A proposal to convert a youth guidance center in Santa Ana into a county-run adult reentry facility hasn’t been approved, Orange County officials emphasized, though $21 million is preserved for the project in the county budget.
County officials clarified the project’s status Tuesday, June 23, after Santa Ana leaders and local residents appeared before the OC Board of Supervisors to oppose the facility and demand a greater role in deciding where it should be located.
County CEO Michelle Aguirre explained that reserving money in the capital budget is not the same as approving the proposed coordinated reentry center or authorizing work at the Hesperian Way site.
“Today’s action is just adoption of the budget and does not move that project forward,” Aguirre told the board, adding that actual authority to spend the money would require a “completely separate agenda item” and future board vote. Staff also noted that the current youth guidance center at the proposed Santa Ana site is expected to remain operational until roughly mid-2028, making the project “not urgent in nature.”
In practical terms, the county has set aside money for a possible adult reentry center, but has not given the project a green light, officials said. County staff said supervisors would still have to approve the facility, its location and the use of the money at a future public meeting. The same requirement would apply if the county selected a site outside Santa Ana.
The clarification followed community opposition from Santa Ana elected leaders and residents, who argued the city already hosts a disproportionate share of the region’s shelters and social service programs and that they were excluded from discussions while proposals were being considered.
The proposed center would operate 24 hours a day and offer temporary housing, case management and connections to services for adults leaving incarceration. Opponents, including Santa Ana Police Chief Robert Rodriguez, have argued that converting the youth facility near the 5 Freeway could place additional pressure on the city’s already stretched police department and negatively impact nearby businesses.
City leaders have also noted that Santa Ana hosts hundreds of shelter beds and other county programs without receiving additional public safety funding to manage the local effects.
Mayor Valerie Amezcua, who attended Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors’ meeting with residents, asked county officials to involve the city before advancing the proposal.
“Please invite us to the table,” she said, adding that Santa Ana supports rehabilitation and services intended to help people successfully return to the community after incarceration, but city leaders want a meaningful role in determining where the facility should be located and how it would operate.
“We are very supportive of rehabilitation,” Amezcua said. “We have two shelters and many programs, as you all know, as the county seat in our city. We are the bearers of everything.”
Aguirre said county staff will arrange meetings with city officials and the broader community.
“We would actually love to have the opportunity to meet with the city and the community, to clarify and provide accurate information as to what the project would be, if the board even approves us to move forward with it,” Aguirre said.
She acknowledged that the county’s latest communication with Santa Ana came late in the evening before the supervisors’ meeting and said those discussions could continue over the next several months.
Supervisor Vicente Sarmiento participated in a community meeting last week where concerns about the proposal were raised.
Martha Molina of the Riverview Neighborhood Association said opposition to the proposal has expanded.
“Two weeks ago, I came, and we had a letter signed by eight neighborhoods,” Molina told supervisors. “Today, we have a letter signed by 23 neighborhoods.”
The amount currently budgeted for the coordinated reentry center is $21 million, staff said. The funds come from a restricted, one-time portion of the county’s AB 109 Public Safety Realignment funding and cannot be freely moved to unrelated county expenses.
Passed in 2011, AB 109 shifted responsibility for certain lower-level, nonviolent offenders from state prisons to county jails and probation departments, while providing counties with dedicated revenue for local custody, supervision and reentry services. The Orange County Community Corrections Partnership previously recommended using the $21 million for the reentry center project, though the partnership does not have authority to approve, build or operate the facility.
Board Chairman Don Wagner defended the need for an adult reentry center while acknowledging that its location remains unsettled.
“It’s very important that this last component be completed,” Wagner said. “I don’t know where the right place would be. Wherever it is, it’s going to reduce crime in the area that it is situated in.”