Davis County commissioners discuss reorganizing community services, ask staff for costed plan before budget

Davis County commissioners on Tuesday, June 3, discussed whether to reorganize the county’s community-services, health and housing functions to better meet new state-required homelessness responses and to centralize grant administration and resource navigation.

The discussion, held during a June 3 work session, focused on where homelessness coordination, affordable housing work and related grant programs should live inside county government. Commissioners and staff said the issue grew from a 2023 state law that expanded winter-overflow requirements and later allowed task forces to pursue a year-round response if they can meet state criteria. Staff described a multi-year plan being considered for Station Park that would include about 40 permanent supportive-housing (PSH) units as part of a larger mixed-use project.

County staff and commissioners said the Station Park plan — which the county’s task force would submit this coming winter — could meet the state’s expectations for a year-round response and, if approved by the state office of homeless services, would provide a multi-year runway to develop PSH. Staff cautioned construction and partnering processes could take several years; one participant estimated a four- to five-year timeline from planning to occupancy for the Station Park PSH component. Staff also said the county is pursuing a “COC Builds” grant this week to help advance that project and that HOME and CDBG funds can be used as part of a local match if needed.

Participants described several existing county responsibilities and programs: Code Blue (winter overflow) operations and a newly acquired permanent Code Blue location at Talia’s Event Center; a revolving home-rehabilitation loan fund (noted in the meeting as approximately $1.8 million, with 41 homes previously assisted); and contract administration for housing rehabilitation and subsidence remediation work in Woods Cross. Staff said some administrative grant funds will run out next fall for specific programs and that ongoing administration — monitoring subrecipients, compliance with HUD rules and reporting — currently falls heavily on a small number of staff in Community and Economic Development (CED).

Several speakers, including CED staff, the health department director and commissioners, outlined existing cross-agency work: the county’s Davis for Health five-year assessment and planning process, Davis Links (a resource-locator directory developed with ARPA/COVID-era funds), the local homeless council, the continuum of care and a winter overflow task force. They discussed the possibility of placing some services under the health department (which already hosts a community outreach staff member, Marcy Clark) to leverage the department’s finance and administrative structure; others noted the Davis Community Housing Authority and Davis Behavioral Health are separate entities with distinct governance and contracts.

Commissioners and staff raised implementation questions: whether economic development is the appropriate home for homelessness coordination, whether personnel should be reclassified or added (staff suggested three CED positions would be reasonable for the current portfolio), and whether some functions (for example, legal defenders and pretrial services) should remain in Human Resources because of the legal/operational nature of those programs.

No formal reorganization decision was made at the session. Commissioners asked staff (county administration, CED, health and other stakeholders) to return with a more concrete recommendation: an organizational design, a list of services to be grouped, and cost estimates and personnel needs to propose during the upcoming budget season. Commissioners and staff emphasized that many programs involve federal and state funding rules that constrain how funds can be moved and that any proposed structure should preserve statutory roles (for example, boards that are appointed by the commission or entities that receive and administer state/HUD funds).

Speakers repeatedly credited staff members who currently carry much of the administrative work. Staff said Ryan (CED grant administrator) and Chanel (CED staff engaged with housing legislation and task-force work) have handled a large share of grant administration and monitoring; commissioners suggested reclassification or additional FTEs if responsibilities remain in CED.

Commissioners asked staff to return with: (1) a proposed organizational map showing which functions would move where; (2) a personnel and cost estimate for administration and monitoring; (3) clarification of statutory oversight responsibilities for entities such as the Davis Community Housing Authority and Davis Behavioral Health; and (4) follow-up on the Station Park PSH timeline and grant-match strategy. The commission did not vote on structural changes at the meeting and instead directed staff to prepare options for the budget process.

The session also reaffirmed Davis Links — a county-managed resource directory being populated by local providers — as a central tool for public access and coordination. Staff said the provider-facing system is live and that a public launch was expected later in the year.

The commissioners framed the discussion as planning work for the budget cycle rather than an immediate transfer of programs. Staff will return with a costed recommendation that can be considered during the commission’s budget deliberations.