Shakopee shelter provider warns 30-day hotel limit could disrupt temporary housing partnerships

Tia, a program specialist with A Hundred and 80 Degrees, told the Shakopee City Council on May 20 that a newly enacted ordinance limiting how hotels may be used could disrupt short-term shelter partnerships that place young adults in hotel rooms.

"Ordinance like this, I could make it harder for youth and families to access temporary shelter, especially in areas where other options are limited," Tia said during public comment, adding that hotel owners who partner with her program were not directly informed about the change.

Tia said she had spoken with city staff earlier the same day and described specific questions about operational details the ordinance did not address, including what happens after the 30-day limit and whether on-site managers who live at a property may reside in what would otherwise be a guest room: "They had talked about people who, staff members who reside there, like management, where they supposed to go if they're supposed to manage their hotel and where they're supposed to manage their hotel if they live there. And, if they have apartments in the hotel, like, owner apartments, what does that look like? So those weren't actually talked about in the ordinance or specified."

Mayor Lehman responded that council policy generally prevents taking action on items not on the published agenda and said his understanding was the ordinance allows temporary housing but not permanent stays: "I believe it's could be, temporary housing up to a certain period of time, but it can't be permanent housing. Mhmm. And I think that's 30 days. I'd refer to staff. I don't have it in front of me." He added, "So if you have people that are homeless living there longer than 30 days, that's where your problem would lie."

Councilor Whiting thanked the speaker and said the council would ask staff to examine the concerns: "we'll get staff to to look into that." Councilor Delaney asked the speaker to provide a list of her concerns so staff could review them: "That was my one question is can we get a list of what your concerns are? That way we can take a look at them." City staff were identified in the meeting as the appropriate contacts and were asked to follow up by email; the speaker said she had already spoken with a staff member identified as Mr. Michael earlier in the day.

No ordinance repeal, exemption, or formal amendment was proposed or voted on during the meeting. The council did not take formal action on the matter; instead staff were directed to review the ordinance language, clarify what the 30-day limit covers and how on-site manager residency or owner apartments are treated, and respond to the speaker by email.

The comments came during the public comment portion of the May 20 meeting; council members and staff said they heard the concerns and would investigate further. The council did not set a timeline for a response or indicate whether any adjustment to the ordinance would be brought back as a future agenda item.