Committee rejects extension of Madison Street Medicine contract for Dairy Drive campground after public testimony and budget concerns

The Madison Finance Committee considered a proposal to extend the contract between the city and Madison Street Medicine to continue services at the Dairy Drive campground and related unsheltered‑homelessness operations. The resolution proposed extending contracts through April 2026 with $0 in additional city funding and authorization to accept up to $100,000 from Dane County.

Public comment included detailed updates from Madison Street Medicine staff and partners. Brenda Konkle (Madison Street Medicine) described program costs, existing unspent contract funds, and several funding streams on hand; TJ Jones and other registrants spoke about on‑site management, construction and maintenance needs. Savannah Harpel, a case manager at Dairy Drive, updated the committee on the status of housing vouchers and rapid rehousing slots tied to the site: the program had 10 Section 8 vouchers and five rapid‑rehousing slots and many participants were actively searching or preparing to move into housing. Speakers and staff emphasized that housing navigation had been accelerated by a partnership with Urban Triage and that some residents remain without immediate housing options.

City staff and Alders raised multiple concerns in committee discussion: whether the $0‑additional‑city‑funds language would still leave the City financially responsible for site utilities, trash/pest control and maintenance; how federally restricted HUD funding and county funds with a Sept. 30, 2025 expiration date would affect continuity into 2026; and how site restoration and demolition costs (city staff estimated about $220,000 for site restoration) would be paid if the campground remained open into 2026. Staff flagged that some funding sources are one‑time and time‑limited and that those sources may not be eligible for expenses after September 2025.

Madison Street Medicine and their partners said they could cover some ongoing bills from their remaining funds but worried about HUD restrictions that might prevent use of certain grants for staffing or subcontractors. Staff also noted a separate contract extension through Oct. 31 was already budgeted to allow a wind‑down period. Committee members expressed particular concern about maintaining a “robust” level of services (mental‑health and substance‑use supports, case management and housing navigation) and whether those services could continue at scale if the contract were extended without an identified consistent revenue stream.

After extensive discussion and public comment, the motion to extend the contract with the terms in the resolution was moved and seconded. The roll call concluded with multiple “no” votes and the chair announced that the motion failed; the committee reported “With 5 no’s, the item will not pass.” The committee did not adopt the extension as presented.