Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Unhoused Services topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Volunteer and residents raise concerns about Bridge Street Mission-run unhoused facility

5068950 · June 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A volunteer and other residents told the Wausau Common Council that a facility operated by Bridge Street Mission emphasizes Christian discipleship and may alienate clients with substance-use and mental-health needs and LGBTQ residents.

A Wausau volunteer and resident told the council on June 24 that the city's new unhoused facility, operated by Bridge Street Mission, emphasizes a Christian discipleship model that she said could alienate some clients and limit effectiveness for people with substance-use and mental-health needs.

"This is not how we need to handle our house," Carrie Morell said. "There's a ton of mental illness. There's a ton of AODA problems, and if it comes with expectations that they need to be indoctrinated, I think that isn't going to solve anything. It's gonna alienate a lot of the population, including what's very well known as them being against the LGBTQ population." Morell said she has volunteered at the facility since it opened in May.

Morell said Bridge Street Mission described its program to a complainant in intake materials as "not an apartment building, but a Christian discipleship program," and she urged the council to consider alternative models as the city plans for longer-term solutions. She acknowledged the facility might be the city's most affordable immediate option but urged the council and staff to pursue other options this fall.

Other public commenters at the start of the meeting focused on concerns about council behavior and the use of public funds for attorneys; those remarks were part of the evening's public-comment period and referenced the separate council discussion about outside counsel and the mayor.

Council members did not take action on the volunteer's comments during the meeting; the remarks were entered into the public record as part of preregistered public comment.