Dairy Drive, Public Input, and Respectful Discussion

On September 16th, the Common Council voted on whether to close the Dairy Drive homeless encampment. Despite my vote to keep it open, the motion failed, with 10 yeses, 9 noes, and 1 abstention, and the site is being closed. Motions generally require 11 votes to pass. Last Tuesday, against the backdrop of the vote, Common Council met again to discuss the opening and operations of the men's shelter. Several dozen people came to City Hall to protest the closure. While I understand the frustration that the decision to close Dairy Drive has caused, some protesters crossed a line during their talks with MGR  after the meeting . This behavior undermines the work of hundreds of advocates fighting for real solutions to homelessness. I voted to keep Dairy Drive open knowing we lack adequate funding for both it and the new men's shelter. With the county contributing far less than expected and facing a $30 million budget shortfall, we're forced to make impossible decisions, patching together solutions while people continue to fall through the cracks.

The Meeting and What Happened After

Tuesday night, the Common Council met to discuss the Men's Shelter with staff and ask questions about operations when it opens next year. Several dozen people came to City Hall to protest the closure, and a few of them came inside to watch the discussion. The remainder remained outside, chanting throughout our meeting, and we could hear them clearly from inside. I have no issue with protesting, especially given the current administration's crackdown and opposition to free speech and protest.

But after the meeting, something unacceptable happened. Some protesters confronted Alder MGR, upset about his vote, and surrounded him for an hour. When I spoke with MGR afterward, it was clear he felt unsafe, especially when people said they were going to find where he lived and place stakes in his yard.

This behavior does nothing to help our homeless neighbors. It only destroys the hard-won goodwill that hundreds of people have worked to build: goodwill we need to actually improve things. Instead, it becomes an egotistical attempt to punish someone for being on the wrong side of a vote. And in doing so, it undermines all of our efforts. I believe that the protesters talking with MGR are good people who got caught up in their passion and ended up going too far in their rhetoric, so I don't want others to conclude that the protestors themselves are bad people. Most of them have put in a lot of work advocating for Dairy Drive and other homeless issues, and many have spent time volunteering to work with the homeless. But a few people are trying to take things that MGR said under duress as a promise, and I don't think that's right.

My Vote

When I voted on September 16th to keep Dairy Drive open, I didn't see a solution that would lead to a good outcome. Dairy Drive was successful when adequately funded, but we don't have funding at the city level for both the men's shelter and Dairy Drive.

Dairy Drive serves an especially high-needs population - people dealing with drug addiction, mental health issues, and chronic homelessness. At peak operation, it cost about $1 million per year, with almost all of that going toward services: social workers, drug treatment, counseling. ARPA funds ran out at the end of 2024. The previous Common Council voted to extend funding through this September to give the operator, Madison Street Medicine, time to wind down the project. The Community Development Division worked with Urban Triage to distribute 15 Section 8 and Emergency Rental Assistance vouchers to remaining residents, though some had already refused long-term housing options, choosing to stay in the campground indefinitely.

This year, we're making budget decisions facing a $30 million county shortfall, tight budget limits imposed by the state, and the opening of the men's shelter on Bartillon Drive. The county has historically been the primary funder of homeless services, and we expected them to contribute significantly to the shelter's $4 million annual cost. Instead, based on agency requests and the executive's budget, the county will contribute just $600,000, compared to the $1.4 million budget request from the Mayor.

This context is critical to understanding how I and other alders approached this decision. We cannot fund Dairy Drive at the levels that made it successful and fund the men's shelter. When choosing between them, the men's shelter makes more sense. It will serve over 5 times as many people on any given night for less than 5 times the total cost.

When I voted to keep Dairy Drive open, I foresaw three potential outcomes:

Most likely: The city keeps Dairy Drive open through April, then shuts it down.

Second most likely: The city keeps Dairy Drive open through April, then transfers the site to Madison Street Medicine for $1. MSM raises money to maintain some services. With far fewer services, the site isn't as successful at getting people into permanent housing, but does provide some shelter.

Unlikely, but possible: MSM is unable to update their HUD contract or obtain additional funding. There are no services at Dairy Drive. The situation becomes no better than the encampment at Reindahl Park - possibly worse than shutting down the camp now.

I was thinking about outcome one. Multiple people have commented that the city and county don't have a plan to address homelessness. To some extent, they're right. There is no comprehensive, longitudinal plan with adequate resources. We're trying to fix this problem one piece at a time, which means people inevitably fall through the cracks and don't get the help they need. For people at Dairy Drive, there is nowhere else to go right now. By keeping the campground open through April, we could at least alleviate some of the pain of sleeping on the streets or in the woods.

I think other alders were worried about the worst-case scenario - outcome three. They may also have been thinking that keeping Dairy Drive open could force us to spend money next year if MSM can't fundraise or if disaster strikes. That would mean pulling money from the men's shelter, causing even more people to suffer. It would split our focus, leaving neither the Dairy Drive population nor the Men's Shelter population getting what they need.

In short, to answer the question: "Could the City have afforded to keep Dairy Drive open?", I think that the answer is that we could afford to keep it open through April with the services as they exist now, but beyond that we could only afford to keep it open as a campground without any of the resources that the people who live there need. It would not have been a successful place beyond April for people to move into permanent housing.

Conclusion

My point in discussing my vote isn't to convince you I made the right decision. I'm trying to illustrate how difficult these decisions are for all alders, and why, as Alder Vidaver put it on the night of the 16th, "there is no right vote". We are working with limited resources, and while some alders prioritize homeless services higher than others, no alder, and especially not MGR, wants to see anybody suffer. I want to point out that MGR voted to extend about $800k in funding to Dairy Drive last year, in addition to extending funding in 2023. He has also been supportive of budgeting efforts to get the men's shelter open. Again, I understand why people are upset about the outcome for Dairy Drive, but we need to be looking to future solutions, including the homeless shelter. We need to be lobbying neighboring municipalities, county, and state officials for more funding for homeless services. And we need to focus on building a legitimate long-term plan for housing the homeless. What we don't need is to turn this into moral grandstanding or start working against our allies.