Council Split Over HomeKey Conversion of University Avenue Motel After Hours of Testimony

City staff proposed converting a University Avenue motel into a long‑term housing site under the state's HomeKey program and asked the City Council to authorize the HomeKey application and a city funding allocation.

Michelle Davis, Housing & Human Services staff, described a plan to rehabilitate the Quality Inn into roughly 113 studio units (conversion of hotel rooms to studios), many with service coordination and certain accessibility features; staff said the proposal leverages HomeKey and state subsidy funds and requested the council authorize submission of the application and an allocation of $965,617.75 from community development funds. Staff noted HomeKey funding rules and explained operational controls, including case managers, 24/7 on‑site security, and a zero‑tolerance approach to specific behaviors.

The public-comment period that followed was long and sharply divided. Supporters — including service providers, housing advocates and residents with lived experience — urged the council to accept the state funds now available, arguing that the city risks losing a multi‑million‑dollar HomeKey award if it declines the opportunity. Several speakers said permanent supportive housing reduces emergency calls and helps people stabilize. An on‑stage presenter from a local housing developer said the conversion would create units prioritized for low‑income households and some accessibility units for residents with mobility and sensory needs.

Opponents — including nearby business owners and residents — said University Avenue is not the appropriate site, argued the neighborhood has been the focus of revitalization efforts and raised concerns about safety, property impacts and the project's operational track record. Business owners and employees at the motel said they were uncertain about job impacts; several speakers asked for stronger written guarantees on security, eviction standards and reporting to the city.

During council deliberations, members pressed staff on eligibility controls (which populations may be prioritized), eviction and discipline thresholds (staff said a three‑violation standard is commonly used), security arrangements and contingency plans if the project generated excessive police calls. Staff said HomeKey does not require sobriety for program eligibility and that services are voluntary, and described case‑management plans intended to connect residents to treatment and supports.

A motion to accept staff recommendations and authorize the application was moved. The transcript records a final vote line that reads, "The motion, pasa 3 votos afirmativos, 4 no distrito 7 5," which records a 3–4 split in the council chamber's roll call as transcribed. The vote language in the transcript is ambiguous about district labeling; the audio record or official minutes should be consulted for the certified vote tally and any subsequent actions or clarifications.

If the council proceeds with an award and a development agreement, staff said detailed operational documents and a management agreement would govern resident selection, security, case‑management staffing and reporting requirements.

The council also asked staff to return with clarifying documentation about program management, enforcement steps tied to the funding agreements and the city's authority to act if calls or safety indicators exceed thresholds.