Somewhat of a first in Josephine County, we’re witnessing a bipartisan objection to the current homeless shelter proposal, if I am reading the community correctly. I find this genuinely encouraging. It speaks volumes about the shared concerns from both sides of the political spectrum.
Here’s my take based on what I’ve seen so far:
Left Viewpoint:
Surprisingly, the proposed shelter doesn’t seem to be gaining much traction among those on the left, even though it appears to check every box typically found on their priority list. It features a large, low-barrier entry site with room for expansion, extensive wraparound services, and a design built around the “Housing First” model. For four years, this is exactly the kind of approach that the previous mayor and city council advocated for: a highly developed site with tiny homes and full-scale support services. On paper, it should be a strong progressive proposal, yet support from that side appears tepid at best.
Why? Most likely because of recurring issues: lack of transparency, concerns about leadership, and the absence of a clear structure for accountability. In addition, concerns have been raised about those involved in the project. New information continues to emerge that has caused many, across political lines to question the integrity and practicality of the plan.
Right Viewpoint:
From a conservative standpoint, the proposal runs counter to many of our core principles. The oversized property, potential for expansion, costly service model, and permanent tiny home structures, aligned with the Housing First approach all of which raise serious concerns from a conservative viewpoint. Combined with the same issues troubling some on the left, including the lack of oversight and transparency and concerns have been raised about those involved in the project – there’s understandable resistance to the current direction.
Many conservatives have reluctantly accepted that something must be done, but we believe the solution must be focused, minimal, and effective. A small, managed site that meets legal requirements, clears out unmanaged encampments from the main city core, and provides basic services to those genuinely seeking help. This is not the time for a massive, permanent tiny home village that risks attracting more homeless individuals from outside our community.
Conclusion:
Grants Pass already has some existing resources, such as the Gospel Rescue Mission and there’s a publicly available list of over 11 pages of assistance options for those in need (see the PDF at the end for the resource guide published by PATH at https://pathofjoco.org/about).
Grants Pass is a small town, and our response should reflect that reality. A massive, long-term facility may unintentionally attract more individuals from outside our community than we can reasonably support.
Any successful proposal must carefully consider size, scope, and location. It should avoid being placed near schools, senior centers, businesses, parks, or tourist areas. It should minimize infrastructure expenses while promoting transparency and accountability. Most importantly, the shelter should reflect the actual scale and needs of our local homeless population. The reality is that many of those living unsheltered do not want help, and no plan should assume otherwise or be built on forced participation.
A small, focused footprint is not only the most likely to gain community support, but also the best path forward for long-term success. Simply put, a small managed site that will allow us to clear out the unmanaged encampments from the main city areas, full complete transparency and accountability from everyone that is involved in this project – is what needs to be the focus.
It’s entirely possible that my reasons for why both the left and right aren’t supporting the current proposal are off, as they are just my opinion – but one thing is certain: both sides strongly oppose the proposal, creating an unexpected sense of bipartisan unity.
After all, this project impacts our entire town, our people, our future, and the character of our community. The proposed shelter may have a very long term impact on our community we need to make sure this is done right.
