Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transitional Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners debate Liberty site, Petaluma alternative and $8 million HHAP grant for temporary housing
Summary
Public comments and legislators debated a proposed temporary housing project and whether to pursue an $8 million HHAP grant; differences centered on site choice, capacity and timing to meet grant deadlines.
SULLIVAN COUNTY, N.Y. — The Public Safety Committee heard extended public comment and internal debate over a proposed temporary housing project, competing site options and whether the county should apply now for an $8 million Home and Community Assistance Program (HHAP) grant.
A member of the public who addressed the committee detailed walking distances at one proposed site and urged the county to use a property the speaker said the county had already invested in. “When you look at your paper, from Route 52 to the park entrance is 0.62 miles… It's a 1.2 mile trip. We've invested a lot of money in that site. There's no reason why we don't go back to it,” the commenter said.
Several legislators pushed back and forth over whether the Liberty site or a county-owned property in Petaluma should be used, and whether the county had time to ready an alternative site for a competitive HHAP application. One legislator criticized the project’s reported per-unit cost and urged larger capacity: “I can't see you spending $8,000,000 for 10 beds… If we're gonna build a facility, I'd rather take something that's that we can revamp, put 30, 40 beds in and really help the problem,” the legislator said.
Another legislator noted the project has been discussed for years and argued the HHAP funding window is competitive and time-sensitive. “This grant… is a very competitive grant, and that money's gonna go. If we do not have our application in, we're not gonna be eligible for it,” the legislator said, and urged the committee to identify a county-controlled site quickly to meet architects’ timelines for site work.
Speakers also discussed design choices intended to limit costs — for example, avoiding a second story to reduce ADA elevator requirements — and the practicality of adapting existing county properties versus starting a new build.
No formal committee action on site selection or the HHAP application was recorded during the meeting; committee members discussed next steps and the timeline for producing site-control documentation and revised cost estimates if they decide to pursue the grant.
