A couple weeks ago I interviewed City Public Works Director Jason Canady regarding the loss of the $50 million FEMA grant for the City’s new water treatment plant project. This is the largest capital project by dollar amount in the history of the City, at least of projects where the City is the lone project partner. Needless to say, the loss of a $50 million grant is a huge deal for a project that has a total price tag approaching $130 million.
According to Director Canady, even our federal Senators Wyden and Merkley spoke too soon when they announced this grant back in 2023. The grant agreement was not fully signed, sealed, and delivered as of a few weeks ago when the Trump administration cancelled all pending grants for all grantees that had tentative awards under the FEMA “Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities” (BRIC) grant program. However, this was especially painful since Grants Pass was complete with just about everything paperwork wise and was just waiting on the painfully slow FEMA administration to sign off on everything. We were literally at the finish line with FEMA paperwork.
Social media erupted upon hearing the news of the grant cancellation. Some blamed our governor for bucking the new federal administration’s executive orders. Some put the blame right on the Trump admin. Some feared City water rates would now skyrocket some more.
The near-term impact on our local water rates is about the only “good” news I have to offer on this topic. Grants Pass has been socking away money for close to 14 years for this project. And the last couple rate studies and water utility rate changes approved by the City Council did not assume that the City would receive this FEMA BRIC grant. The first time the City applied to this grant program, the City came very close to being approved but in the end was not approved. The second time applying the City was awarded the grant.
In recent weeks City staff and the City’s contract financial (bond) advisor have been crunching the numbers to see if the project can move forward without another near-term water rate change, and the preliminary indication is any rate change needed this year would be minimal. And the project and contractors were ready to break ground on the construction a few weeks ago, they were just waiting on the final approval from FEMA. Unless a massive miracle appears in coming days, the City Council will need to confirm that we need to move forward without the $50M BRIC grant. I called an office for representative Cliff Bentz, our lone federal representative on the Republican side. The Bentz staff member was aware of this issue and that Bentz had heard from the City, but as expected did not inspire any confidence in a potential reversal of the grant cancellation.
As contractors are set to go and we might risk significant fluctuations in materials prices if we don’t move forward with this massive project soon, from everything I’ve heard so far the City Council should move forward with the project as soon as possible. Director Canady implied that if we didn’t move forward by the end of May that we might have to go back to the drawing board with bidding out the project. In a time where contractors are putting in higher prices because of uncertainties related to tariffs, rebidding the project doesn’t seem like a good idea. And the project will be a little cheaper in the end not having to follow every one of the FEMA requirements, per Director Canady.
And we are already many years behind the hopeful schedule when this project was officially launched, for a variety of reasons both internal and external to the City. Let’s not forget that we’re doing this because our existing water plant, the sole water source for the vast majority of properties within the City, is the oldest operating plant in the state, is not seismically sound, and due to age is somewhat vulnerable to catastrophic failure the more we delay its replacement. Losing this water source for an extended period would be an economic and health catastrophe that would make losing the $50 million grant look cheap in comparison.
The Curious Case of the Anonymous Letter and the Secret Homeless Services Plan
The Grants Pass City Council also have even more significant decisions ahead as it relates to “resting” sites for homeless individuals and/or the extent of the City’s required involvement in a homeless services site. This seems like a never-ending discussion and undoubtedly the most significant community challenge that has been facing the City for many years.
A little over a month ago, Holli Morton, chair of the local Josephine County Republican Party executive committee, began speaking to the City Council in the general comment period of meetings and speaking on the Bill Meyer radio show, extoling the virtues of this novel homeless site proposal that the City Council was considering. This was confusing to me since I had not seen the City Council discuss the specifics of any such proposal in public meetings. I sent in a records request to the City for a copy of the proposal. No such proposal existed, at least not in written form.
Then an anonymous (snail mail) letter showed up in my mailbox, warning of the dangers and conflicts of interest that may exist with the “Vine Street Homeless Center” proposal. As it turns out, many other local government watchers and local media reps received the same anonymous letter. The letter also found its way to the City Mayor and City Council.
The anonymous letter suggested, by asking a series of questions, that there is someone local that they claim has a questionable business history that is positioning to profit from selling equipment to the new homeless services center and that Holli Morton may have invested in this business. The letter implied that presentations had been made about this proposal in the Josephine County GOP office, again by asking a series of questions in the anonymous letter. Further questions in the letter implied that there may be environmental issues with this 7.8-acre property on NW Vine Street due to some previous industrial uses on the site. Other questions implied a double standard regarding this property’s consideration versus how the City Council treated MINT when it cancelled the City’s previously awarded grant to MINT in January this year.
In the evening of Monday April 21st, a group of agencies led by the local U-Turn for Christ made a public presentation regarding what is now called “The Pathways to Stability Project.” Pathways to Stability is a new nonprofit started by local members of U-Turn for Christ and clearly supported by many other local organizations. In fact, I was extremely impressed by how many agencies were literally at the table in the meeting of April 21st. This is the kind of broad collaboration that is needed for such a project to be successful, and individuals/agencies that once found themselves on the opposite side of this heated political discussion now seem to be working together in a positive manner.
They did in fact unveil the “Vine Street” property as the target location for the Pathways to Stability Project. Mayor Clint Scherf spoke briefly at the event in favor of the proposal and discussed with me privately how he has collaborated with this group. In my private discussion, the Mayor implied that if a property transaction could take place, the City need only annex this property into the City limits which could happen relatively quickly.
The property is located at 2660 NW Vine Street, immediately adjacent to the existing City limits and I-5 as pictured below. It is 7.8 acres of industrial zoned property owned by the Glenn & Marilyn Standridge Revocable Trust. The Josephine County assessor currently shows a RMV of $1,973,720 for the property and this property was recently being advertised for sale at a whopping $4.5 million. The first step for the City if Council authorizes staff in a private executive session to look into the purchase of this property would be to do a commercial appraisal. That appraisal process may already be underway given the topic of recent City Council executive sessions. And given the comments in the anonymous letter and standard purchase process for most industrial type properties, the next step may be an environmental assessment.
In a private chat with the Mayor that night, I asked him what he thought about that anonymous letter being circulated. Mayor Scherf did not seem at all concerned and suggested that the local businessman who was being smeared in this letter is already looking for someone to sue regarding the anonymous letter comments. The Mayor also implied that this site could be annexed into the City fairly quickly and potentially take the place of the current 6th and 7th street homeless sites.
The presentation the night of April 21st included comments from many local agency partners such as UCAN, MINT, PATH, Hearts with a Mission, Maslow Project, Dove Ministries, U-Turn for Christ, and others. It was suggested that more than 20 agencies will be partnered with this project at some level. This level of collaboration was great to see and is what is needed if Grants Pass is to offer some type of homeless services site that meets the “government” definition of a homeless shelter. Evolving government definitions and related state regulations regarding homeless services sites certainly need a lot of work in Oregon at the state legislature, but that’s another topic for another day.
The main organizations involved as well as leaders for Pathways to Stability did a great job of presenting what they hope to achieve. I found their energy and plans inspiring but felt like they are overpromising on timeline expectations and lacking a solid financial plan. They answered all the questions well, in my opinion, except the financial questions. But City taxpayers and ratepayers should know that the main project leader does not want any increased taxes or fees of the City to accommodate this project.
When the question came of who pays for the site costs and operational costs, details were few. It was mentioned that federal grants are available to support operations and various project partners could contribute. And the City may be considering some sort of property purchase and lease back arrangement. However, the federal administration is cancelling grants left and right as well as threatening to withdraw federal funding from any jurisdictions with pro-sanctuary status (which is the entire State of Oregon by state law). At this time, it doesn’t seem wise to hold our breath for federal grants. We can certainly try, but there should also be a Plan B.
And the project plan’s timeline goals seem to be overly optimistic. As shown by the picture below of one of the handouts given out to those who attended on April 21st, the project “aims to house and shelter 500+ unhoused by the end of year 2025.” I love the optimism, but with the reality of how slow the wheels of government turn for this type of project, we’ll be doing good just to have the site purchased and designated as the new resting site by the end of calendar 2025.
The good work that has been done so far in the initial phases of building Pathways to Stability is commendable, particularly in the collaboration that now seems to be a valuable foundation for the project. I trust that the Mayor and City Council will do the appropriate due diligence on both the project proposal and proposed property given they have seen the anonymous letter.
The project may face some adversities, given that at least one of the eight City Council members seems to be adamantly opposed to the City having any kind of financial involvement with homeless or resting sites at this time. But if the valuable foundation that has been built holds, the odds of success greatly improve. As City Council member Joel King has said many times over the years, “the richness of relationships can overcome the scarcity of resources.”