Garden Grove

Homeless shelter idea raised

THE POSSIBILITY of creating a homeless shelter – possibly in partnership with another city – was raised at Tuesday’s meeting of the Garden Grove City Council (Shutterstock).

A wide variety of possible tools to battle the problem of homelessness surfaced at Tuesday’s meeting of the Garden Grove City Council.

After the council heard a report on the city’s Comprehensive Strategic Plan to address the problems of the unhoused, City Manager Scott Stiles and City Councilmember Kim Nguyen raised the possibility of expanding services even beyond what’s already underway.

Nguyen expressed appreciation for the report and its content, but added, but “I’m not done pushing for a shelter.”

Stiles commented that while the city did not have a “low-barrier shelter “ – generally defined as a temporary facility for the homeless – it was nevertheless considering that option, including working with other cities. The repurposing of motels to house the homeless is another possibility.

At last Wednesday’s meeting of the Westminster City Council, members discussed the prospect of partnering with Garden Grove on establishing and sharing a shelter.

The presentation by Nate Robbins outlined the city’s efforts, noting that the city has served 17,765 people. Street outreach involved 6,195 contacts, 346 emergency shelter beds were provided, 145 people were rehoused and 458 people were prevented from becoming homeless. A total of 10,601 calls have come into the homeless hotline.

A total of $1.6 million has been spent on the issue. The report covered the period from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021.


A proposal by Councilwoman Diedre Thu-Ha Nguyen (District 3) to pass a resolution in “support of Afghan refugees and the people of Afghanistan” ran into some pushback.

Councilmembers George Brietigam (District 1), Phat Bui (District 4)  and John O’Neill (District 2) expressed opposition to the proposal, and Councilmember Stephanie Klopfenstein (District 5) said she would abstain on the matter.

Several members argued that since the council didn’t have any authority over immigration and related issues, the resolution was moot. O’Neill objected to some of the language that he considered “divisive.”

Finally, the council decided to ask Nguyen and O’Neill to confer on a revised version of the resolution to bring it back to the council at a later meeting.

1 reply »

  1. I don’t know where this resolution stuff came from…. to resolve on something the city council has no authority or input over is just silly.
    It is without community input which is who they serve.
    Essentially it s merely “announcing and making public” that council member’s OPINION on a national…or often controversial topic.
    It is waste if time and I MOVE that they stop doing it.

Leave a Reply