Pierce County wants to open a new homeless shelter. Where to put it has become a problem
With a June 1 deadline approaching, Pierce County hasn’t found a location for a new stability site to support homeless people.
The county wants to open a permanent shelter somewhere outside Tacoma, but zoning rules for the unincorporated area say such shelters can only operate for 90 days.
The Pierce County Council appropriated $2.5 million in American Rescue Plan Funding for the stability site, but the county has to act before the end of 2024 when those funds no longer are available.
Until the location of the site is pinned down, Human Services does not know what service provider would run the site, or sites, or how it would operate. Heather Moss said a notice of funding availability would be put out once the issue of location is resolved, which would allow providers to apply to run the stability site.
While there are currently few details available about how the site would operate and and what services it would include, the county has mentioned including wrap-around services and that it would serve as a “first step toward more stable and long-term housing options.”
During the County Council’s lSelect Committee on Homelessness meeting last month, director of Human Services, Heather Moss said the department is “diligently working” on a plan for the site on June 1, as directed in the budget.
Moss said the department is working to find a location for the site and first looked at properties that were considered for the Pierce County Village before the project was proposed at a location near Spanaway Lake. She said none of those properties appear appropriate for that kind of use.
She said they had also been looking at other “public surplus properties” primarily owned by Pierce County.
“Once a property gets to surplus, it’s usually not good for much, frankly,” Moss told the committee.
County Councilmember Ryan Mello told Moss that he thought the council would be open to changing the code to allow for establishment of the stability-site shelter and suggested the council “fast track” a zoning solution for the issue.
He also suggested the County Executive could declare an emergency to allow for the stability site to be built, and, in the interim, the council could pass a more permanent zoning solution.
When later asked by The News Tribune days if the council was working on a zoning-code amendment to help aid the implementation of the stability site, Mello said he expected Human Services to propose an amendment to the council.
That same week, representatives from Human Services told The News Tribune they did not have immediate plans to propose a zoning amendment.
On Thursday, Mello confirmed that the council had asked the Human Services Department for a proposal to amend the zoning but had not received one.
“At this point in time, what we are considering is that we need to partner with some other city outside of the City of Tacoma to host this stability site,” said Moss to the committee.
The plan to exclude Tacoma is a recognition that it already is home to the majority of homeless shelter, housing and services.
It is possible, according to Moss, that any available properties for the site might be smaller than originally planned. She suggested that could mean having multiple sites.
“The proviso itself currently still stipulates, very specifically, a single site,” Moss told the committee. “So we might need to address that if we move forward with implementation.”
Councilmembers Marty Cambell and Mello expressed their support to allow multiple stability sites in different parts of the county.
“It also makes it more accessible,” Campbell said. “We know that people can access homeless services in the communities where they have relationships [have] a better chance of success. So having more locations the more chances - the more chances that someone from that community can get services.”
Councilmember Robyn Denson said she would support having multiple sites but also was concerned how that could increase the cost of the effort.
“I think there is always the question of cost efficiency,” Denson said. “Because obviously, each of these stability sites, you know, we want hygiene stations, we need a cooking station, we want case management there, you know, there’s security.”
She said that these service requirements could get expensive when five sites are being built and staffed instead of one of two.
“We’ve got to be speedy about this,” Denson said at last month’s meeting.
This story was originally published May 12, 2024 at 6:00 AM.
