Family Promise says city funding helped stabilize more than 100 families; neighbors raise concerns about local impacts

Family Promise of Skagit Valley reported to the Sedro-Woolley City Council that city funding labeled in the meeting as “15 90” supported shelter, seasonal drop-in services and a prevention specialist, which the nonprofit said helped stabilize dozens of families over the past six months.

Audria Wall, executive director of Family Promise of Skagit Valley, told the council “these are taxpayer dollars that are put to good use,” and gave a breakdown of clients served and program outcomes.

Wall said seasonal drop‑in shelter programming served 28 families and 89 individuals over the winter; year‑round shelter supported 16 families in six months; the prevention specialist served 61 families and 210 individuals, and overall Family Promise served 105 families in the last six months with 55 families permanently housed and stabilized. She said 25 percent of participants were Sedro‑Woolley residents and that $66,000 remained in the city funding allocation.

Why it matters: Council members said the local results justify the city’s targeted funding and stressed continuing coordination. Several councilors noted the programs’ high success rates as they debated budget and broader housing strategies during the same meeting.

What officials and the nonprofit said: Wall described several program lines and outcomes: seasonal shelter, year‑round shelter, transitional housing, and a homeless prevention specialist who focused on early intervention and resourcing. She said the prevention work “ensures that children never have to enter a shelter and into homelessness,” and attributed unusually high success rates to wraparound supports and partnerships.

Council members praised the nonprofit’s work. Councilman Burns said, “Thank you for what you do in the community,” and Councilman Henderson told Wall, “You guys are — You’re killing it,” after reviewing the numbers.

Resident concerns during public comment: Three residents who live adjacent to Family Promise and to nearby church properties described negative effects they attribute to shelter operations and related transitional housing plans. Elizabeth Friedel said people living next to Family Promise had created disturbances at her property and voiced opposition to a separate project the nonprofit is pursuing: “I can only imagine that they also wanna do the same thing in my backyard… That will negatively impact my home value,” Friedel said. Judy Lemley and Lynn Combs described noise, parking spillover and safety concerns and said they had not received timely notice of planned property changes.

Council and staff response: Mayor Johnson and staff acknowledged the public comments and asked Family Promise to supply documentation for the council; Wall offered to send detailed reports to Kelly (staff). Council members and staff discussed notice and permitting pathways for changes in land use and said city staff would follow up on neighborhood concerns. No formal enforcement action or code change was adopted at the meeting.

Background: Council earlier amended Family Promise’s contract (two weeks prior, according to Wall) to allow city funds to be used across the nonprofit’s housing programs; that contract amendment was referenced by the presenter as enabling the organization to redirect funds to transitional housing repairs and supports.

Ending: Wall said the nonprofit will return with further data and that she expected remaining city funds to be spent before October. Council members thanked Family Promise for the presentation and asked staff to circulate the program details to the full council.