Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness And Social Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Grand Forks Council Questions Funding, Policies for Nest on Fourth Social Detox Center
Summary
Council members debated whether the Nest on Fourth is operating as originally intended after staff reported the mayor's budget seeks $130,000 from the county and the state allocated $130,000 per year of the biennium; council requested data and said operators should brief them during the budget process.
Council members pressed for data and possible policy changes after staff described proposed county and state contributions to the social detox program now operating as the Nest on Fourth.
Todd Phelan told the council the mayor’s proposed budget includes a $130,000 request of Grand Forks County and that the state has committed $130,000 per year of the biennium. “There’s a $130,000 request for Grand Forks County,” Phelan said. “And then the state of North Dakota has come up with a $130,000 for each year of the biennium.”
Several council members said the Nest differs from the original social‑detox model and that the change may have increased downtown disorder. “I don’t think anyone would be surprised that I’m not enamored with what’s going on in our downtown,” Council President Sandy said. He added that the program appears to be allowing people to stay long‑term rather than providing short‑term detox services.
Other council members urged reliance on data before changing funding decisions. “I don’t know if correlation really truly means causation here, and so I’d like to go back and look at the statistics,” said council member Burke, who also noted that housing‑commission data she has seen show clients moving out within about two weeks. Council member Veen said that Altru Health System sought a more cohesive plan to reduce emergency‑room burdens when the social‑detox center was first discussed.
Council members asked staff to include the Nest’s operators and the police in upcoming budget discussions so the council could evaluate trends in emergency‑room use, ambulance responses and police calls. Council President Sandy forecast that debate and presentations would be part of the June–July budget process.
No formal vote was taken. Council members expressed differing views: some said the program appears enabling and urged policy changes to require sobriety and exit plans, while others said housing‑first approaches have evidence of success and recommended the city review outcome data before cutting support.
The council asked staff to return with statistics and invited program operators to present during the budget review so members could make an informed decision on whether to continue the proposed funding.
