Grants Pass council adopts revised homelessness grant process after months of question and protest

Grants Pass City Council on Sept. 3 approved a revised request-for-proposals (RFP) for a capital grant aimed at creating shelter capacity and other capital improvements for people experiencing homelessness, after weeks of debate about fairness, code compliance and improper communications.

City Attorney Stephanie Nuttall told the council the original solicitation contained widespread deficiencies and that canceling it and issuing a new RFP best protected the city and applicants. "It was determined that it was in the city's best interest to cancel the grant program," Nuttall said, and the draft document she presented tightened minimum requirements and public-review procedures.

The reworked program imposes a hard funding cap (previously discussed at $1,200,000), clarifies site requirements and approvals, and makes some previously scored-but-optional elements mandatory — for example, applicants must now show how services will be provided or facilitated on site. Nuttall also proposed new, explicit disqualifiers: failure to meet minimum program requirements (for example capacity and timeline), unacceptable locations that cannot meet code, and improper communications with decision-makers. The revised scoring weights make site compliance and program operations each worth about 30 points, with the remaining 40 points for need, budget, references and related materials.

Nuttall said the new process will include a public proposal opening and distribution to council, staff review focused on code compliance, a public workshop for interviews and scoring by council members, and a single notice-of-intent-to-award step before contract negotiations. She also proposed requiring an applicant oath on the cover sheet certifying that application materials are true and acknowledging that materials will become public when opened.

Councilors pressed on several recurring issues: whether staff had properly cancelled the first RFP, how the city could protect the identity of a property owner willing to transfer land for a shelter, and whether background or credit checks should be required. Nuttall said she would verify whether property ownership documentation could remain confidential until an intent to award and recommended placing litigation-disclosure language into the proposal's risk assessment section rather than making background checks a blanket requirement.

Public commenters urged that the city include experts in the RFP review (social workers, treatment providers) and questioned potential impacts on schools, businesses and neighborhoods. Some community members pressed for faster action to reduce the existing unmanaged camping impacts downtown.

Council actions during the meeting included: a motion from Councilor Victoria to adopt the revised grant program (seconded by Councilor Kathleen) that passed by roll call, 7–1 (Indra opposed). The council separately voted unanimously to direct staff to extend the applicant timeline from the short draft schedule and to return with the adjusted dates. A separate motion (moved by Councilor Kathleen, seconded by Rob) to bring the previously lone applicant, Elk Island Trading Group, forward for a council presentation failed, 1–7.

Why it matters: The grant would provide up to roughly $1.2 million for capital costs to expand shelter capacity and related services; the city has faced months of public pressure over unmanaged camping downtown and legal constraints on how it may manage public property. The revised procedure aims to make award decisions more transparent and to reduce the risk of late-stage lobbying or undisclosed site defects that could make a selected project infeasible.

What comes next: City staff will return with an updated timeline, revised RFP text reflecting the council's direction on confidentiality and litigation disclosure and final scoring documents. The council asked that the timeline be extended so applicants have more time to assemble site documentation and partnerships. Nuttall warned that even with a revised process, staff would still need time for scoring and contract negotiations before presenting a final contract to council.

Votes at a glance: Motion to adopt revised grant program (mover: Victoria; second: Kathleen) — approved 7–1. Motion to direct staff to extend the application timeline — approved (unanimous). Motion to invite Elk Island Trading Group to present — failed 1–7.

Community reaction: Public commenters were split: some urged faster action to reduce downtown impacts; others asked that the city require stronger programmatic support (substance treatment, 24/7 management, partnerships) and that review panels include practitioners familiar with homelessness services.

Ending note: The council’s vote resets the procurement timeline and the RFP text; staff said they expect to return with a final issuance schedule and clarified documents before seeking an award.