Grand Junction staff outlines long-term homelessness funding plan and short-term options as resource center faces April 15 closure

Grand Junction city staff told the City Council on March 12 that they will pursue a long-term, request-for-proposals approach to funding homelessness services and continue short-term work to identify temporary space or lease arrangements after the city's resource center is scheduled to close on April 15.

The proposal presented by City Manager Mike and housing staff would use the current resource-center funding (about $460,000 annually, roughly $115,000 per quarter already being spent) as a baseline and seek proposals from community providers tied to the unhoused needs assessment adopted in the city's unhoused strategy and implementation plan. Staff said the city could consider a rounded figure of about $500,000 a year as a starting point for discussion while the council and staff develop more detailed budget proposals during the regular budget process.

Why it matters: Council members and staff said they want a community-driven, measurable approach to reduce homelessness in Grand Junction while also preparing for the imminent operational question: what happens when the current resource center closes April 15. Providers have told staff that closing without an alternative will create immediate service gaps; downtown businesses and residents have also requested updated information and opportunities to weigh in.

City housing manager Ashley Chambers summarized recent local data work and the needs assessment that underpins staff recommendations. "In 2023, they identified 5 key needs for our community to work on," Chambers said, listing a shortage of affordable housing, shelter/housing for acute needs, housing instability and displacement, access to supportive services and basic needs, and system improvement/coordination. Chambers told council the city's most recent survey reached about 90 people, up from roughly 74 in 2022, and that the city's by-name housing list has added about 390 new individuals this year and more than 1,200 unique names over the last three years. She also said the average wait time on that list is over 300 days and that Mother Teresa Place, a 40-bed facility, is expected to open soon.

City Manager Mike framed the city's role as one of coordination rather than direct service delivery in many aspects of homelessness response. "As a city manager, I'm not an expert at everything we provide," he said, urging the council to consider partnering with nonprofits that have service expertise and to set funding parameters so providers can propose measurable outcomes.

On process, staff proposed issuing a request for proposals that would ask providers how they would use specified funding to meet the needs identified in the assessment. Staff suggested convening stakeholders and possibly creating a review committee or working with a partner agency to vet proposals. Council members said they preferred staff and the broader provider community to propose program-level solutions rather than the city prescribing specific services.

Short-term options and constraints: Staff described active real-estate searches led by the city's broker and conversations with potential lease holders, but said the supply of suitable commercial properties is limited and many potential venues require significant infrastructure work (power, plumbing, sewer) before hygiene services and showers can be provided. Staff also reported that at least one provider has offered to be a lease holder for a temporary space if a suitable building is found and if operational funding is available.

Councilmembers and staff discussed three practical short-term paths: (1) allow the resource center to close on April 15 and rely on distributed provider responses; (2) extend the current location's operations on a month-to-month or short-term lease while a longer-term solution is developed; or (3) identify one or more interim spaces (including faith-based locations) that could host a reduced set of essential services while permanent solutions are pursued. Several council members and providers said duplicating the current range of services quickly would be unrealistic; staff suggested a triage approach to identify essential services that must continue immediately if the current site closes.

Council direction and next steps: Council members expressed general consensus for staff to pursue the long-term RFP approach and to keep working on short-term contingency planning. Staff were directed to organize broader stakeholder conversations: a listening session for downtown businesses and residents (to inform whether an extension is acceptable to the community) and a roundtable with homelessness service providers to develop feasible contingency plans assuming the April 15 closure. Staff said they will coordinate logistics and outreach and return options to council at upcoming meetings. No formal vote was taken at the workshop.

Ending: Staff emphasized the pace and complexity of the property search and the amount of provider coordination required; they asked partners and residents to help spread word about planned listening sessions so the council can hear representative input before making a final operational decision.