Beachhead for the Homeless : Shelter: Furor erupts over plan to turn over surplus Navy housing in San Pedro to the indigent. Federal law puts them first in line for such quarters.

As word spread about the plan for a huge homeless shelter in San Pedro, the response became increasingly vocal, increasingly angry.

No more, not here, was the response. That and bitter words about how the town already has done enough for the downtrodden, how there were already enough shelters in San Pedro, how the plan was set in motion without anyone knowing about it.

There are dire predictions that this is only the beginning, that soon San Pedro will be awash in homeless people.

And at the heart of all the controversy is none other than the Navy.

This seaside community long has been the home of Navy personnel stationed at the nearby Long Beach Naval Station. The Navy actually built a housing area in the heart of San Pedro, something seldom done by the military.

But with the closure of the station last September, the Navy announced it was vacating a portion of its San Pedro housing units--144 dwellings on a 27-acre site where enlisted sailors and their families lived.

The trouble began when a group called Turner’s Technical Institute announced plans to use the housing to shelter and educate up to 600 homeless people.

From what city officials have been able to glean in the last few weeks, transforming the dwellings into a shelter may be impossible to stop because, according to federal law, groups representing the homeless have the right of first refusal on vacated Department of Defense buildings.

“The process doesn’t allow for any community involvement,” said Barry Glickman, chief of staff for Los Angeles City Councilman Rudy Svorinich Jr., who represents the harbor district. “The community doesn’t have anything to say about it.”

The latest manifestation of community rancor erupted Tuesday night, when more than 1,000 residents from San Pedro and neighboring Rancho Palos Verdes packed a local junior high school auditorium and raised a cacophony of complaints. The overflow gathering was a repeat of a smaller meeting last week that prompted organizers to distribute 4,000 leaflets to spread the word about this week’s follow-up session.

“Enough is enough,” fumed resident Bob Doornbos. “Within 2 1/2 miles of where we are tonight, we already have three public housing areas. We don’t need another one.”

Added Rancho Palos Verdes Councilwoman Susan Brooks: “The federal bureaucracy is out of control, and I think this is a perfect example of it.” Her remarks won thunderous applause.

Turner Technical Institute representatives who were on hand to answer questions from the hostile audience have countered in the past that the shelter being envisioned would be gated, that those who live there would be carefully screened for drug and alcohol abuse and that there would be curfews for the residents.

“The homeless problem isn’t going to go away,” said Lorraine Cervantes, an institute representative who spoke at last week’s meeting. “Industry after industry is closing down in this country and we have hundreds of thousands of people in this country who are losing their jobs.”

The story of what is happening in San Pedro bears a striking resemblance to events in San Bernardino last year after the closure of Norton Air Force Base. Civic leaders had spent more than $11 million on plans to convert the base into an international airport, only to have an organization for the homeless step in and ask for all the facilities. A compromise was worked out in which several buildings were turned over to the organization working on behalf of the homeless.

Like the San Bernardino group, the technical institute is basing its claim to the housing on the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987. According to the law, the Department of Defense must give homeless-assistance organizations priority to use closed military bases.

The chain of events leading to the present controversy began when the Navy decided it had too many housing units after the closure of the station. When no other branch of the military expressed interest in the units, the McKinney law kicked in and notice of its availability was published in the Federal Register.

Johnathon Marzet, deputy director of the technical institute, said he came across the register notice while browsing in the library and began making his proposal for the housing units without even going to look at them.

Meanwhile, on a parallel track, a committee made up of Navy officials and civic leaders was formed to study how the housing tract could best be used. But in late February, the Navy informed the committee that the technical institute’s application had been approved by the Department of Health and Human Services.

“It’s a matter of things happening, and no one was aware of it,” said Glickman, Svorinich’s chief of staff. “The McKinney Act puts it all on autopilot. Once you start it, you can’t stop it.”

Glickman said he and others are also worried about other housing tracts that might become available if the Navy shipyard and other nearby military installations close.

At a meeting last week, Glickman asked Marzet what he would do if community opposition stopped the project.

“ Can’t is not in my vocabulary,” Marzet replied.

“Well, it’s in mine,” Glickman said heatedly.