Estimated read time: 5-6 minutes
NORTH SALT LAKE — North Salt Lake residents voiced their overwhelming disapproval of a proposed permanent emergency shelter in the North Salt Lake City Council meeting on Tuesday, prompting the council to unanimously pass a resolution opposing it.
Residents said they were caught by surprise by the proposal after the potential purchase of the former LifeLine Teen Treatment Center, 1130 W. Center, was raised during the Utah Homeless Service Board meeting on Aug. 22. Dozens of residents confronted the Davis County Commission during its meeting last week, and that confrontation carried into the City Council meeting in North Salt Lake.
Forty-five residents of North Salt Lake and a handful from other cities in Davis County signed up to speak to the packed chambers during Tuesday's lengthy public comment section, all voicing their disapproval and frustration at what they described as a lack of transparency.
"We were as surprised by this as you were," Councilman Ted Knowlton told residents.
"The objective is to get people out of shelter; I wish we didn't have to have people in shelter because housing is such a challenge in our state and other states, we find the need for additional shelter. Which is why the statute this year gave the option to opt to a year-round facility," Wayne Niederhauser, state homeless coordinator, told the City Council Tuesday.
A city presentation indicated that the annual Point-In-Time Count recorded 65 people experiencing homelessness on a single night in the county. That number was contrasted with approximately 200 people experiencing homelessness in Davis County being sent to neighboring counties because there is not a permanent facility. Additionally, Davis Behavioral Health has had 500 people without permanent addresses arrive at the facility requesting services.
"Mental health services and homeless services, those traditionally in Utah have been a county service, and Davis County was able to, I think, export their homeless problem, as we heard, to Salt Lake and Weber County, but that's not a sustainable plan," said Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross. "For a long time, counties were able to get by shipping their homeless to Salt Lake, but those days are over. Salt Lake, if you haven't noticed, is overflowing with homeless people, and these people deserve respect. They deserve not to freeze to death on the street."
But despite recognizing the need, Weiler asked the council to deny the request. Like many residents, he asked that a year-round facility be more centrally located with access to transportation, food banks, employment services, health care services including substance abuse and mental health, legal services and case management.
"The powers that be will have to look at other locations," Weiler said.
Residents also expressed concerns that due to the proximity of Salt Lake City, the proposed shelter would just be used as an overflow for Salt Lake County.
"Smaller counties like us have been able to push our homeless population to bigger counties like Salt Lake; in this particular location with Lifeline, my concern is the other way," said resident Amanda Kirk.
Other residents pointed to the nearby Foxboro subdivision being filled with families, with six different schools within a mile radius of the proposed shelter. Several residents stated that they had moved to North Salt Lake for a sense of safety that was now being threatened. Amy Morrow told the council she had moved from Sugar House shortly after a homicide involving two people experiencing homelessness in a park near her house.
"When I would take my daughter to the park to play when she became a toddler, it was unsafe. We found needles, there were homeless living in a field next to our house, so my little 3-year-old was terrified to go to sleep in her room and had terrible nightmares," said Morrow. "It was an extreme change when we moved to North Salt Lake — we felt safe. And if you haven't experienced not feeling safe in the reality of your life, it is so remarkable when you can actually sleep at night and not be a watchdog. I'm speaking out for the children. There are many in Foxboro. Please protect them."
The future of the proposed shelter is uncertain, as is the county's plan for winter response as colder temperatures approach. Feedback gathered by Niederhauser and other stakeholders will be brought back to the Utah Homeless Services Board to discuss next steps.
Davis County's past plans rejected
A permanent shelter in Davis County was first publicly proposed during the legislative session through a fiscal request by the Davis County Winter Taskforce, which was ultimately denied. This year, the county opted to pursue a year-round plan to address homelessness within the county, as opposed to only the winter response period required by law for counties of the second and first classes.
According to HB499, signed into law in 2023, counties with populations of at least 175,000 — which includes Davis County — are required this year to submit a winter response plan to address the emergency shelter needs of individuals experiencing homelessness from Oct. 15 to April 30.
The law also states that if a county opts to pursue a year-round option, its deadline would be extended to August 2025. But Davis County was still required to provide a code blue plan for this year, which was ultimately rejected by the State Office of Homeless Services because it exceeded the funding allocated by the state to the county.
The Davis County task force proposed to the state to purchase a bus that would house 20 people when an alert was issued. The bus would drive around while people slept and would drop them off in the morning. Around the same time the code blue plan was rejected, the county and the state were approached by homeless service provider Switchpoint regarding the provider's plans to submit an offer on the North Salt Lake property.
The Davis County Winter Taskforce, which includes seven mayors and one county commissioner, ultimately made the decision to check the box for the year-round shelter.
Councilwoman Alisa Van Langeveld asked during Tuesday's meeting, "Can it be unchecked?"
