Thread by @mlcarmel

Okay Boise, listen up!

It's time for the third hearing for the Interfaith Sanctuary proposal to move to State Street and this time I expect a vote. Let's see what happens!

After some smaller matters, the hearing is starting up.

We're starting off with testimony about safety and how moving the shelter would impact the police department and residents of State Street.

Alex Danilovitch, one of the leaders of the Friends of Murgoitio Park group, is speaking now. She is criticizing a series of tweets @Geoffrey_Wardle sent during last week's hearing in response to testimony shared against the property.

Another person is testifying now by reading a letter from Democratic Senator Grant Burgoyne expressing his concerns about the IFS project. He said the proposal shows the city and its social services are not working in collaboration.

Former city council candidate Katy Fite is testifying against the project. This was a major talking point in her 2021 campaign.

We have the first pro-shelter comment of the night from their education director.

A constant theme in a lot of these comments are people sharing either their experience with being low-income themselves or supporting homeless shelters and their residents.

But, they argue Interfaith should not be in this proposed location.

We have 57 people on Zoom ready to testify.

Another big theme from those in opposition is a concern about low-income Boiseans being segregated in Veteran's Park. They say adding a shelter there will only compound the problem and make the neighborhood even more low-income than others in the city than it already is.

Chair Meredith Stead has once again told participants they cannot use the Zoom chat for conversation. I gather from her comments that users are likely being disrespectful to city staff.

We're taking a second five minute break.

Howard Belodoff is testifying in favor of the project. He is one of the attorneys with Idaho Legal Aid Services who sued the City of Boise over its policy of ticketing people for camping on city streets when there is no space available in shelters.

I just got this message from Cori Erickson, a shelter opponent, related to the issue of people talking in the Zoom chat.

Richard Llewllyn, President of Northwest Neighborhood Association, is speaking against the project. He is concerned about moving more low-income people into Veterans Park.

Something I am hearing over and over tonight is the sentiment that there are no conditions on this project that would stop impacts to the neighborhood.

"It's the low barrier aspect of this I am most concerned about" - the most recent speaker

We still have several people online left to testify and a rebuttal from Interfaith Sanctuary left.

I think...I spoke too soon about expecting a vote tonight. This could get pushed back into the new year.

Tim Flaherty, the executive director of street outreach nonprofit Astegos, is speaking against the project.

"Moving the shelter outside of the core of our city is going to be difficult for the people who need to utilize its services."

For anybody keeping track at home: We have now heard nearly 14 hours of testimony of hearing on this topic.

It's time for Geoff Wardle to rebut.

Wardle is objecting to a five minute rebuttal after all of those hours of largely negative comments.

Wardle: Everybody has ignored the fact that we're doing this to increase medical services in conjunction with Terry Reilly Health and FMRI. Everybody is has ignored that our guests cross an interstate off ramp to get to our location.

Wardle is getting really heated.

Wardle: We had no qualms granting a CUP for City Lights on Jefferson which is as close to other commercial and residential uses. The same thing with River of Life. I understand the concerns, but I refuse to accept the notion that the homeless should be shunted to industrial areas

Stead just had to cut Wardle off. The final thing he said. was"

"I grew up. inthis neighborhood and I'm glad I left"

It looks like we might get a decision. Commission is going to a break.

We're back.

Commissioner Gillispie is referring back to a motion from Commissioner Danley from last week trying to defer the vote until IFS submits a security plan. He is opposed.

Gillispie: "I don't think it's the city's job to coach or provide the applicant for a roadmap for getting a permit approved. They've submitted their permit and had plenty of time to work on it. It is what it is."

In short: He would like to vote on it now with the info they have

Danley is responding.

"The attempt at the deferral the first go around was to prevent this right here and advance the ball and getting us into a position on mitigation."

Danley: I don't feel comfortable deferring this yet again. I think I know the answer even if we tried.

No motion from him.

Time to talk about the project.

Commissioner Squires: It's hard for me to understand how this will mitigate impacts to neighbors without knowing what the plan looks like. I have a huge issue with not having that information.

Mohr is opposed to deferring.

Mooney would also not like to defer.

Danley: "We have no information on whether there is any mitigation here on this issue for the folks in the building, around the building or in the city at large. We have none of that."

It looks like the commission is going to make a decision tonight on whether or not to defer to ask IFS to bring back a security plan.

If they opt not to defer for more info, they will deliberate on January 3.

If the city requests a security plan, it would require the public hearing to be reopened and more people to testify.

Gillsipie is once again arguing against deferral and a requirement of a mitigation plan and additional information be developed before deliberation.

The vote fails 6-2.

The deliberation has been deferred until January 3 due to the lateness of the hour.

It looks like commissioners would like to settle in for a lengthy deliberation.

Blanchard: Everyone deserves this city wide.

Stead is a little frustrated the matter didn't get decided tonight, but she said this is an unusual circumstance that requires more time.

The vote to kick it to January 3 was unanimous.

I'll see you guys in 2022!

We've got a little frustration in the chambers. There was another applicant in the chambers who says he needs to close on a building he would like to buy by the end of the year, but because the city didn't finish the IFS matter they had to kick the project to January 3.

This is what Stead was referring to earlier, noting there are lots of other projects piling up behind the shelter project that hasn't been decided.

Conflicts like this are exactly why Stead asked people to not repeat arguments, submit written comments and be brief.

The Commission is kicking several projects to January 3.

If P&Z takes multiple hours to deliberate on the project, it could push those projects back further.

Gillispie is reminding commissioners that discussion needs to occur on the dais, in public view under Idaho Code.

Goodnight!!!