all additional funds are either already settled or should be secured once all final pieces for the project’s construction are covered.