The Abridged version:
- Davis City Council members on Tuesday discussed the future of the Davis Daytime Respite Center — discontinue services for homeless individuals, alter services, move the operation or keep it as is.
- The discussion comes six years after the center was placed in the Davis Manor neighborhood.
- Residents of the neighborhood have expressed concern about the impact of the center on their neighborhood.
The Davis Daytime Respite Center serves hundreds of homeless individuals each year, providing needs like showers and meals during its daytime operating hours.
But other residents in the Davis Manor neighborhood say that problems have intensified and the situation has become untenable. Some point to things like crime and visible drug use as evidence that the operation, which opened its doors six years ago, is in the wrong location.
“We were really pleased, actually, when the day center first opened in our neighborhood,” said Antoinette O’Neill, who lives near the respite center. “We were proud to pilot the program, but over the past six years my empathy has waned a little bit because we’ve had a massive impact on our community and not in a positive way.”
Council looks to make changes
In response to some of those concerns, the Davis City Council discussed on Tuesday whether to make changes at the controversial site on L Street.
The center has been in limbo since its contracted operator shuttered in October and the city stepped in to continue operations.
After hours of discussion, the council narrowed its options, but did not come to a definitive conclusion. In a motion passed unanimously, members directed staff to continue services at the L Street location through the fiscal year, which ends in June, while working to establish a transportation plan with Fourth and Hope in Woodland.
The council also directed staff to further evaluate a location on Fifth Street as a potential alternative site and consult with the county for the possible use of 600 A St.
Sign Up for the Yolo County Newsletter
Stay in-the-know on all things Yolo! Weekly email with stories and insights from Yolo County reporter Daniel Hennessy.
Neighborhood concerns
Neighborhood compatibility concerns were front and center during the council’s last discussion on the respite center on Nov. 18. During an update on the city’s homelessness system of care, the respite center, which serves hundreds of homeless residents each year, received the most attention.
The center was installed in the Davis Manor neighborhood six years ago with the goal of providing a place for homeless residents to access resources like computers, laundry, mail and case management.
“When the respite center was first set up six years ago, the idea was there’s just this real need for a place for people to be safe, to come in from out of the elements, to be warm and dry, to take a shower, to do laundry, to have a little space to know they won’t be bothered,” said then-Councilmember, now Mayor Donna Neville.
Neighborhood perspective changed
Since then, service providers have changed and the neighborhood has soured on the center and the city’s plans there.
Dozens of residents spoke during the public comment period in November, many of whom expressed concerns about the impact that the respite center has had on the surrounding neighborhood. Some detailed situations in which clients of the center were using drugs, sleeping in yards, getting into fights, stealing and having mental health crises.
“It’s a failed experiment and it’s been foisted on the surrounding neighborhoods with no relief,” said Tim Hoban, who lives nearby.
Decisions to be made
In response to some of these concerns, the council previously directed staff to return with an analysis of potential new sites for the respite center.
Council members discussed potential new locations for the respite center, including the Civic Center Gym on Russell Boulevard, 512 Fifth St. and 1101 H St./809 11th St.
In their report, staff emphasized that none of these locations would be perfect.
“The majority of the sites suffer from aging infrastructure, unbudgeted demolition and remediation costs, and ongoing neighborhood compatibility concerns,” the report said.
“We all kind of feel like it could be doing a lot better than it is,” then-Mayor Bapu Vaitla said.
“I do think that that location is just not an ideal location,” said Councilmember Gloria Partida.
But those feelings weren’t unanimous.
“For me, it should stay where it is. There’s going to be challenges anywhere it goes,” Councilmember Josh Chapman said. “I think that we can put better safeguards around it.”
Despite the differing opinions, all members of the council have expressed a desire to make changes.
Daniel Hennessy joins Abridged from the California Local News Fellowship. He’s a reporter covering Yolo County.