DAB Says NIMBY to Nav Center

By Sarah Owens and Michael Livingston

Excerpt from Downtown Advisory Board's meeting minutes for 12 March 2020

The Downtown Advisory Board does not want a navigation center downtown, and it's made its position known through a recommendation to the Urban Renewal Agency Board not to spend Riverfront Downtown Urban Renewal Area funds to acquire and rehab a building for that purpose, suggesting doing so would be "reactionary."  See Memo from DAB to the Urban Renewal Agency Board dated May 2020 (at p. 4 of the document).

This issue first arose at DAB's February meeting where consideration of the Draft 2020-21 RDURA Budget led to concerns about using RDURA funds "to address the challenge of homelessness and concerns regarding the financial burden and concentration of services within the RDURA" See Memo from Shari Wahrgren to DAB dated 12 March 2020 re RDURA Draft FY 2020-21 Budget, (at p. 4 of the document).  See RDRUA Draft FY 2020-21 Budget (at p. 7 of the document)..

Part of DAB's problem with the proposal was not being allowed to know precisely in which building downtown the City's planning to site the nav center (this is standard practice to avoid driving up the purchase price before a contract's been signed).  But, while DAB's memo classified its concerns as having to do with "location", "equity" and "strategic planning", its main concern was "location", as in, not in our back yard ("Will this negatively impact adjacent neighbors, businesses?" "What measures would be taken to ensure that neighbor concerns are being addressed?" "Is this part of a homelessness ‘strategic plan’ and/or will it drive additional services to this area?" "A downtown location will further concentrate those with housing challenges into a small area of the city, which could be detrimental to their recovery and further intensify the density of high needs populations and make it worse.")  

In case DAB's memo didn't drive the point home, DAB member Linda Nishioka wrote a letter of her own, claiming, without evidence, that "placing a navigation center within the downtown area could have dire consequences.  A navigation center would not support the objectives of sustaining and improving the economic vitality of downtown."  (Emphasis in original.)  Her letter closed with "No one wants to see downtown decay."

Memo from DAB to the Urban Renewal Agency Board dated May 2020 (at p. 9 of the document)

Other members of DAB as of March 2020: Aaron Terpening, Vincenzo Meduri, Dana Vugteveen, Joshua Kay, Tyson Giza; Brad Compton, Hilary Holman-Kidd, Laurie Miller, and Scott McLeod.

Staff brought DAB's concerns to the attention of the Citizens Budget Comittee in the form of written comment, presented at its May 6 Meeting. The Committee consists of all the members of the City Council, plus a rep from each of the wards, plus one "at-large."  Former City Councilor Steve McCoid, who's also a member of the MWVCAA Board, represents Ward 4.  City Councilors all know the location of the proposed site, having been told in executive session.  It's likely McCoid also knows the location. 

RDURA, lower dot = MWVCAA, upper dot = New UGM

Committee member Kaser asked Urban Development Director Kristin Retherford to explain to the Committee that it was a "typical City process" not to disclose the location of potential real estate purchases, which opened the door for McCoid to ask why, given that constraint, the City would seek DAB's approval?  Retherford then had to explain that DAB advises City Council on the RDURA budget, and that DAB had been told that there had been an appraisal and "discussions" with the owner, but no agreement has been reached.

As to whether and when the public might weigh in on the location of the nav center, Retherford told the Committee that siting depended on "operational needs", "proximity to other services and to those who would be managing the navigation center" (i.e. the Mid-Willamette Community Action Agency), with emphasis on proximity to the latter.  Other siting considerations included the size of the building, its suitability for the intended use, and compatibility with building (fire, safety) and zoning codes, "so there are a lot of constraints about where such a building could be located."

As previously observed, the City cannot realistically count on the state to fund its low-barrier shelter/nav center, at least not in the near future.  See "Has Council Moved the Needle on Homelessness?"  But, the City will need to be prepared when and if state funding does come through, which preparation includes making substantial investments of its own, aka having "skin in the game."  Everyone knows the City lacks sufficient General Fund flexibility for such an undertaking, which is how the City wound up inserting the recommendations of the Downtown Homeless Solutions Task Force into the plan for the RDURA so that RDURA funds could be used instead.  See "Urban Renewal to the Rescue."  This was a very creative move, and one that DAB approved, by the way, in the full knowledge that RDURA funds must be spent on properties within the RDURA.  So it's more than a little disingenuous for DAB to get all huffy at the prospect of a nav center downtown.