Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homelessness Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mayor Safford’s proposal to sell 5 William Street to fund low‑barrier shelter draws fiscal warnings
Summary
Mayor Safford proposed selling 5 William Street to fund another year of low‑barrier shelter operations, prompting the finance commissioner to warn that selling a capital asset to cover ongoing operating costs would be fiscally unsound; councilmembers suggested auctions, county talks and using fund balance as alternatives.
Mayor Safford proposed selling 5 William Street to help fund a low‑barrier homeless shelter for another year, restarting a debate over whether the city should convert a capital asset into operating revenue.
The proposal surfaced during the council’s review of the amended 2026 budget and public‑works agenda. “We can sell that so that we can help to fund the low‑barrier shelter for another year,” the mayor said, presenting the sale as one option to meet the city’s budget shortfall.
Finance Commissioner (name not provided) responded with a sharp fiscal caution: “You can’t sell your asset to fund general operating funds because eventually that asset’s gone and the need for those funds doesn’t stop existing.” The finance official recommended exploring the unassigned fund balance, meeting with RISE and the county to reduce costs or obtain support, and reserving asset sales as a last resort.
Supporters of the sale described 5 William as an underused city property that could generate revenue. One councilmember argued the parcel “is the only asset the city has that doesn’t have a tenant or further obligation,” and recommended auctioning it to maximize proceeds if the council moves forward.
Speakers framed the issue in the context of the city’s existing agreement with RISE, which runs a low‑barrier shelter. Councilmembers recalled that the RISE arrangement was intended to be temporary, and they noted constraints in shifting shelter responsibilities to the county: the county’s formal obligation under Code Blue applies only when temperatures dip below freezing and the county’s longer‑term shelter model depends on DSS reimbursement eligibility that RISE’s model does not always meet.
Legal counsel reminded the council of constraints on disposing of public property, saying the municipality should make findings that (1) the building is not reasonably needed for a current public purpose, and (2) if the property is sold below market value, the public benefit of the sale must equal or exceed the difference in value. A councilmember suggested holding an auction to avoid selling below market value and potential legal difficulties.
Council members proposed several alternatives to an immediate sale: draw temporarily from the unassigned fund balance, negotiate cost‑sharing or operational solutions with the county, hold an auction to maximize proceeds, or continue the discussion at the scheduled budget workshop. Mayor Safford paused deliberations and directed the council to continue the conversation at the 11:30 a.m. budget workshop and at the council meeting on Tuesday.
Next steps: the council plans to resume detailed budget deliberations at a scheduled 11:30 a.m. workshop and to revisit the 5 William proposal at the Tuesday meeting; no vote on a sale took place during this session.
