Please find attached my public comment regarding the PlanSpokane 2046 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
This submission outlines key concerns related to the current planning framework, including gaps in functional classification, equitable siting, and cumulative impact analysis for service-integrated and special needs housing.
I would appreciate confirmation that this comment has been received and included in the official EIS record.
I am submitting this comment on the PlanSpokane Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to address a critical gap in the City’s current planning and environmental review framework. While the EIS evaluates housing capacity, growth patterns, and infrastructure needs at a broad level, it does not adequately address how service-integrated, transitional and supportive housing—particularly those tied to mental health, substance use disorder, and homelessness response systems—are defined, classified, and sited within the City.
This omission is significant. The City is increasingly relying on program-based, service-integrated housing as part of regional and statewide strategies to address complex social and health challenges. However, these facilities are not being clearly or consistently characterized within the City’s land use framework, and as a result, their unique functional characteristics and cumulative impacts are not being fully analyzed in the EIS.
The issue is not whether these facilities should exist, they are an essential part of the broader response to urgent community needs. The issue is whether the City’s current planning tools are sufficient to accurately define, evaluate, and equitably site them in a manner consistent with adopted Comprehensive Plan policies.
As outlined below, a fundamental blind spot exists in how these uses are classified and understood within the City’s framework. This gap limits the City’s ability to assess distribution, evaluate cumulative impacts, and implement policies—such as SH 2.4—that are intended to guide equitable and compatible siting across neighborhoods.
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION GAP
A critical blind spot exists in how the City currently classifies service-integrated transitional and supportive housing uses. These facilities do not fit cleanly within existing land use categories. They are not accurately characterized as traditional residential household living, yet they are also not consistently classified as group living or care facilities. Instead, they fall into an undefined space within the code, despite having distinct functional characteristics such as on-site staffing, case management, behavioral health coordination, structured programming, and a level of operational intensity that differs significantly from conventional housing.
Importantly, these are not purely local residential uses. These facilities function as part of broader regional and statewide systems addressing mental health, substance use disorder, and homelessness. They often serve individuals from across jurisdictions, operate in coordination with state-funded programs, and are designed to respond to regional service demands—not just neighborhood-level needs. Despite this, they continue to be reviewed and permitted as if they are standard residential development.
Since the 2017 Comprehensive Plan update, transitional housing and emergency shelter have been formally recognized; however, the nature of these facilities has evolved substantially. Many now operate as program-based, service-integrated environments rather than purely residential household uses. Despite this evolution, the City has not updated its classification framework to reflect these functional realities.
[PDF page 3 of 86]
This gap has direct planning consequences. Policy SH 2.2 and 2.4 calls for the City to ensure that housing for vulnerable populations is sited in a manner that supports equitable distribution, access to services, and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. However, without a clear and consistent method to define and categorize these uses based on their functional characteristics—and without acknowledging their regional role—there is no reliable mechanism to evaluate distribution, ensure they are placed in areas were adequate services are assessable and cumulative impacts are evaluated to prevent overconcentration. In practice, these facilities can also generate increased demand on public services such as police, fire, emergency response, and transportation systems, reinforcing the importance of accurate classification and coordinated siting analysis. If the City cannot clearly define what these facilities are, it cannot effectively implement the very policies intended to guide where and how they are sited.
POLICY VS. IMPLEMENTATION
Spokane’s Comprehensive Plan and municipal code already establish clear direction regarding equitable siting, compatibility, and dispersal of special needs housing. The issue is not a lack of policy—it is a lack of consistent implementation. In practice, these facilities are frequently classified based on generalized labels rather than their functional characteristics. As a result, service-intensive uses are permitted as standard residential housing development, by passing the level of analysis and scrutiny intended under existing policy. This creates a structural disconnect between adopted standards and real-world outcomes.
This misalignment has tangible consequences. Without functional classification, there is no meaningful mechanism to evaluate cumulative impacts, no consistent way to assess neighborhood compatibility, and no effective safeguard against the geographic concentration of service-intensive uses within specific areas of the city. The result is a pattern in which these facilities have become concentrated—not by explicit policy direction, but through planning gaps within the City’s planning department regarding classification and implementation. Concentration and equitable dispersion of special needs temporary and supportive housing is contemplated and recognized through the express language of the GMA, the Comprehensive Plan, and SMC 12.05.062-Siting of Basic Public Facilities, yet when these facilities are treated separately, and not considered cumulatively—this undermines the very policies that were put in place that discourage concentration—therefore, special needs housing should require critical analysis and cumulative impacts through the City’s permitting process.
COMMUNITY IMPACT AND TRUST
At a community level, many Spokane residents have reached a breaking point. There is a growing sense that concerns raised repeatedly over time in regards to overconcentration are currently not meaningfully acknowledged or addressed, resulting in a loss of trust in the City’s planning and decision-making process.
[PDF page 4 of 86]
For many residents, this issue is tied directly to daily lived experiences. Conditions within certain neighborhoods have shifted in ways that feel increasingly incompatible with long-term residential stability and quality of life. As a result, some residents are now contemplating leaving—not because they oppose housing or services, but because the current approach lacks consistency, transparency, and accountability. This dynamic is particularly concerning given the City’s stated commitment to collaboration and community engagement. Residents are participating in good faith efforts, yet there is a growing perception that input is not being critically considered in a meaningful way and is not translating into alignment with adopted policy or implementation practices.
Residents are actively seeking to understand and engage with the City’s policies, including the Comprehensive Plan. However, when projects consistently reveal misalignment between stated policy and on-the-ground outcomes—and when concerns raised through established channels are not meaningfully addressed—it raises a fundamental question about how the City’s engagement and decision-making processes function in practice.
If existing avenues for participation do not allow for reconciliation of these inconsistencies, it is unclear where meaningful engagement is intended to occur. This creates a disconnect between the City’s stated commitments to compatibility, inclusion, transparency, and responsible planning, and the lived experiences of those attempting to participate in the process.
A planning framework is only as effective as its implementation. When adopted policies are not reflected in how land uses are classified, analyzed, and sited, this disconnect represents a systemic gap that warrants explicit acknowledgment within the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the Comprehensive Plan update, and the Spokane Municipal Code. When policies are not carried into practice, a clear breakdown occurs between adopted standards and real-world application. Absent this alignment, policy becomes symbolic rather than operational. Over time, this erodes public trust, weakens meaningful community engagement, and undermines the integrity and effectiveness of city planning and perpetuates project segmentation which leads them to be geographically concentrated.
The result is a pattern of de facto land-use segregation, in which service-integrated transitional and permanent supportive housing and special needs facilities become repeatedly concentrated within a limited number of neighborhoods, rather than equitably distributed across the city in accordance with adopted policies related to dispersal and compatibility. This pattern places disproportionate strain on localized infrastructure and public services, reinforces inequitable development outcomes, and is inconsistent with the core principles of equity and integration. This is not effective comprehensive planning and addressing this gap is essential to achieving the express language of the GMA and consistency within the Comprehensive Plan.
CASE STUDY: WEST HILLS CORRIDOR
The West Hills corridor demonstrates a clear and documented disconnect between Spokane’s adopted policy framework, prior planning direction, and current implementation practices.
The West Hills neighborhood is presented as a case study because it exemplifies a realworld window into how the City’s policies are functioning in practice, which has led to significant concentration of high-intensity, special-needs facilities. 1am using West Hills because the inconsistencies observed here warrant critical analysis and response. This case study illustrates why adopted policies must be implemented accurately and consistently, and why alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and Spokane Municipal Code must occur in real-world decision-making and application. Without that alignment, neighborhoods are left without meaningful safeguards, their concerns are diminished, and critical systems—including fire, EMS, transportation, and environmental infrastructure and green spaces—are placed under strain.
[PDF page 5 of 86]
Concentrating high-need, service-intensive facilities in a location where infrastructure is already limited or unstable creates cumulative impacts that affect neighborhood risk of instability, decreased service responsiveness, and reduces overall safety and quality of life.
The City, through the 2016 Plan Commission recommendations and the adopted 2017 Comprehensive Plan, established a consistent and explicit policy directive: special needs and service-integrated housing should be equitably distributed across ALL neighborhoods and should NOT be geographically concentrated (Exhibit A). This policy direction has not changed. If anything, it has been reinforced through subsequent code updates, including SMC amendments governing the siting of Basic City Facilities, which require alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and continue to discourage overconcentration (Exhibit B).
Beyond policy, the record shows that the City and its regional partners actively acknowledged and responded to these concerns in practice. The Spokane Regional ROW Initiative explicitly identified the City’s intent to reduce dense concentrations of resources within a single neighborhood and raised concern about recreating such concentration within the West Hills corridor, particularly in proximity to the Catalyst project. Similarly, earlier proposals for a pallet shelter village on Sunset Highway were scrutinized and did not advance, in part due to concerns about location, proximity to other service-intensive uses, and cumulative impact (Exhibit C). In the Spokane Regional ROW Initiative notes regarding Empire Health Foundation’s pallet shelter proposal in 2022, it is expressed that:
“Mayor Nadine Woodward has been working with the Spokane City Council to reduce the dense concentration of resources in a single neighborhood and has concerns about recreating a dense concentration of resources in another single neighborhood given the proximity to the motel conversion project [Catalyst Project]”
Additional large-scale shelter siting discussions, including House of Charity 2.0, were redirected away from west-of-downtown locations [West Hills Neighborhood] following similar concerns (Exhibit D). Taken together, these actions demonstrate that the City not only adopted policies discouraging overconcentration, but also recognized and applied those policies historically in real-world planning decisions. However, current actions reflect a clear departure from that established direction and intent.
The same types of projects that were previously subject to concern—including a pallet shelter housing project to house the homeless population from Camp Hope are currently under permit review, as well as a multi-unit, program-based facility serving Trueblood class members now currently under construction—are being advanced within the same Sunset Highway / West Hills. corridor by the same nonprofit organizations, namely Waters Meet Foundation (formerly Empire Health Foundation) and Catholic Charities Eastern Washington.
This is occurring despite the fact that these exact locations were previously identified as being at risk for overconcentration, and despite the fact that prior concerns were acknowledged by regional partners, City leaders and neighborhood residents—these projects are now moving forward. Moreover, these projects appear to have been reclassified in a manner that avoids treatment as service-intensive, special needs facilities, thereby allowing them to proceed through a streamlined permitting pathway. This approach bypasses the level of siting analysis, public process, neighborhood compatibility review, and cumulative impact evaluation that would otherwise be required under the Spokane Municipal Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
[PDF page 6 of 86]
This creates direct and unresolved inconsistency:
- The City previously acknowledged overconcentration as a concern
- The City directed planning efforts to avoid it
- The City previously acted on those concerns explicitly in the Sunset corridor
- Yet the City is now advancing the same type of use in the same locations, without applying
those same considerations
Importantly, this is not the result of a change in policy. The Comprehensive Plan has not been amended to allow concentration, nor have the underlying principles been weakened. To the contrary, they have been reaffirmed and strengthened. What has changed is how the City is choosing to apply—or not apply—those policies in practice.
The result is that overconcentration is no longer being analyzed or prevented, despite being clearly identified, historically acknowledged, and explicitly discouraged. Instead, projects that were previously questioned on the basis of cumulative impact and proximity are now being advanced within the same geographic area without a consistent analytical framework.
This case study demonstrates that the issue before the EIS is not theoretical. It is an ongoing and documented pattern in which recognized planning concerns are not being translated into enforceable or consistently applied siting decisions. Without addressing this gap, the City’s policy commitments to equitable distribution and neighborhood compatibility remain unenforced, allowing continued concentration of service-integrated housing within the same corridors despite longstanding direction to the contrary.
CURRENT CONDITION AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
In 2017, as part of the Comprehensive Plan implementation framework, the City established clear policy direction under SH 2.2 (Special Needs Temporary Housing), which explicitly directs the City to disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods. In addition, related policies encourage a land use pattern that allows convenient access to daily goods and services, particularly for individuals with limited mobility or transportation options.
Taken together, SH 2.2 and SH 2.4 establish a clear framework: special needs housing must not only be equitably dispersed across all neighborhoods, but also located in areas that provide meaningful access to daily goods, services, and transportation necessary to support vulnerable populations. These directives were not advisory, they were adopted as policy to guide equitable and responsible land use decisions. However, as demonstrated by current conditions in 2026, these directives are not being followed in practice.
Within the West Hills/Sunset corridor, there is a clear and measurable concentration of special needs and service-integrated housing within approximately a one-mile radius. This includes (Exhibit E):
- Ascenda Sober Living
- St. Agnes Family Haven (Catholic Charities in partnership with Frontier Behavioral
Health)
- New Roots Village (proposed transitional housing development)
[PDF page 7 of 86]
- The Catalyst Project
- Passages Treatment
- Beloved Sunset Apartments
- Shangri-La Motel (city-funded placements)
- West Wynn Motel (city-funded placements)
Several of these facilities are located within approximately 500 feet of one another, and collectively represent over 200 units or placements of service-intensive and publicly supported housing concentrated within a single neighborhood corridor (Exhibit E). This pattern directly conflicts with the City’s adopted policy to disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods.
Equally concerning is the City’s failure to follow its own policy direction regarding access to daily goods and services. The West Hills neighborhood is widely recognized as a low walkability area, with a score of approximately 24, indicating that it is highly car-dependent. The neighborhood is characterized by steep topography, limited commercial amenities, and poor pedestrian connectivity to the rest of the city. There are few, if any, accessible grocery stores, employment centers, or essential services within walking distance. The area is physically separated from the downtown core by the Latah Creek corridor, further limiting access. For many residents, including those with limited mobility, daily errands require a vehicle.
This reality is fundamentally incompatible with the City’s own policy directive to site special needs housing in areas with convenient access to goods and services. This concern is further compounded by infrastructure limitations. The Latah Creek bridge—one of the primary transportation and pedestrian connections between the West Hills corridor and the rest of the City—further illustrates a critical infrastructure constraint that has not been adequately evaluated in the Draft EIS. As an aging structure with documented deterioration and operational limitations, the bridge already functions as a constrained, single point of access across a significant geographic barrier. Any additional restrictions, or potential future closure due to structural conditions, would further reduce or eliminate already limited pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. This would effectively isolate the West Hills neighborhood and the vulnerable populations the city intends to serve, forcing reliance on indirect, vehicle-oriented routes that are not designed for safe or practical pedestrian use.
This condition is directly relevant to adopted Comprehensive Plan policy. Policies such as SH 2.4, which call for the equitable dispersal of special needs housing across neighborhoods, and broader policy direction requiring that such housing be sited in areas with convenient access to goods, services, and transportation, presume a baseline level of connectivity and accessibility that is not present here. The West Hills corridor, already characterized by low walkability and limited access to daily needs, does not meet this threshold.
[PDF page 8 of 86]
When considered alongside the increasing concentration of service-integrated and special needs housing within this same corridor, the limitations of the Latah Creek bridge compound existing barriers to mobility and access. This creates a condition where residents—particularly those without reliable transportation or with limited mobility—are placed in an environment that is inherently disconnected from essential services. The City does not analyze how this constrained infrastructure network interacts with siting decisions, nor how it may undermine the City’s own policy objectives related to equitable distribution, access, and neighborhood compatibility. As such, the omission represents a significant gap in the evaluation of cumulative impacts.
West Hills Corridor: Cumulative Impacts Associated with Service-Integrated and Special Needs Housing
The West Hills corridor illustrates the cumulative impacts that can occur when service-integrated and special needs housing—including supportive housing and voucher-based motel placements—are concentrated within a limited geographic area. Existing conditions in this corridor reflect a pattern of increased demand on public services and measurable changes to neighborhood stability.
Documented incidents and resident experiences indicate increased emergency response activity, including a 200%-300% increase in EMS and 911 calls following the arrival of the Catalyst Project in West Hills, as well as multiple fire events—one of which resulted in a Level 3 evacuation (Exhibit F & G). The fire department has acknowledged that increased cumulative fire incidents have placed strain on the fire response system, alongside rising demand on police, fire, and emergency medical services. Additional conditions include property-related crimes such as vehicle break-ins, theft, and fuel siphoning, as well as open drug use, drug-related activity, abandoned or stolen vehicles, and encampment-related spillover impacts contributing to visible deterioration within the neighborhood. More recently, a significant drug enforcement action within the West Hills Sunset corridor, where detectives seized approximately one kilogram of suspected fentanyl powder, over 3,100 fentanyl pills, more than $46,800 in cash, methamphetamine, and other drug related materials (Exhibit H).
Neighborhoods experiencing a high concentration of service-integrated facilities supporting individuals with significant substance use disorders and mental health challenges can become destabilized when impacts are not properly managed, often resulting in visible deterioration and conditions commonly perceived as blight. In the absence of balanced siting and adequate support infrastructure, these environments may also become more susceptible to associated criminal or nuisance activities, further compounding strain on public services and neighborhood stability.
Despite these observable conditions, the City does not evaluate how the concentration of special needs housing, supportive housing, and motel-based voucher programs may contribute to cumulative public safety impacts, increased service demand, or long-term neighborhood stability. And despite repeated efforts to open up a dialogue with City officials regarding neighborhood concerns in the West Hills, these efforts have been largely ignored and dismissed, most recently a letter to the City Council Executive team addressing overconcentration in the West Hills Sunset Corridor—to date, no formal response has been received (Exhibit I).
Functional Use of St Agnes Haven in West Hills
The following provides a functional description of the programmatic nature of the St. Agnes facility, which is currently under construction in the West Hills corridor. Under the City’s permitting framework, the project has been classified as multifamily housing. However, as described below, the operational characteristics and service delivery model reflect a service-integrated, program based residential use that differs substantially from conventional multifamily development (Exhibit J).
[PDF page 9 of 86]
Saint Agnes functions as a service-integrated, program-based residential facility rather than a typical residential use. The operational model is characterized by on-site staffing, structured case management, and coordinated behavioral health services, including mental health and substance use disorder support delivered in partnership with providers such as Frontier Behavioral Health. Residents are not simply tenants in independent dwelling units; they are participants in a managed program environment designed to stabilize individuals with complex behavioral health needs.
The level of service is consistent with high-intensity supportive housing, where daily operations include regular staff interaction, service compliance expectations, and ongoing coordination with external systems, including healthcare systems, crisis response infrastructure, and, in some cases, court- or diversion-based programs. This type of setting inherently involves a higher degree of oversight and operational intensity than conventional housing due to the needs of the population being served.
Importantly, St Agnes is not solely a local housing response—it is part of a broader regional and statewide strategy to address behavioral health system gaps, including homelessness among individuals with serious mental illness, substance use disorder, and those intersecting with crisis and forensic systems. Programs of this type are often connected to statewide initiatives designed to reduce reliance on emergency departments, jails, and inpatient psychiatric facilities, while providing community-based stabilization and long-term support. As such, the facility functions within a larger coordinated care framework, serving populations that are referred through regional networks, healthcare systems, and state-supported behavioral health pathways.
Critically, tenancy within St Agnes is not purely based on traditional leasehold rights, but is instead conditioned on program participation and behavioral expectations. Residents are typically required to comply with program rules, engage with assigned services, and adhere to conduct standards tied to safety and stability. Ongoing tenancy is actively monitored through staff oversight, with compliance evaluated based on behavioral factors such as participation in services, adherence to program guidelines, and overall stability. Failure to meet these expectations may result in intervention, program escalation, or potential loss of housing placement.
As a result, the functional characteristics of Saint Agnes align more closely with a structured, supervised residential program operating as part of a regional and statewide behavioral health response system, rather than independent residential living.
Requested Analysis and Recommendations
Currently, the absence of clear, enforceable dispersal standards allows for the clustering of service-intensive housing in limited geographic areas. This creates cumulative impacts that are not adequately evaluated when projects are considered in isolation. Over time, this pattern undermines neighborhood compatibility, strains local infrastructure, and contradicts the City’s stated goal of equitable distribution.
[PDF page 10 of 86]
From a planning perspective, this is a systems-level issue. When multiple projects with similar operational characteristics—such as high service needs, behavioral health components, or transitional occupancy—are sited without a framework that accounts for cumulative concentration, the result is not true integration. Instead, it creates pockets of overrepresentation that can unintentionally shift the burden of regional social services onto a small number of communities. Equitable distribution must mean more than allowing these uses everywhere; it must also mean ensuring they are not disproportionately concentrated anywhere.
To address this gap, I respectfully encourage the Plan Commission to consider the following:
- Establish clear, measurable dispersal policies for special needs and service-integrated housing
that apply citywide
- Incorporate cumulative impact analysis into project review, particularly where multiple similar
uses exist within a defined area
- Align land use classifications with functional characteristics, ensuring consistent treatment
across similar housing models
- Strengthen implementation mechanisms so that Comprehensive Plan policies are not merely
aspirational, but operational
- Ensure that infrastructure, public safety, and neighborhood context are evaluated alongside
equity goals
Spokane has an opportunity through PlanSpokane 2046 to move from broad policy statements toward a more balanced and accountable framework—one that supports vulnerable populations while also maintaining the integrity, safety, and sustainability of all neighborhoods. A well-functioning city distributes both opportunity and responsibility. Achieving that balance requires not only compassion, but also clear planning structure, consistency, and follow-through.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,
LuAnne Walker
ra
West Hills Neighborhood Resident
[PDF page 11 of 86]
EXHIBIT A
1. Spokane City Plan Commission Findings of Fact 2016
2. 2017 Projected Comprehensive Plan Amendments
[PDF page 12 of 86]
Spokane City Plan Commission Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommendations Regarding Infill Development
A recommendation from the City Plan Commission to the City Council accepting the Infill Development Steering Committee’s Summary Report and Recommendation as a guide for future programmatic and regulatory implementation measures.
WHEREAS, The Plan Commission is charged to investigate and make recommendations to the City Council in relation to all matters pertaining to the living conditions of the City; the betterment of facilities for doing public and private business therein; the elimination of slums; the correction of unhealthful housing conditions; the proper laying out, platting, and naming of streets, squares, and public places, and the numbering of buildings and houses therein; the location, planning, and architectural designing of public buildings; and generally, all things tending to promote the health, convenience, safety, and well-being of the City's population, and to further its growth along consistent, comprehensive and permanent plans; and,
WHEREAS, The Plan Commission is further empowered to provide advice and make recommendation on broad planning goals and policies and on whichever plans for the physical development of the City that the City Council may request the Commission's advice by ordinance or resolution; and,
WHEREAS, The Commission shall provide opportunities for public participation in City planning by providing through its own broadly based membership an informed opinion to complement the work of the City's elected officials and administrative departments; soliciting public comment, when pertinent, on planning issues of City-wide importance or of a substantial community concern, and evaluating comments received; and securing the assistance of experts and others with knowledge or ideas to contribute to City planning; and,
WHEREAS, The City of Spokane’s Infill Development Project is engaged in identification of issues regarding infill development and the development of strategies to overcome obstacles to such development; and,
WHEREAS, High-quality infill development can create positive economic impacts for communities; and,
WHEREAS, The communication objectives for the Infill Development Project are to examine a range of potential programs and regulatory changes that could be implemented to help describe today’s development standards, increase public awareness of the infill mechanisms and products, engage in dialogue with stakeholders that results in productive recommendations to increase opportunities for development and new housing, develop an easy-to-follow report and recommendations for future action based on the project's findings, and monitor the effectiveness of infill development strategies developed through this process; and,
WHEREAS, The City hosted six focus group meetings, held between May and June 2016, for the purpose of soliciting community input on neighborhood specific and citywide interests, challenges and opportunities; and,
[PDF page 13 of 86]
WHEREAS, Additional input was gathered through an open house, held August 30, 2016, through an online survey, and through individual presentations upon request to the Mayor’s Housing Quality Task Force, to five neighborhood councils, and to working groups of the Downtown Spokane Partnership; and,
WHEREAS, The Summary Report and Recommendation were prepared by project staff in conjunction with the assigned steering committee, based on a review of existing conditions related to infill development, a review of relevant existing adopted policies and regulations, and input from stakeholders and the public at large; and,
WHEREAS, The Summary Report and Recommendation contains a series of strategies that the City of Spokane and others may pursue to further the Infill Development Project's objectives; and,
WHEREAS, It is recognized that additional legislative action with robust public engagement will be required for all strategies that involve changes to adopted policy and regulations of the City of Spokane and that such changes will need to be incorporated into subsequent work plans of the Plan Commission and/or considered in conjunction with ongoing or upcoming major planning efforts such as the Comprehensive Plan Update and update to the Downtown Spokane Plan; and,
WHEREAS, Appropriate notice of the Plan Commission hearing was published in the Spokesman Review on September 28, and October 5, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, the City Plan Commission held a public hearing on October 12, 2016 to obtain public comments on the proposed Summary Report and Recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the Plan Commission has reviewed and considered all public testimony received prior to and during the public hearings.
NOW THEREFORE, By a vote of 7 to 0 , the Plan Commission does recommend that quality development should be enabled and promoted on vacant and underdeveloped lots and parcels in developed areas in a manner that:
- Provides a desirable mixture of affordable housing options to people of all income levels, and sustainably realizes density objectives;
- Is designed to maintain and encourage attractive neighborhood character;
- Is consistent with the City of Spokane Comprehensive Plan, as well as adopted neighborhood plans and subarea plans; and,
- Is consistent with existing neighborhood character, and/or the neighborhood character envisioned in adopted neighborhood plans; and,
FURTHER, The Plan Commission recommends to the City Council the acceptance of the Summary Report and Recommendation as a guide for future program development and potential regulatory implementation measures; and,
FURTHER, The Plan Commission recommends that all recommendations be advanced for implementation as the available options consisting of correlated components of the whole effort, while further internal and interdepartmental review will be required for identifying the scope, budget, and probable timeframes for each; and,
[PDF page 14 of 86]
FURTHER, The Plan Commission recommends that the continuation of the Multiple-Family Tax Exemption is of paramount importance for nearest-term implementation as the program is reviewed by the City Council in 2017; and,
FURTHER, Recognizing the urgency of moving these recommendations forward, the Plan Commission recommends that after reviewing and accepting the Summary Report and Recommendation, the Commission and Council meet jointly to discuss the manner in which all the strategies recommended by the steering committee may be prioritized and implemented.
Dennis Dellwo, President
Spokane Plan Commission
October 12, 2016
[PDF page 15 of 86]
Volume V, Appendix G
Work Plan Matrices
Future Matrix and Master Matrix
City of Spokane Comprehensive Plan
[PDF page 16 of 86]
CHAPTER 10 — SOCIAL HEALTH
Future Implementation (Not Yet Implemented & Not Near Term)
SH 1 — Funding Mechanisms to Support Social Health
Utilize all funding mechanisms that will help to develop the infrastructure, support, and staffing necessary to provide affordable, accessible opportunities for arts, culture, recreation, education, and health and human services to all citizens, with particular attention to the needs of youth, the elderly and those with special needs.
SH 1.7 — Surplus City Real Property
Establish a dedicated reserve fund within the City of Spokane’s general fund to cover the cost of leasing any unused city-owned building and/or property that has been determined surplus to non-profit organizations.
Next step: Analyze the creation of a community land bank and/or land aggregation entity by the Mayor's Housing Quality Task Force.
SH 2 — Facilities for Special Needs Populations
Enable and encourage development patterns and uses of public and private property that are responsive to the facility requirements of special needs populations.
SH 2.1 — Care Facilities
Distribute care facilities fairly and equitably throughout all neighborhoods.
Next step: Map care facilities throughout the City.
SH 2.2 — Special Needs Temporary Housing
Disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods.
Next step: Map special needs temporary housing throughout the City.
SH 2.4 — Co-location of Facilities
Encourage a land use pattern that allows convenient access to daily goods and services, especially for those persons with limited mobility and/or transportation options.
SH 2.6 — Joint-Use Facilities
Provide for the joint use of facilities that clusters services for child or adult day care, health care, human services, libraries, schools, and cultural, recreational, and educational programs, as needed.
SH 3 — Arts and Cultural Enrichment
Support community image and identity through the arts and accessible art activities.
SH 3.3 — Public Art Incentives
Provide incentives such as bonus densities or increases in floor-area ratio and lot coverage to encourage the use of public art in commercial, industrial, and mixed-use developments.
[PDF page 17 of 86]
EXHIBIT B
1. Section 12.05.062 Siting of Basic City Facilities — Process
[PDF page 18 of 86]
Spokane Municipal Code
***Note: Many local criminal codes can now be located under Chapter 10.60 SMC while others are now cited under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), which was incorporated into the municipal code in 2022. (See SMC 10.58.010). Code Enforcement, including Noise Control and Animal Regulations are located in Chapters 10.62 through 10.74.
Home | Title 12 | Chapter 12.05 | Section 12.05.062
[PDF page 19 of 86]
Title 12 Public Ways and Property
Chapter 12.05 General City Property
Section 12.05.062 Siting of Basic City Facilities — Process
A. Prior to locating a Basic City Facility, or prior to locating a new city-owned or contracting for a city-funded emergency shelter or transitional housing, the City shall convene at least one public community meeting or open house and solicit written comment from members of the affected neighborhood council area(s) concerning the need(s) for the facility and the service(s) desired or required by the community, as well as identified service gap(s) to be addressed by the facility.
B. Siting of any new or relocated city-funded Basic City Facility providing emergency shelter or transitional housing shall be consistent with the “special needs temporary housing” provisions of the City’s approved comprehensive plan, as adopted pursuant to Title 17B of the Spokane Municipal Code, as such plan may be amended from time to time. In particular, siting shall place primary emphasis on satisfying the directive in the comprehensive plan to ensure that special needs housing facilities are evenly dispersed throughout all of the city’s neighborhoods.
C. City services shall not be provided at a Basic City Facility location unless the City Council has approved the location or relocation of a Basic City Facility. This subsection C shall not apply to the siting of city-funded facilities providing emergency shelter or transitional housing.
D. The requirements of this section shall not apply to Basic City Facilities sited before the effective date of this section.
Date Passed: Monday, June 16, 2025
Effective Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2025
ORD C36692 Section 4
[PDF page 20 of 86]
EXHIBIT C
1. ROW INITIATIVE
2. EMPIRE HEALTH FOUNDATION PALLET SHELTER NOTES
[PDF page 21 of 86]
Spokane Regional ROW Initiative Action Plan Summary
[This page contains a rotated action-plan table that could not be transcribed reliably. See the original page image.]
[PDF page 22 of 86]
[This page continues a dense, rotated action-plan table that could not be transcribed reliably. See the original page image.]
[PDF page 23 of 86]
EXHIBIT D
1. Refer to page 3 under “What is the timeline for HOC 2.0
[PDF page 24 of 86]
House of Charity 2.0
House of Charity 2.0 Overview
[Website navigation and cookie controls omitted.]
[PDF page 25 of 86]
House of Charity serves the most vulnerable members of our community, those on the streets battling the effects of mental illness, childhood trauma, and substance misuse. Many of our patrons have struggled to engage with formal and informal care systems, such as their families, schools, the mental health system, and every other shelter in town. These community members have sometimes given up hope that life can improve. We always endeavor to show them they do indeed have hope.
At House of Charity, we "hold the hope" for our patrons until it rekindles within them. We welcome any person in any condition, as long as they respect our staff, building, and rules. We believe each person, regardless of condition, is made in the image and likeness of Christ and deserves dignity and respect. We believe strongly that every human being should, at the very least, be able to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom indoors, in a safe place where they can also get the help and services they need to begin transforming their lives. We offer space, staff, and services to walk alongside them as they improve their health and wellness. We walk with them through their darkest valley, offering our reassuring presence to ease their fears slowly.
House of Charity is an all-inclusive, low-barrier emergency shelter that provides case management, meals, sleeping, and a respite program to individuals experiencing homelessness. We have been operating in Spokane since 1912. In 2000 we moved House of Charity from its old location on Main Street to its current location at the request and suggestion of the City of Spokane and the downtown business community.
Catholic Charities has acquired two sites to potentially build a new House of Charity 2.0 (HOC 2.0). This state-of-the-art facility would expand the current services of House of Charity in a new location outside the downtown core corridor, offering expanded capacity for both men and women, providing a wide range of all-inclusive shelter services. These services will be open 24/7 to anyone who needs emergency shelter and would like to transition towards temporary and more permanent housing services.
This project will continue to embody the core principle that Catholic Charities has maintained for over 50 years: Every human person is made in the image and likeness of God and thus demands basic dignity, respect, and compassion. Any person experiencing homelessness should be able to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom indoors, in a safe, welcoming space. This space should include behavioral health services they need to stabilize their lives and then be placed by our team on a path to permanent supportive housing.
HOC 2.0 will include a sleeping program for both men and women, respite care, case management, new augmented kitchen facilities that could be designed to accommodate freezing equipment to stockpile more meals tailored to meet the unique dietary needs of our patrons, increased security services covering a five-block radius of the new location, ample space to safely store personal gear and office space for community partners and outside providers to offer primary care, mental health, and substance abuse counseling delivered directly on-site. There will also be a large outdoor fenced utility area for seating, gathering, exercise, and other outdoor activities. In addition, case managers would be available on-site to administer intentional support services.
[PDF page 26 of 86]
The current House of Charity (HOC) facility located at 32 W. Pacific Avenue would remain in its current location. It would continue to provide support services to Catholic Charities clients and nearby housing residents with new opportunities to meet community needs. However, the current HOC location would no longer sleep or feed individuals experiencing homelessness. The first floor will be used for staffing needs to assist our permanent supportive housing units in the area. The upstairs sleeping space will remain intact and could be used as an additional sheltering space by regional emergency management groups during inclement weather, fire/smoke season, future contagious disease events, etc. It could also be activated if desired by emergency management groups, as a medical isolation and quarantine space, as needed by the city or county during times of crisis like pandemics or norovirus outbreaks.
HOC 2.0 would provide 24/7 shelter services to our most vulnerable community members outside the downtown corridor.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is HOC 2.0?
Catholic Charities has submitted a regional proposal to the City of Spokane and Spokane County to address homelessness for single adults called HOC 2.0. House of Charity 2 (HOC 2.0) would expand our ability to provide 24/7 shelter services to men and women enrolled in our program and support our most vulnerable community members outside the downtown corridor. Catholic Charities has secured three potential sites to relocate House of Charity out of the downtown core. The result would be a new comprehensive homeless shelter solution in a new location. This concept is built on the decades-long core value and guiding principle of Catholic Charities' homeless services strategy. Every human person is made in the image and likeness of God and thus demands basic dignity, respect, and compassion. People experiencing homelessness should be able to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom indoors, in a safe, welcoming space. This space should also provide behavioral health services people need to stabilize their lives. Once stabilized, each client should have a guided path and a Catholic Charities team member to walk alongside them as they transition to permanent supportive housing.
The House of Charity holds hope for people who have none. HOC 2.0 would continue to serve our most vulnerable neighbors with expanded capacity and provide intentional wraparound supportive services to help people move forward in their lives. This new, augmented model would allow multiple stakeholders such as the city, county, law enforcement, downtown business, real estate owners, and social service providers to achieve shared goals and outcomes. Most importantly, it provides the vulnerable men and women experiencing homelessness and living on our streets, parks, alleys, and underpasses to find access to resources and services delivered with dignity, love, and the hope they deserve.
What is the timeline for HOC 2.0?
Since the HOC 2.0 project was announced in April 2022, CCEW has had three viable sites west of downtown, all under ownership/control of CCEW, zoned appropriately and shovel ready. However, given the level of concern expressed by residents in west Spokane, the city has asked Catholic Charities to re-direct the search to find other location options. In August 2022, Catholic Charities began looking for a new site outside of the downtown core and in other areas outside of the city.
We are looking in all directions, but it could take several months to find an appropriate site with the correct zoning. Once a site is found it will take several months to perform due diligence and neighborhood outreach before it can be purchased. After that, it will be a year for construction, pushing out the new HOC 2.0 into Summer 2024, assuming all funding is provided as per current plans.
What needs does HOC 2.0 fill in the community?
HOC 2.0 would use a trauma-informed approach to provide 24/7 on-site services for men and [text cut off in source image].
[PDF page 27 of 86]
Who can access HOC 2.0?
HOC 2.0 is a low-barrier shelter. We want very few obstacles or reasons why an individual experiencing homelessness would not want to come in. The House of Charity has always had and will continue to have basic health and safety rules. Patrons are not allowed to drink or use illegal substances on-site; there is no sexual activity allowed on site; there are no weapons allowed on site, and violence of any kind is not tolerated. However, men and women in any condition, even if they are actively struggling with mental health or substance use disorder challenges, can receive services if they are respectful of themselves, other clients, and staff. There is no requirement for sobriety or religious education. We serve all people based on need, not creed. We are totally and unconditionally inclusive of every segment of our community. We believe that every individual deserves to be treated with respect and compassion—regardless of the choices that may be perceived to be contrary to them moving forward on their life journey. Sobriety and mental health stability are a journey that can take decades to complete/stabilize.
Will HOC 2.0 provide 24/7 services?
Yes, HOC 2.0 will provide on-site case management, vocational training, housing assistance, security, peer support & SUD (substance use disorder) services designed to support patrons on all aspects of their stability continuum. In addition, HOC 2.0 will provide round-the-clock services, including a bed, showers, laundry facilities, three meals, and access to other services to anyone currently enrolled.
What services can people access at HOC 2.0?
Clients can access augmented mental health counseling and care, substance use disorder counseling, medical respite, permanent housing services, vocational training, case management, and peer support counseling on-site with 24/7 security that patrols half a mile around the area. HOC 2.0 will also have dedicated apartment-style suites for hospice care for our homeless brothers and sisters, allowing them to go through end-of-life journeys with peace, tranquility, and specialized hospice care.
Why is Catholic Charities relocating House of Charity?
This is an opportunity to build a new facility that can incorporate all of the lessons learned from our current operations and processes, and design a space to honor those lessons. We will expand our ability to meet identified community needs, and create workflows and operations that are not possible in the current location.
Is HOC 2.0 a low-barrier shelter? Will there be other models of shelter for more engaged people?
HOC 2.0 will first and foremost be a low-barrier shelter. This does not mean there are no rules or requirements for maintaining health and safety. Low-barrier means that individuals choosing to access shelter will not be denied access based on race, religious beliefs, cultural background, mental health stability, gender identity, sobriety, or use of substances, and do not require completion of treatment as a requirement for program entry. In addition, we do not deny clients based upon poor credit or financial history, poor or lack of rental history, criminal history, history of victimization, status as a survivor of sexual assault or an affiliated person of such a survivor, health or mental health history, medication adherence, age, marital/family status, based upon behaviors that indicate lack of "housing readiness" or other unnecessary conditions. We also do not require any minimum income to be accepted into our program.
[PDF page 28 of 86]
Patrons ready to move forward in their stabilization journey will have access to other graduated service models and sleeping areas on-site. They will be offered case management and wraparound services to help support their journey. As clients engage with us at HOC 2.0, they take on more responsibility and accept more accountability. As they let us help them stabilize their lives, they will have progressively larger, more private sleeping spaces and more amenities/privileges on-site via a campus setting, with areas separated by client engagement and stability levels.
How will HOC 2.0 differ from House of Charity?
HOC 2.0 will have:
- Increased sleeping space
- Capacity for both men and women
- Increased transitional and medical respite care
- Expanded case management services with enough office space for community partners and providers to offer primary care
- Hospice suites and hospice services on-site
- Outdoor gathering spaces and reflection/spiritual growth spaces
- Built-in facility features to support pets
- Exercise/physical fitness areas
- Mental health and substance abuse counseling offered on-site
- State-of-the-art facility and kitchen designed to accommodate more meals tailored to meet the unique dietary needs of our patrons
- Extended security services
- Improved space to securely store personal possessions
- Large outdoor fenced utility area for outdoor activities and transportation
Where will the new site be located?
We are evaluating three potential sites that we have control over and that are zoned correctly.
Will HOC 2.0 help with transportation for clients?
Yes, a crucial feature of this new location will be working with the City of Spokane to solidify regular bus transportation services so clients have nonstop access to critical downtown corridor services, which would include providing transportation back and forth from hospitals after hours to ensure our vulnerable, medically fragile patrons have easy access to medical care 24/7.
How much will the HOC 2.0 cost?
The full extent of operational costs is still being finalized, pending the final site design. However, early estimates place the construction costs near $11 million. Costs could increase due to environmental factors at the building site, inflation, increased building material costs, timing, etc.
[PDF page 29 of 86]
What will happen to the current House of Charity location?
The current House of Charity (HOC) facility located at 32 W. Pacific Avenue would remain in its current location. It will continue to provide support services to Catholic Charities clients and nearby housing residents with new opportunities to meet community needs. However, the current HOC location would no longer sleep or feed individuals experiencing homelessness. The first floor would be used for staffing needs to assist our permanent supportive housing units in the area. The upstairs sleeping space will remain intact and could be used as an additional sheltering space by regional emergency management groups during inclement weather, fire/smoke season, future contagious disease events, etc. It could also be activated, if desired by emergency management groups, as a medical isolation and quarantine space, as needed by the city or county during times of crisis like pandemics or norovirus outbreaks.
[Professional contact details omitted from the reading text.]
Interested in supporting Catholic Charities! Get involved today!
WEST HILLS CONCENTRATION MAP OF SPECIAL NEEDS AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SERVING HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBTANCE ABUSE DISORDER
[PDF page 31 of 86]
WEST HILLS MAP
Corner of Sunset & Government Way
Mapped facilities
- Shangri-La Motel — 20 units
- Catholic Charities: St. Agnes Haven — 24 units
- New Roots Pallet Shelter Village — 30 units
- Catholic Charities: St. Agnes / Frontier Behavioral Health — 24 units
- Beloved Sunset Apartments — 27 units
- West Wynn Motel — 34 units
- Ascenda Sober Living Community
- Catholic Charities Catalyst — 79 units, 1 mile away
- Passages Respite Home — 4 units, 1.2 miles away
Map key
- Supportive housing serving homeless individuals
- Mental health facilities and housing
- Low-income housing
- Motels that take City-funded vouchers
- Sober-living facility
- New development
More suspicious fires pop up in Spokane's West Hills neighborhood
Vanessa Perez
August 9, 2023
[PDF page 34 of 86]
SPOKANE, Wash. — The hunt for the person or people responsible for starting fires in Spokane is on.
Several fires broke out around the West Hills last week, causing some people to evacuate. Written notes were found downtown with threats to burn down Spokane right before the fires started.
Almost a week later, more suspicious fires popped up in the same area.
[PDF page 35 of 86]
The Spokane Fire Department has major concerns and is unsure if there's a connection from last week's fires, despite them in the same general area.
Fire crews responded to a fire on the edge of Browne's Addition on a steep hill located on West Sunset Boulevard and south Coeur d'Alene Street.
Firefighters were able to keep the fire small. SFD says the suspicious fires are taking up resources and causing a threat to the community.
"It smelt like a fire so I came out of my apartment and just saw the smoke going up and it was pretty thin. It wasn't really that big at the time,” Alex Menko said.
Menko says people ran over with hoses to stop the fire from spreading before firefighters arrived.
"It did just rain but prior it's been super dry, a lot of dead stuff around here, so I mean it can spread really fast. In this valley, it's so open and there are so many spots to kind of just do whatever," Menko said.
Fires can escalate in just a matter of minutes and force people to evacuate like we saw last week.
"We've got a lot of these areas of fuel around the city. Little pockets like maybe they're not big but you get fire in them and they are really problematic," Spokane Fire Department Public Information Officer Justin De Ruyter said.
SFD is asking people to stay vigilant to call 9-1-1 if you see any smoke or fires. If you have any information regarding the suspicious fires, you are encouraged to call the Spokane Fire Department Investigations Unit at 509-625-7120.
"We've got somebody running around or at least some people or some persons that are running around starting these fires so getting them identified and taken off the streets, that's quite a concern of ours right now," De Ruyter said.
Related: Threats of arson discovered in different locations before multiple fires started around Spokane
Copyright 2023 by KXLY. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Woman accused of West Hills fires transferred to Spokane, bond set at $75,000
August 16, 2023
Updated August 17, 2023 at 8:35 p.m.
A “Burn Spokane Down” message can be read Aug. 4 under the railroad viaduct on Lincoln Street in downtown Spokane. Five fires started on the west side of the city on Aug. 3 afternoon, hours after the graffiti and other similar messages were reported to police. (Garrett Cabeza / The Spokesman-Review)
By Garrett Cabeza
[Professional contact details omitted from the reading text.]
A homeless woman accused of setting fires in the West Hills Neighborhood earlier this month because she was upset with the local housing crisis made her initial appearance Wednesday in Spokane County District Court.
[PDF page 38 of 86]
Vickie L. Smith, 53, was arrested Aug. 10 in Tukwila, Washington, on suspicion of three counts of first-degree arson. She was transferred to the Spokane County Jail Tuesday to face those charges before District Court Judge Jennifer Fassbender maintained Smith’s bond at $75,000 Wednesday.
Smith remained in jail Wednesday afternoon.
The brief hearing mostly included Smith, who wore gray Spokane County Jail clothing, answering “yes” to Fassbender’s questions and saying she did not have a current address.
The Aug. 3 fires caused residents to evacuate and threatened dozens of structures, but none were burned and no injuries were reported.
Cynthia Miraglia, who lives on the Indian Canyon Golf Course, told police she saw Smith near her home that day bending down and noticed a flicker of a lighter or match.
Smith reportedly told Miraglia she was hiding there to smoke marijuana because she lived at the Catalyst Project, a nearby shelter, and would get in trouble if she was caught smoking near the shelter.
Miraglia called 911 and walked Smith out of the neighborhood.
On the walk, Smith told Miraglia she was frustrated with the Catalyst program because they didn’t feed her, among other things.
Kelly Keenan, senior vice president of advancement and impact at Catholic Charities Eastern Washington, said Smith has never been a participant at Catalyst and never lived at the facility. Catalyst is a program under Catholic Charities.
Keenan also said Catalyst participants receive three meals a day.
Police linked graffiti in downtown Spokane referring to burning Spokane on Aug. 3 to Smith.
Officers reviewed surveillance video footage that showed a woman writing the graffiti on the Washington Trust Bank Building downtown, according to court documents.
Smith was confronted by police early in the morning of Aug. 4 during a trespassing investigation at another Washington Trust Bank in the Logan Neighborhood.
When police arrived, Smith asked whether she was being arrested for lighting the fires. She told officers she lit the fires to get housing after 12 years of being homeless.
Smith said the housing crisis in Spokane was unfair and demanded officers give her somewhere to live, according to court records.
Officers did not arrest her at that time, but police later matched the woman doing graffiti downtown to Miraglia’s photos and police body camera footage of Smith, according to court documents.
Officers obtained an email address linked to Smith and messaged her. They received a response detailing how the writer had set eight fires in the area, five in Dishman Hills and three near Sunset Hill, according to court documents.
The Dishman Hills fires set Aug. 3 were quickly extinguished.
Spokane police spokeswoman Julie Humphreys said Spokane police will investigate the Dishman Hills fires.
Fassbender said Smith’s court dates will be in Spokane County Superior Court.
Editor's note: The story was updated August 17, 2023, to reflect that Smith never lived at Catalyst Project, according to a Catholic Charities Eastern Washington official.
[PDF page 39 of 86]
[Author biography and subscription controls omitted.]
Major Wildland Fire in Sunset Hills Causes Evacuations
Justin de Ruyter, Spokane Fire PIO
[Professional contact details omitted from the reading text.]
Friday, August 4, 2023 at 8:59 a.m.
At 1:57 pm this afternoon, Spokane Fire Engine 4 was dispatched to 1405 South Rustle St for a report of smoke in the area. As firefighters drove up Sunset Hill, they upgraded the call to a brush fire response due to the visible smoke column. Upon arrival, they discovered a fire burning on the south side of Sunset Highway behind the Catholic Charities shelter. Fire behavior was high, with trees torching and numerous embers starting new spot fires.
Even with the extra resources arriving, the fire quickly overwhelmed firefighters, so additional alarms were called, ultimately going to three alarms with additional resources added. Other alarms also brought mutual aid resources from Spokane County, District 3, District 10, Bureau of Land Management, and the Department of Natural Resources.
The fire quickly jumped to the north side of Sunset Highway and started running towards houses up the hill off of West Deska Dr. Fire intensity was high, with trees torching and a complete burn of vegetation. Evacuation levels were raised to Level 3 "Go" to an area immediately surrounding the fire.
Air resources quickly arrived soon after, which consisted of fixed wings and helicopters dropping both retardant and water. The air resources were the key factor in keeping fire on the north side of the road out of the structures; without them, there most certainly would have been significant damage to the structures.
[PDF page 41 of 86]
With the assistance of the air resources, firefighters could access the fire on the north side with hose lines and hand tools, successfully stopping the forward progression. Once the fire was contained with fire line, mop-up activities began next to the perimeter, working towards the interior.
The fire is under control and will be staffed tonight and tomorrow in the mop-up stage. Firefighters will watch the weather tomorrow for some upper-level disturbances that can lead to gusty winds in the region.
Evacuation levels were lowered to Level 1 for homes on the north side of Sunset Highway, and all other evacuations were lifted. Residents are encouraged to sign up for evacuation notices on their cell phones by registering with ALERT Spokane through the Spokane County Department of Emergency Management website.
There were no reported civilian or firefighter injuries and no value loss to structures. Value saved numbers are unavailable at this time, but will be in the millions.
[Related photos and website footer omitted.]
[PDF page 42 of 86]
EXHIBIT G
911/EMS RESPONSE AT THE CATALYST PROJECT IN WEST HILLS
[PDF page 43 of 86]
Monthly 911 Call Volume at 4301 W. Sunset Blvd. (2021-2024) with Trendlines
[This page contains a rotated bar chart. See the original page image for the monthly values and trendlines.]
[PDF page 44 of 86]
Prior Calls
Thursday, October 9, 2025 - 07:06:35
Incident | Date | Time | Location | FDID | Nature
- 2025086513 9/28/2025 01:01:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 7802E-Burns, Unknown Status, Explosion
- 2025086135 9/26/2025 19:38:13 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2025077742 8/31/2025 03:17:57 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 28C01K-Stroke, Not Alert, CLEAR Evidence
- 2025077118 8/28/2025 23:39:53 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D04-Breathing Problem, Clammy
- 2025076301 8/26/2025 12:59:42 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12002-Seizure, CONTINUOUS
- 2025071284 8/11/2025 08:33:13 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 17D04W-Fall, Not Alert, Patient weight over X lbs
- 2025066194 7/26/2025 20:38:56 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32-UNKNOWN
- 2025063934 7/20/2025 02:01:22 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26A08-Sick, Other Pain
- 2025063518 7/18/2025 16:23:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26D01-Sick, Not Alert
- 2025057051 6/30/2025 00:00:16 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D01-Overdose, Arrest
- 2025051735 6/13/2025 12:38:46 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A04-Sick, Fever/Chills
- 2025048404 6/3/2025 23:01:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 23D01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2025048114 6/3/2025 00:33:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D04-Chest Pain, Clammy
- 2025046503 5/28/2025 23:40:23 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25B03-Psychiatric, THREATENING SUICIDE
- 2025045573 5/26/2025 04:40:21 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2025043959 5/21/2025 01:23:48 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 18C04X-Headache, Sudden / Severe, No Stroke Evidence
- 2025043340 5/19/2025 04:55:27 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 11S-STRUCTURE FIRE, Single Response
- 2025039790 5/7/2025 14:27:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D02-Chest Pain, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025032483 4/14/2025 08:32:30 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 10D01-Chest Pain, Not Alert
- 2025032226 4/13/2025 10:43:44 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26D01-Sick, Not Alert
- 2025032186 4/13/2025 07:54:14 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32-4UNKNOWN
- 2025031134 4/9/2025 12:30:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 19D02-Heart, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025029210 4/3/2025 06:32:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32959 26A11-Sick, Vomiting
- 2025028627 4/1/2025 11:39:02 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26C01-Sick, ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS
- 2025027717 3/29/2025 13:57:20 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D04-Chest Pain, Clammy
- 2025024676 3/20/2025 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 28CO1K-Stroke, Not Alert, CLEAR Evidence
- 2025024347 3/19/2025 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 1118-POSSIBLE ILLEGAL BURN
- 2025024247 3/18/2025 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2025023576 3/16/2025 19:09:21 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32-4UNKNOWN
- 2025023199 3/15/2025 12:07:51 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 1D01-Abdominal Pain, Not Alert
- 2025023088 3/15/2025 01:35:11 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 7A01-Burns, < 18% Body Area
- 2025022563 3/13/2025 11:28:02 4301 W SUNSET BLVD. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 9E01-Death, Not Breathing at all
- 2025022235 3/12/2025 10:58:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 32-UNKNOWN
- 2025020651 3/7/2025 02:09:15 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 26-SICK
- 2025018197 2/27/2025 09:09:43 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6002-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025017357 2/24/2025 14:13:54 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25A01-Psychiatric, Non-suicidal/Alert
- 2025015366 2/17/2025 19:49:35 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2025013492 2/12/2025 08:49:55 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 31A01-Unconscious, Alert >= 35, No Cardiac History
[PDF page 45 of 86]
- 2025013269 2/11/2025 15:02:44 4301 W SUNSET BLVD. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23E01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2025013169 2/11/2025 10:53:55 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 10D05-Chest Pain, Heart Attack/Angina History
- 2025012462 2/9/2025 03:48:02 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 18C04K-Headache, Sudden / Severe, CLEAR Stroke
- 2025010757 2/4/2025 05:01:14 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 1118-POSSIBLE ILLEGAL BURN
- 2025010668 2/3/2025 19:25:28 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2025010444 2/3/2025 04:46:27 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
Spokane Valley drug investigation leads to fentanyl seizure, arrest
Oliver Waite, NonStop Local Digital Producer
April 8, 2026
Courtesy of Spokane County Sheriff's Office
SPOKANE VALLEY, Wash. — After serving search warrants in March tied to an ongoing drug sales investigation, Spokane Valley Investigative Unit (SVIU) detectives arrested a suspect and reportedly seized a large quantity of suspected fentanyl, methamphetamine, cash and other property.
According to the Spokane County Sheriff's Office (SCSO), detectives were granted warrants on March 18 for a motel in the 2700 block of West Sunset Boulevard and two storage units in the 5600 block of West Sunset Highway. Investigators also developed probable cause to arrest a suspect for drug distribution charges.
[PDF page 52 of 86]
SVIU detectives served the warrants and arrested a 45-year-old female suspect on the morning of March 19. According to SCSO officials, the suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on two counts of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute.
Detectives reported that approximately 1 kilogram of suspected fentanyl powder, more than 3,100 pills suspected of containing fentanyl and more than $46,800 in cash were seized following the arrest. They also reported finding methamphetamine, scales, other drug paraphernalia, a Jeep Wrangler, precious metals and other property that authorities believed to be stolen.
[Video promotion and website cookie controls omitted.]
SCSO officials stated that the suspect posted a $50,000 bond after her first appearance in Spokane County Superior Court. She was released from jail on March 24.
The investigation remains underway and more charges or arrests are expected.
Oliver Waite, NonStop Local Digital Producer
[Website cookie controls omitted.]
[PDF page 54 of 86]
EXHIBIT I
WEST HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
[PDF page 55 of 86]
February 23, 2026
Members of the Spokane City Council Spokane City Hall
808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd.
Spokane, WA 99201
In re: Request for Clarification — New Roots Village Siting Process and Comprehensive Plan
Alignment
Dear Members of the Spokane City Council:
The West Hills Neighborhood Council respectfully requests clarification regarding the City’s process for siting the New Roots Village transitional housing project under the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan and implementing land-use ordinances. This request is not a policy objection to housing or services. It is a request for administrative clarification regarding how adopted City law was applied to the New Roots Village project.
Governing Legal Framework
The Spokane Comprehensive Plan is adopted by ordinance and constitutes City law.
Relevant policies include:
- SH 2.2 — Special Needs Temporary Housing, which directs the City to “disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods”; examples include emergency shelters, foster care facilities, group homes, transitional housing, and homeless shelters.
- SH 2.3 — Compatible Design of Special Needs Facilities, which directs the City to “ensure that facilities that accommodate special needs populations blend in with the existing visual character of the neighborhood in which they are located.”
- LU 5.5 — Compatible Development, which directs the City to “ensure that infill and redevelopment projects are designed to be compatible with and complement surrounding uses and building types.”
[PDF page 56 of 86]
- H 1.13 — Siting of Subsidized Low-Income Housing, which directs the City to “set clear site selection criteria for publicly subsidized housing to minimize geographic concentration of publicly subsidized housing projects in neighborhoods with high percentage of minority or low-income households”; and
- ED 8.1 — Quality of Life Protection, which directs the City to “protect the natural and built environment as a primary quality of life feature that allows existing businesses to expand and that attracts new businesses, residents, and visitors.”
Under the City Council Rules of Procedures, Rule 1.3.1, Councilmembers have an explicit ethical duty, in which “every council member must uphold the constitution, laws, and regulations of the State of Washington and the Charter and ordinances of the City.”
This duty is affirmative. When credible questions arise regarding the application of adopted ordinances and Comprehensive Plan policies, clarification and review help ensure that this obligation is fulfilled through transparent governance.
Given the proximity of multiple special-needs and recovery-oriented facilities in the West Hills area, residents seek clarification regarding how dispersal, compatibility, and siting considerations were evaluated and documented under the City’s adopted policies.
Public Process
Meaningful public participation in City-funded projects is not discretionary. SMC 12.05.062: Siting of Basic City Facilities requires consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and establishes public process requirements prior to the siting of City-funded transitional housing facilities. These requirements state, “the City shall convene at least one public community meeting or open house and solicit written comment from members of the affected neighborhood council area(s).”
To date, the West Hills Neighborhood Council has not received a formal community meeting hosted by the City pursuant to the siting requirements of SMC 12.05.062.
[PDF page 57 of 86]
While Waters Meet Foundation (WMF) hosted two informational meetings regarding the New Roots Village proposal, those meetings were applicant organized. The City did not host or formally conduct those meetings under its siting authority. Councilmember Paul Dillon attended the first meeting as a guest, and Councilmember President Betsy Wilkerson attended the second meeting as a guest. However, attendance by individual elected officials does not substitute for a City-conducted community meeting as contemplated under SMC 12.05.062.
The distinction is important. The Code places the obligation on the City—not the applicant—to ensure that required public process steps occur prior to siting City-funded facilities. Without a formally convened City process demonstrating how dispersal, compatibility, and Comprehensive Plan policies were evaluated, the public is left without the transparency and procedural safeguards intended by the ordinance.
Basis for Clarification
In the West Hills neighborhood, the following facilities are within approximately 500 feet of one another: Ascenda Sober Living, Catholic Charities and Frontier Behavioral Health's St. Agnes Family Haven (currently under active development), and the proposed New Roots Village transitional housing project (presently in development and construction planning).
The Catalyst Project, an already established transitional housing facility, is located less than one mile from these sites.
In addition, the surrounding one-mile radius includes other recovery-oriented or publicly supported housing and behavioral health service providers, including: Passages Treatment Services; two privately owned motels (West Wynn Motel and Shangri-La Motel) that accept city-funded vouchers for the purpose of serving individuals experiencing homelessness; and subsidized low-income family housing at Beloved Sunset Apartments, where 27 of 60 units are set aside for Project Based Vouchers (PBVs) managed through the Spokane Housing Authority.
When considered cumulatively, the approximate number of housing units or placements within this one-mile West Hills/Sunset corridor is as follows:
- Catalyst Project — 79 units (The Catalyst, 2025)
- St. Agnes Family Haven — 48 units (Bullock, 2025)
- New Roots Village (proposed) — 30 units (CHHS, 2025)
- Passages Treatment — 4 units (National Alliance on Mental Illness, 2024)
[PDF page 58 of 86]
- Beloved Apartments — 27 units (Spokane Housing Authority, 2025)
- Shangri-La Motel (city-funded vouchers) — 20 units (West Wynn & Shangri-La Motel, n.d.)
- West Wynn Motel (city-funded vouchers) — 34 units
Total: 242 units within approximately a one-mile radius.
Regardless of how each facility was permitted individually, the cumulative presence of 242 service-intensive and/or publicly supported housing units within a concentrated one-mile area raises legitimate questions regarding dispersal, compatibility, and geographic concentration under the Comprehensive Plan policies cited above.
The issue presented is not the legality of any single project in isolation, but whether the aggregate siting pattern within this corridor reflects equitable distribution and policy-aligned dispersal across neighborhoods citywide.
Next Steps
West Hills residents are not attempting to create conflict. We are attempting to uphold and understand the land-use laws and Comprehensive Plan the City itself adopted—laws intended to protect public safety, neighborhood integrity, and overall quality of life. The West Hills Neighborhood Council respectfully submits this request for written clarification regarding the siting of New Roots Village.
Responsive Communication, Accountability, and Trust
[PDF page 59 of 86]
As outlined above, approximately 242 service-intensive or publicly supported housing units are located within a one-mile radius of the West Hills/Sunset corridor. These cumulative impacts have prompted legitimate concerns from neighborhood residents and the West Hills Neighborhood Council. The Neighborhood Council and West Hills community members have submitted repeated written inquiries to City officials and departments; however, no formal written response addressing these concerns has been provided to date. No substantive two-way dialogue has occurred that has resulted in clarity, shared understanding, or documented explanation of how these policies were implemented. The absence of written findings or responsive clarification creates the appearance that the SMC siting requirements and the Comprehensive Plan function symbolically rather than as enforceable standards guiding City decision-making.
Meaningful public participation in City-funded projects is not discretionary. SMC 12.05.062 (Siting of Basic City Facilities) requires consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and establishes public process requirements prior to the siting of City-funded transitional housing facilities. Those provisions contemplate more than notice—they contemplate engagement sufficient to demonstrate how adopted dispersal and compatibility policies were evaluated and applied.
Accountability requires that governance tools and oversight mechanisms be used before disputes escalate externally. Courts serve as a final safeguard—not a substitute for transparent legislative and administrative review. When internal clarification processes are not utilized, the result may include:
- Increased legal exposure
- Avoidable taxpayer expense
- Further erosion of public trust
When the City receives detailed written input regarding cumulative impact of concentrated special needs facilities yet provides no substantive response or policy-based clarification, residents are left without a meaningful administrative pathway for resolution. The lack of internal engagement places unnecessary financial, emotional, and procedural burdens on community members and risks pushing matters into adversarial forums that should be a last resort.
We remain willing to participate in a productive, policy-focused dialogue and respectfully request written clarification so that communication can move forward in an informed and constructive manner. Clarification of this matter would:
[PDF page 60 of 86]
- Identify where and how Comprehensive Plan dispersal and compatibility policies were evaluated, applied, and documented in the siting of New Roots Village, including how opportunities for meaningful and timely public participation were incorporated into that process.
- Specify the land-use classification applied to New Roots Village and the corresponding siting standards relied upon in approving the project.
- Provide documentation of the procedural steps the City followed in applying adopted land-use law and Comprehensive Plan policies prior to approving the siting of this transitional housing facility.
- Provide transparent clarification of the City’s process that would not only address legitimate policy questions but also help restore public trust in the consistent and lawful application of adopted standards.
Accordingly, the West Hills Neighborhood Council respectfully requests written clarification of the City’s process for siting New Roots Village, including identification of where and how Comprehensive Plan policies and siting standards were evaluated and documented.
Thank you for your time and for your continued role in ensuring that City law is applied consistently and transparently.
Respectfully,
West Hills Neighborhood Council
Noah Dickens, Chair
Stephen Cummins, Vice Chair
Susan Arnesen, Communications Director
Maggie Toland, Community Assembly Representative
Stuart Lee, Alternate Community Assembly Representative
[PDF page 61 of 86]
References
Bullock, E. (2025, April 24). St. Agnes family haven project expected to address housing needs. Journal of Business. https://www.spokanejournal.com/articles/17023-st-agnes-family-haven
Catholic Charities Easter Washington (2025). The Catalyst Project.
https://www.cceasternwa.org/catalyst
Community Housing and Human Services Department. (2025, September). Request for proposal and application September 2025: New roots village tiny homes operator. https://static.spokanecity.org/documents/chhs/funding-opportunities/chhs/2025-08-20/tiny-homes-operator/tiny-homes-operator-rfp-application.pdf
National Alliance on Mental Illness. (2024, April 24). A new local behavioral health service: Passages’ Termonn peer respite home. https://namispokane.org/a-new-local-behavioral-health-service-passages-termonn-peer-respite-home/
Spokane Housing Authority (2025). Project based vouchers.
West Wynn & Shangri-La Motel. (n.d.). West Wynn motel in Spokane, WA.
https://www.spokanewamotels.com/west-wynn-motel
[PDF page 62 of 86]
EXHIBIT J
ST AGNES FRONTIER BEHAVIOUR HEALTH COLLABORATION WITH CHATHOLIC CHARITIES OF EASTERN WASHINGTON
[PDF page 63 of 86]
Help for Today | Hope for Tomorrow
Frontier Behavioral Health
Supportive housing program changes lives
Trueblood: In the News
January 2026
[PDF page 64 of 86]
THE PARTNERSHIP
- Catholic Charities of Eastern Washington
- Frontier Behavioral Health: Trueblood resources
February 25, 2022 — FBH and Catholic Charities of Eastern Washington entered a subrecipient agreement for MTH2.
[PDF page 65 of 86]
MOTHER TERESA HAVEN II
[PDF page 66 of 86]
CCEW ON-SITE STAFF
Care Coordinator
- Intensive case management services
- Lease compliance support
- Support with ABD/SSI applications
- SHA voucher support
Peer Support Specialist
- Conflict management
- Release and recovery support
- Maintaining resident rapport with on-site team
Healthcare Coordinator
- Transportation to healthcare appointments
- Medication pickup/drop off
Mental Health Wellness Coach
- Supplemental to FBH outpatient wellness services
- Crisis support
[PDF page 67 of 86]
APPLICATION PROCESS
1. FBH provides CCEW with an application packet to begin the background-check process.
2. CCEW notifies the individual and FHARPS in writing of the application decision and selection criteria.
3. FHARPS also sends written notification of the decision to the referring provider and individual referred.
[PDF page 68 of 86]
UNIT PREPARATIONS
- Kitchen cookware and dining items
- Bathroom items
- Bedding
- Cleaning supplies and items
- Laundry items
- Area rugs and lamps
- Television and Internet
- Wagon
- Welcome basket
- Laminated information sheet
- Resource guide
[PDF page 69 of 86]
FURNITURE PURCHASES
- Couch with ottoman
- Entertainment table
- Dining table and chairs
- End tables and nightstand
- Mattress/bed frame
- Dresser
[One additional quantity line is not clearly readable in the source image.]
[PDF page 70 of 86]
THE RESULTS
[PDF page 71 of 86]
CRISIS CONTACT AND INVOLUNTARY HOSPITALIZATION
July 2022–June 2023
- RCL/988: 94
- Crisis Response–DCR: 50
- ITA orders: 28
- ED admits: 125
- ITA bed days: 392
July 2023–June 2024
- RCL/988: 37
- Crisis Response–DCR: 39
- ITA orders: 28
- ED admits: 53
- ITA bed days: 435
July 2024–March 2025
- RCL/988: 51
- Crisis Response–DCR: 37
- ITA orders: 19
- ED admits: 34
- ITA bed days: 268
- PM/ICM becomes aware of a concern with a client or an inspection notice is posted; or
- an arrest occurs involving a TBCM.
Notification is sent to FBH through the CCEW TB distribution list.
- PM/ICM shares client concerns or the outcome of an inspection at the weekly property management meeting.
- FBH PA and a supervisor attend the meeting and create an individualized plan for clients identified by property management.
- The assigned care-team members coordinate and work toward a resolution.
- When needed, FBH develops a plan to help the client find alternative housing.
- FBH and CCEW staff provide updates at the next property management meeting about clients discussed the week before.
[PDF page 75 of 86]
NOTIFICATION OF CONCERNS
Change in Presentation
1. Increased anger/agitation, verbal aggression, inappropriate comments/actions
2. Changes in ability to care for self (personal hygiene decreases, inappropriate clothing)
3. Behavior/demeanor is not at baseline
4. Possible substance use.
Change in Level of Functioning
1. Changes in mood that differ from baseline/normal presentation.
2. Statements including suicidal ideation/homicidal ideation.
3. Increase of mental health symptoms (paranoia, delusions, hallucinations)
4. Deterioration due to SUD symptoms.
Change in Social Interactions
1. TBCM is isolating and remaining in their apartment and won't engage with staff.
2. TBCM's sleep patterns are disrupted (i.e. up at odd hours or sleeping excessively)
CCEW Notification to FBH
1. 48-hour Notice: Upcoming notice for inspection due to property damage, safety issues, pests.
2. 10-Day Notice: Comply or Vacate
3. 30-Day Notice: Pay or Vacate
4. 3-Day Notice to Quit
5. No notice (immediate eviction) will be provided for on-site offenses that lead to arrests of drug related and violent crimes.
6. Notice issued by staff for "Lease Violation Ticket"
7. Change in TBCM's Presentation, Level of Functioning, and/or Social Interactions (see above).
8. Guest(s) who are in violation of the TBCM's lease.
9. Anticipated date for turning over rooms to be rented.
FBH Notification to CCEW
1. Potential maintenance requests or addressing damages
2. Issues or concerns that may impact lease compliance
3. Change in TBCM's Presentation, Level of Functioning, and/or Social Interactions (see above)
[PDF page 76 of 86]
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT MEETING
Who is now included
- MTH PM and on-site ICM Team
- FBH PA and TB Supervisors
- FBH Trueblood & Forensic
- Mental Health Outpatient staff
Continuity of Care
- Clinical case discussions
- Clinical staff included in the lease compliance discussions
- Proactively focus on recurring compliance concerns with identified tenants
- Coordinated and collaborative follow-up between PM, Onsite ICM team and FBH teams
- Strengthen partnership
[PDF page 77 of 86]
SUPPORT FOR STAFF
Training for CCEW and FBH
- Crisis Response: ITA services
- Motivational Interviewing
Access to Resources
- Direct line to refer TBCMs to MRRCT
- MTH distribution email
- Identified TB supervisor for intakes
External Resources
- In-service with SPD re: co-deployed teams; 4th amendment
- Meetings with SPD Captain re: drug use
[PDF page 78 of 86]
[No readable text detected on this image-based page. See the original page in the slide viewer.]
- Transportation support for appointments and employment
- Supportive Housing Care Coordination
- Peer Support
- Healthcare Coordination
- Mental Health Services
- Substance Use Disorder Programming
- Goal Setting Support
- Daily Life Skills Programming
- Weekly Healthcare Clinics
- Workforce Training Programs
- Social Connectivity
[PDF page 82 of 86]
ADJUSTED SCORING MATRIX
- Lower risk score - priority for PSH
- Higher risk score - additional support for housing readiness, resulting in accessing transitional housing coupled with necessary support and resources to increase future success with PSH.
EXPANDING HOUSING READINESS/SUSTAINABILITY
- TBCM's history of living independently
- Previous group home placements
- Length of previous incarceration
[PDF page 83 of 86]
EMERGENCY HOUSING
Emergency housing is short-term (up to 30 days) and ideal for TBCMs precipitously released from jail or the hospital, whose current housing is not viable, there is a possible or confirmed notice or eviction, or respite from a current housing is needed to stabilize and mitigate the risk of contact with law enforcement.
10 apartments
Combined on-site staffing, seven days a week at Emergency and Transitional housing
- 1 FTE MA Supervisor
- 1 FTE MA
- 1 FTE SUDP
- 1 FTE BA
- 1 FTE Peer
[PDF page 84 of 86]
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
Transitional Housing (up to 180 days) continues the momentum set in Emergency Housing and will support, advocate, and assist TBCMs to be ready for PSH and reduce their risk for arrest, detention, and recidivism.
15 Tiny Homes
Combined on-site staffing, seven days a week, at Emergency and Transitional housing
[PDF page 85 of 86]
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
Two locations, providing ongoing services to sustain housing and find long term rental assistance.
44 units
On-site staffing, seven days a week, at St. Agnes and St. Jude locations
- 1 FTE MA Supervisor
- 1 FTE MA
- 1 FTE SUDP
- 1 FTE BA
- 1 FTE Peer
[PDF page 86 of 86]
ST. AGNES HAVEN
- 24 one-bedroom units
- On-site office for FBH staff
- Expected Completion: 2026
- Government Way and Sunset Blvd.
- Adjacent to bus services
- Grocery store
- Additional multi-family housing and the Finch Arboretum
LuAnne Walker
Apr 14, 2026
Local Resident
[PDF page 1 of 86]
Dear Plan Commission Members,
Please find attached my public comment regarding the PlanSpokane 2046 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
This submission outlines key concerns related to the current planning framework, including gaps in functional classification, equitable siting, and cumulative impact analysis for service-integrated and special needs housing.
I would appreciate confirmation that this comment has been received and included in the official EIS record.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
----------------------------------------
ATTACHMENT / ADDITIONAL PAGES
----------------------------------------
[PDF page 2 of 86]
Dear Plan Commission Members,
I am submitting this comment on the PlanSpokane Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to address a critical gap in the City’s current planning and environmental review framework. While the EIS evaluates housing capacity, growth patterns, and infrastructure needs at a broad level, it does not adequately address how service-integrated, transitional and supportive housing—particularly those tied to mental health, substance use disorder, and homelessness response systems—are defined, classified, and sited within the City.
This omission is significant. The City is increasingly relying on program-based, service-integrated housing as part of regional and statewide strategies to address complex social and health challenges. However, these facilities are not being clearly or consistently characterized within the City’s land use framework, and as a result, their unique functional characteristics and cumulative impacts are not being fully analyzed in the EIS.
The issue is not whether these facilities should exist, they are an essential part of the broader response to urgent community needs. The issue is whether the City’s current planning tools are sufficient to accurately define, evaluate, and equitably site them in a manner consistent with adopted Comprehensive Plan policies.
As outlined below, a fundamental blind spot exists in how these uses are classified and understood within the City’s framework. This gap limits the City’s ability to assess distribution, evaluate cumulative impacts, and implement policies—such as SH 2.4—that are intended to guide equitable and compatible siting across neighborhoods.
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION GAP
A critical blind spot exists in how the City currently classifies service-integrated transitional and supportive housing uses. These facilities do not fit cleanly within existing land use categories. They are not accurately characterized as traditional residential household living, yet they are also not consistently classified as group living or care facilities. Instead, they fall into an undefined space within the code, despite having distinct functional characteristics such as on-site staffing, case management, behavioral health coordination, structured programming, and a level of operational intensity that differs significantly from conventional housing.
Importantly, these are not purely local residential uses. These facilities function as part of broader regional and statewide systems addressing mental health, substance use disorder, and homelessness. They often serve individuals from across jurisdictions, operate in coordination with state-funded programs, and are designed to respond to regional service demands—not just neighborhood-level needs. Despite this, they continue to be reviewed and permitted as if they are standard residential development.
Since the 2017 Comprehensive Plan update, transitional housing and emergency shelter have been formally recognized; however, the nature of these facilities has evolved substantially. Many now operate as program-based, service-integrated environments rather than purely residential household uses. Despite this evolution, the City has not updated its classification framework to reflect these functional realities.
[PDF page 3 of 86]
This gap has direct planning consequences. Policy SH 2.2 and 2.4 calls for the City to ensure that housing for vulnerable populations is sited in a manner that supports equitable distribution, access to services, and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. However, without a clear and consistent method to define and categorize these uses based on their functional characteristics—and without acknowledging their regional role—there is no reliable mechanism to evaluate distribution, ensure they are placed in areas were adequate services are assessable and cumulative impacts are evaluated to prevent overconcentration. In practice, these facilities can also generate increased demand on public services such as police, fire, emergency response, and transportation systems, reinforcing the importance of accurate classification and coordinated siting analysis. If the City cannot clearly define what these facilities are, it cannot effectively implement the very policies intended to guide where and how they are sited.
POLICY VS. IMPLEMENTATION
Spokane’s Comprehensive Plan and municipal code already establish clear direction regarding equitable siting, compatibility, and dispersal of special needs housing. The issue is not a lack of policy—it is a lack of consistent implementation. In practice, these facilities are frequently classified based on generalized labels rather than their functional characteristics. As a result, service-intensive uses are permitted as standard residential housing development, by passing the level of analysis and scrutiny intended under existing policy. This creates a structural disconnect between adopted standards and real-world outcomes.
This misalignment has tangible consequences. Without functional classification, there is no meaningful mechanism to evaluate cumulative impacts, no consistent way to assess neighborhood compatibility, and no effective safeguard against the geographic concentration of service-intensive uses within specific areas of the city. The result is a pattern in which these facilities have become concentrated—not by explicit policy direction, but through planning gaps within the City’s planning department regarding classification and implementation. Concentration and equitable dispersion of special needs temporary and supportive housing is contemplated and recognized through the express language of the GMA, the Comprehensive Plan, and SMC 12.05.062-Siting of Basic Public Facilities, yet when these facilities are treated separately, and not considered cumulatively—this undermines the very policies that were put in place that discourage concentration—therefore, special needs housing should require critical analysis and cumulative impacts through the City’s permitting process.
COMMUNITY IMPACT AND TRUST
At a community level, many Spokane residents have reached a breaking point. There is a growing sense that concerns raised repeatedly over time in regards to overconcentration are currently not meaningfully acknowledged or addressed, resulting in a loss of trust in the City’s planning and decision-making process.
[PDF page 4 of 86]
For many residents, this issue is tied directly to daily lived experiences. Conditions within certain neighborhoods have shifted in ways that feel increasingly incompatible with long-term residential stability and quality of life. As a result, some residents are now contemplating leaving—not because they oppose housing or services, but because the current approach lacks consistency, transparency, and accountability. This dynamic is particularly concerning given the City’s stated commitment to collaboration and community engagement. Residents are participating in good faith efforts, yet there is a growing perception that input is not being critically considered in a meaningful way and is not translating into alignment with adopted policy or implementation practices.
Residents are actively seeking to understand and engage with the City’s policies, including the Comprehensive Plan. However, when projects consistently reveal misalignment between stated policy and on-the-ground outcomes—and when concerns raised through established channels are not meaningfully addressed—it raises a fundamental question about how the City’s engagement and decision-making processes function in practice.
If existing avenues for participation do not allow for reconciliation of these inconsistencies, it is unclear where meaningful engagement is intended to occur. This creates a disconnect between the City’s stated commitments to compatibility, inclusion, transparency, and responsible planning, and the lived experiences of those attempting to participate in the process.
A planning framework is only as effective as its implementation. When adopted policies are not reflected in how land uses are classified, analyzed, and sited, this disconnect represents a systemic gap that warrants explicit acknowledgment within the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the Comprehensive Plan update, and the Spokane Municipal Code. When policies are not carried into practice, a clear breakdown occurs between adopted standards and real-world application. Absent this alignment, policy becomes symbolic rather than operational. Over time, this erodes public trust, weakens meaningful community engagement, and undermines the integrity and effectiveness of city planning and perpetuates project segmentation which leads them to be geographically concentrated.
The result is a pattern of de facto land-use segregation, in which service-integrated transitional and permanent supportive housing and special needs facilities become repeatedly concentrated within a limited number of neighborhoods, rather than equitably distributed across the city in accordance with adopted policies related to dispersal and compatibility. This pattern places disproportionate strain on localized infrastructure and public services, reinforces inequitable development outcomes, and is inconsistent with the core principles of equity and integration. This is not effective comprehensive planning and addressing this gap is essential to achieving the express language of the GMA and consistency within the Comprehensive Plan.
CASE STUDY: WEST HILLS CORRIDOR
The West Hills corridor demonstrates a clear and documented disconnect between Spokane’s adopted policy framework, prior planning direction, and current implementation practices.
The West Hills neighborhood is presented as a case study because it exemplifies a realworld window into how the City’s policies are functioning in practice, which has led to significant concentration of high-intensity, special-needs facilities. 1am using West Hills because the inconsistencies observed here warrant critical analysis and response. This case study illustrates why adopted policies must be implemented accurately and consistently, and why alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and Spokane Municipal Code must occur in real-world decision-making and application. Without that alignment, neighborhoods are left without meaningful safeguards, their concerns are diminished, and critical systems—including fire, EMS, transportation, and environmental infrastructure and green spaces—are placed under strain.
[PDF page 5 of 86]
Concentrating high-need, service-intensive facilities in a location where infrastructure is already limited or unstable creates cumulative impacts that affect neighborhood risk of instability, decreased service responsiveness, and reduces overall safety and quality of life.
The City, through the 2016 Plan Commission recommendations and the adopted 2017 Comprehensive Plan, established a consistent and explicit policy directive: special needs and service-integrated housing should be equitably distributed across ALL neighborhoods and should NOT be geographically concentrated (Exhibit A). This policy direction has not changed. If anything, it has been reinforced through subsequent code updates, including SMC amendments governing the siting of Basic City Facilities, which require alignment with the Comprehensive Plan and continue to discourage overconcentration (Exhibit B).
Beyond policy, the record shows that the City and its regional partners actively acknowledged and responded to these concerns in practice. The Spokane Regional ROW Initiative explicitly identified the City’s intent to reduce dense concentrations of resources within a single neighborhood and raised concern about recreating such concentration within the West Hills corridor, particularly in proximity to the Catalyst project. Similarly, earlier proposals for a pallet shelter village on Sunset Highway were scrutinized and did not advance, in part due to concerns about location, proximity to other service-intensive uses, and cumulative impact (Exhibit C). In the Spokane Regional ROW Initiative notes regarding Empire Health Foundation’s pallet shelter proposal in 2022, it is expressed that:
“Mayor Nadine Woodward has been working with the Spokane City Council to reduce the dense concentration of resources in a single neighborhood and has concerns about recreating a dense concentration of resources in another single neighborhood given the proximity to the motel conversion project [Catalyst Project]”
Additional large-scale shelter siting discussions, including House of Charity 2.0, were redirected away from west-of-downtown locations [West Hills Neighborhood] following similar concerns (Exhibit D). Taken together, these actions demonstrate that the City not only adopted policies discouraging overconcentration, but also recognized and applied those policies historically in real-world planning decisions. However, current actions reflect a clear departure from that established direction and intent.
The same types of projects that were previously subject to concern—including a pallet shelter housing project to house the homeless population from Camp Hope are currently under permit review, as well as a multi-unit, program-based facility serving Trueblood class members now currently under construction—are being advanced within the same Sunset Highway / West Hills. corridor by the same nonprofit organizations, namely Waters Meet Foundation (formerly Empire Health Foundation) and Catholic Charities Eastern Washington.
This is occurring despite the fact that these exact locations were previously identified as being at risk for overconcentration, and despite the fact that prior concerns were acknowledged by regional partners, City leaders and neighborhood residents—these projects are now moving forward. Moreover, these projects appear to have been reclassified in a manner that avoids treatment as service-intensive, special needs facilities, thereby allowing them to proceed through a streamlined permitting pathway. This approach bypasses the level of siting analysis, public process, neighborhood compatibility review, and cumulative impact evaluation that would otherwise be required under the Spokane Municipal Code and the Comprehensive Plan.
[PDF page 6 of 86]
This creates direct and unresolved inconsistency:
- The City previously acknowledged overconcentration as a concern
- The City directed planning efforts to avoid it
- The City previously acted on those concerns explicitly in the Sunset corridor
- Yet the City is now advancing the same type of use in the same locations, without applying
those same considerations
Importantly, this is not the result of a change in policy. The Comprehensive Plan has not been amended to allow concentration, nor have the underlying principles been weakened. To the contrary, they have been reaffirmed and strengthened. What has changed is how the City is choosing to apply—or not apply—those policies in practice.
The result is that overconcentration is no longer being analyzed or prevented, despite being clearly identified, historically acknowledged, and explicitly discouraged. Instead, projects that were previously questioned on the basis of cumulative impact and proximity are now being advanced within the same geographic area without a consistent analytical framework.
This case study demonstrates that the issue before the EIS is not theoretical. It is an ongoing and documented pattern in which recognized planning concerns are not being translated into enforceable or consistently applied siting decisions. Without addressing this gap, the City’s policy commitments to equitable distribution and neighborhood compatibility remain unenforced, allowing continued concentration of service-integrated housing within the same corridors despite longstanding direction to the contrary.
CURRENT CONDITION AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
In 2017, as part of the Comprehensive Plan implementation framework, the City established clear policy direction under SH 2.2 (Special Needs Temporary Housing), which explicitly directs the City to disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods. In addition, related policies encourage a land use pattern that allows convenient access to daily goods and services, particularly for individuals with limited mobility or transportation options.
Taken together, SH 2.2 and SH 2.4 establish a clear framework: special needs housing must not only be equitably dispersed across all neighborhoods, but also located in areas that provide meaningful access to daily goods, services, and transportation necessary to support vulnerable populations. These directives were not advisory, they were adopted as policy to guide equitable and responsible land use decisions. However, as demonstrated by current conditions in 2026, these directives are not being followed in practice.
Within the West Hills/Sunset corridor, there is a clear and measurable concentration of special needs and service-integrated housing within approximately a one-mile radius. This includes (Exhibit E):
- Ascenda Sober Living
- St. Agnes Family Haven (Catholic Charities in partnership with Frontier Behavioral
Health)
- New Roots Village (proposed transitional housing development)
[PDF page 7 of 86]
- The Catalyst Project
- Passages Treatment
- Beloved Sunset Apartments
- Shangri-La Motel (city-funded placements)
- West Wynn Motel (city-funded placements)
Several of these facilities are located within approximately 500 feet of one another, and collectively represent over 200 units or placements of service-intensive and publicly supported housing concentrated within a single neighborhood corridor (Exhibit E). This pattern directly conflicts with the City’s adopted policy to disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods.
Equally concerning is the City’s failure to follow its own policy direction regarding access to daily goods and services. The West Hills neighborhood is widely recognized as a low walkability area, with a score of approximately 24, indicating that it is highly car-dependent. The neighborhood is characterized by steep topography, limited commercial amenities, and poor pedestrian connectivity to the rest of the city. There are few, if any, accessible grocery stores, employment centers, or essential services within walking distance. The area is physically separated from the downtown core by the Latah Creek corridor, further limiting access. For many residents, including those with limited mobility, daily errands require a vehicle.
This reality is fundamentally incompatible with the City’s own policy directive to site special needs housing in areas with convenient access to goods and services. This concern is further compounded by infrastructure limitations. The Latah Creek bridge—one of the primary transportation and pedestrian connections between the West Hills corridor and the rest of the City—further illustrates a critical infrastructure constraint that has not been adequately evaluated in the Draft EIS. As an aging structure with documented deterioration and operational limitations, the bridge already functions as a constrained, single point of access across a significant geographic barrier. Any additional restrictions, or potential future closure due to structural conditions, would further reduce or eliminate already limited pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. This would effectively isolate the West Hills neighborhood and the vulnerable populations the city intends to serve, forcing reliance on indirect, vehicle-oriented routes that are not designed for safe or practical pedestrian use.
This condition is directly relevant to adopted Comprehensive Plan policy. Policies such as SH 2.4, which call for the equitable dispersal of special needs housing across neighborhoods, and broader policy direction requiring that such housing be sited in areas with convenient access to goods, services, and transportation, presume a baseline level of connectivity and accessibility that is not present here. The West Hills corridor, already characterized by low walkability and limited access to daily needs, does not meet this threshold.
[PDF page 8 of 86]
When considered alongside the increasing concentration of service-integrated and special needs housing within this same corridor, the limitations of the Latah Creek bridge compound existing barriers to mobility and access. This creates a condition where residents—particularly those without reliable transportation or with limited mobility—are placed in an environment that is inherently disconnected from essential services. The City does not analyze how this constrained infrastructure network interacts with siting decisions, nor how it may undermine the City’s own policy objectives related to equitable distribution, access, and neighborhood compatibility. As such, the omission represents a significant gap in the evaluation of cumulative impacts.
West Hills Corridor: Cumulative Impacts Associated with Service-Integrated and Special Needs Housing
The West Hills corridor illustrates the cumulative impacts that can occur when service-integrated and special needs housing—including supportive housing and voucher-based motel placements—are concentrated within a limited geographic area. Existing conditions in this corridor reflect a pattern of increased demand on public services and measurable changes to neighborhood stability.
Documented incidents and resident experiences indicate increased emergency response activity, including a 200%-300% increase in EMS and 911 calls following the arrival of the Catalyst Project in West Hills, as well as multiple fire events—one of which resulted in a Level 3 evacuation (Exhibit F & G). The fire department has acknowledged that increased cumulative fire incidents have placed strain on the fire response system, alongside rising demand on police, fire, and emergency medical services. Additional conditions include property-related crimes such as vehicle break-ins, theft, and fuel siphoning, as well as open drug use, drug-related activity, abandoned or stolen vehicles, and encampment-related spillover impacts contributing to visible deterioration within the neighborhood. More recently, a significant drug enforcement action within the West Hills Sunset corridor, where detectives seized approximately one kilogram of suspected fentanyl powder, over 3,100 fentanyl pills, more than $46,800 in cash, methamphetamine, and other drug related materials (Exhibit H).
Neighborhoods experiencing a high concentration of service-integrated facilities supporting individuals with significant substance use disorders and mental health challenges can become destabilized when impacts are not properly managed, often resulting in visible deterioration and conditions commonly perceived as blight. In the absence of balanced siting and adequate support infrastructure, these environments may also become more susceptible to associated criminal or nuisance activities, further compounding strain on public services and neighborhood stability.
Despite these observable conditions, the City does not evaluate how the concentration of special needs housing, supportive housing, and motel-based voucher programs may contribute to cumulative public safety impacts, increased service demand, or long-term neighborhood stability. And despite repeated efforts to open up a dialogue with City officials regarding neighborhood concerns in the West Hills, these efforts have been largely ignored and dismissed, most recently a letter to the City Council Executive team addressing overconcentration in the West Hills Sunset Corridor—to date, no formal response has been received (Exhibit I).
Functional Use of St Agnes Haven in West Hills
The following provides a functional description of the programmatic nature of the St. Agnes facility, which is currently under construction in the West Hills corridor. Under the City’s permitting framework, the project has been classified as multifamily housing. However, as described below, the operational characteristics and service delivery model reflect a service-integrated, program based residential use that differs substantially from conventional multifamily development (Exhibit J).
[PDF page 9 of 86]
Saint Agnes functions as a service-integrated, program-based residential facility rather than a typical residential use. The operational model is characterized by on-site staffing, structured case management, and coordinated behavioral health services, including mental health and substance use disorder support delivered in partnership with providers such as Frontier Behavioral Health. Residents are not simply tenants in independent dwelling units; they are participants in a managed program environment designed to stabilize individuals with complex behavioral health needs.
The level of service is consistent with high-intensity supportive housing, where daily operations include regular staff interaction, service compliance expectations, and ongoing coordination with external systems, including healthcare systems, crisis response infrastructure, and, in some cases, court- or diversion-based programs. This type of setting inherently involves a higher degree of oversight and operational intensity than conventional housing due to the needs of the population being served.
Importantly, St Agnes is not solely a local housing response—it is part of a broader regional and statewide strategy to address behavioral health system gaps, including homelessness among individuals with serious mental illness, substance use disorder, and those intersecting with crisis and forensic systems. Programs of this type are often connected to statewide initiatives designed to reduce reliance on emergency departments, jails, and inpatient psychiatric facilities, while providing community-based stabilization and long-term support. As such, the facility functions within a larger coordinated care framework, serving populations that are referred through regional networks, healthcare systems, and state-supported behavioral health pathways.
Critically, tenancy within St Agnes is not purely based on traditional leasehold rights, but is instead conditioned on program participation and behavioral expectations. Residents are typically required to comply with program rules, engage with assigned services, and adhere to conduct standards tied to safety and stability. Ongoing tenancy is actively monitored through staff oversight, with compliance evaluated based on behavioral factors such as participation in services, adherence to program guidelines, and overall stability. Failure to meet these expectations may result in intervention, program escalation, or potential loss of housing placement.
As a result, the functional characteristics of Saint Agnes align more closely with a structured, supervised residential program operating as part of a regional and statewide behavioral health response system, rather than independent residential living.
Requested Analysis and Recommendations
Currently, the absence of clear, enforceable dispersal standards allows for the clustering of service-intensive housing in limited geographic areas. This creates cumulative impacts that are not adequately evaluated when projects are considered in isolation. Over time, this pattern undermines neighborhood compatibility, strains local infrastructure, and contradicts the City’s stated goal of equitable distribution.
[PDF page 10 of 86]
From a planning perspective, this is a systems-level issue. When multiple projects with similar operational characteristics—such as high service needs, behavioral health components, or transitional occupancy—are sited without a framework that accounts for cumulative concentration, the result is not true integration. Instead, it creates pockets of overrepresentation that can unintentionally shift the burden of regional social services onto a small number of communities. Equitable distribution must mean more than allowing these uses everywhere; it must also mean ensuring they are not disproportionately concentrated anywhere.
To address this gap, I respectfully encourage the Plan Commission to consider the following:
- Establish clear, measurable dispersal policies for special needs and service-integrated housing
that apply citywide
- Incorporate cumulative impact analysis into project review, particularly where multiple similar
uses exist within a defined area
- Align land use classifications with functional characteristics, ensuring consistent treatment
across similar housing models
- Strengthen implementation mechanisms so that Comprehensive Plan policies are not merely
aspirational, but operational
- Ensure that infrastructure, public safety, and neighborhood context are evaluated alongside
equity goals
Spokane has an opportunity through PlanSpokane 2046 to move from broad policy statements toward a more balanced and accountable framework—one that supports vulnerable populations while also maintaining the integrity, safety, and sustainability of all neighborhoods. A well-functioning city distributes both opportunity and responsibility. Achieving that balance requires not only compassion, but also clear planning structure, consistency, and follow-through.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,
LuAnne Walker
ra
West Hills Neighborhood Resident
[PDF page 11 of 86]
EXHIBIT A
1. Spokane City Plan Commission Findings of Fact 2016
2. 2017 Projected Comprehensive Plan Amendments
[PDF page 12 of 86]
Spokane City Plan Commission Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommendations Regarding Infill Development
A recommendation from the City Plan Commission to the City Council accepting the Infill Development Steering Committee’s Summary Report and Recommendation as a guide for future programmatic and regulatory implementation measures.
WHEREAS, The Plan Commission is charged to investigate and make recommendations to the City Council in relation to all matters pertaining to the living conditions of the City; the betterment of facilities for doing public and private business therein; the elimination of slums; the correction of unhealthful housing conditions; the proper laying out, platting, and naming of streets, squares, and public places, and the numbering of buildings and houses therein; the location, planning, and architectural designing of public buildings; and generally, all things tending to promote the health, convenience, safety, and well-being of the City's population, and to further its growth along consistent, comprehensive and permanent plans; and,
WHEREAS, The Plan Commission is further empowered to provide advice and make recommendation on broad planning goals and policies and on whichever plans for the physical development of the City that the City Council may request the Commission's advice by ordinance or resolution; and,
WHEREAS, The Commission shall provide opportunities for public participation in City planning by providing through its own broadly based membership an informed opinion to complement the work of the City's elected officials and administrative departments; soliciting public comment, when pertinent, on planning issues of City-wide importance or of a substantial community concern, and evaluating comments received; and securing the assistance of experts and others with knowledge or ideas to contribute to City planning; and,
WHEREAS, The City of Spokane’s Infill Development Project is engaged in identification of issues regarding infill development and the development of strategies to overcome obstacles to such development; and,
WHEREAS, High-quality infill development can create positive economic impacts for communities; and,
WHEREAS, The communication objectives for the Infill Development Project are to examine a range of potential programs and regulatory changes that could be implemented to help describe today’s development standards, increase public awareness of the infill mechanisms and products, engage in dialogue with stakeholders that results in productive recommendations to increase opportunities for development and new housing, develop an easy-to-follow report and recommendations for future action based on the project's findings, and monitor the effectiveness of infill development strategies developed through this process; and,
WHEREAS, The City hosted six focus group meetings, held between May and June 2016, for the purpose of soliciting community input on neighborhood specific and citywide interests, challenges and opportunities; and,
[PDF page 13 of 86]
WHEREAS, Additional input was gathered through an open house, held August 30, 2016, through an online survey, and through individual presentations upon request to the Mayor’s Housing Quality Task Force, to five neighborhood councils, and to working groups of the Downtown Spokane Partnership; and,
WHEREAS, The Summary Report and Recommendation were prepared by project staff in conjunction with the assigned steering committee, based on a review of existing conditions related to infill development, a review of relevant existing adopted policies and regulations, and input from stakeholders and the public at large; and,
WHEREAS, The Summary Report and Recommendation contains a series of strategies that the City of Spokane and others may pursue to further the Infill Development Project's objectives; and,
WHEREAS, It is recognized that additional legislative action with robust public engagement will be required for all strategies that involve changes to adopted policy and regulations of the City of Spokane and that such changes will need to be incorporated into subsequent work plans of the Plan Commission and/or considered in conjunction with ongoing or upcoming major planning efforts such as the Comprehensive Plan Update and update to the Downtown Spokane Plan; and,
WHEREAS, Appropriate notice of the Plan Commission hearing was published in the Spokesman Review on September 28, and October 5, 2016; and,
WHEREAS, the City Plan Commission held a public hearing on October 12, 2016 to obtain public comments on the proposed Summary Report and Recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the Plan Commission has reviewed and considered all public testimony received prior to and during the public hearings.
NOW THEREFORE, By a vote of 7 to 0 , the Plan Commission does recommend that quality development should be enabled and promoted on vacant and underdeveloped lots and parcels in developed areas in a manner that:
- Provides a desirable mixture of affordable housing options to people of all income levels, and sustainably realizes density objectives;
- Is designed to maintain and encourage attractive neighborhood character;
- Is consistent with the City of Spokane Comprehensive Plan, as well as adopted neighborhood plans and subarea plans; and,
- Is consistent with existing neighborhood character, and/or the neighborhood character envisioned in adopted neighborhood plans; and,
FURTHER, The Plan Commission recommends to the City Council the acceptance of the Summary Report and Recommendation as a guide for future program development and potential regulatory implementation measures; and,
FURTHER, The Plan Commission recommends that all recommendations be advanced for implementation as the available options consisting of correlated components of the whole effort, while further internal and interdepartmental review will be required for identifying the scope, budget, and probable timeframes for each; and,
[PDF page 14 of 86]
FURTHER, The Plan Commission recommends that the continuation of the Multiple-Family Tax Exemption is of paramount importance for nearest-term implementation as the program is reviewed by the City Council in 2017; and,
FURTHER, Recognizing the urgency of moving these recommendations forward, the Plan Commission recommends that after reviewing and accepting the Summary Report and Recommendation, the Commission and Council meet jointly to discuss the manner in which all the strategies recommended by the steering committee may be prioritized and implemented.
Dennis Dellwo, President
Spokane Plan Commission
October 12, 2016
[PDF page 15 of 86]
Volume V, Appendix G
Work Plan Matrices
Future Matrix and Master Matrix
City of Spokane Comprehensive Plan
[PDF page 16 of 86]
CHAPTER 10 — SOCIAL HEALTH
Future Implementation (Not Yet Implemented & Not Near Term)
SH 1 — Funding Mechanisms to Support Social Health
Utilize all funding mechanisms that will help to develop the infrastructure, support, and staffing necessary to provide affordable, accessible opportunities for arts, culture, recreation, education, and health and human services to all citizens, with particular attention to the needs of youth, the elderly and those with special needs.
SH 1.7 — Surplus City Real Property
Establish a dedicated reserve fund within the City of Spokane’s general fund to cover the cost of leasing any unused city-owned building and/or property that has been determined surplus to non-profit organizations.
Next step: Analyze the creation of a community land bank and/or land aggregation entity by the Mayor's Housing Quality Task Force.
SH 2 — Facilities for Special Needs Populations
Enable and encourage development patterns and uses of public and private property that are responsive to the facility requirements of special needs populations.
SH 2.1 — Care Facilities
Distribute care facilities fairly and equitably throughout all neighborhoods.
Next step: Map care facilities throughout the City.
SH 2.2 — Special Needs Temporary Housing
Disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods.
Next step: Map special needs temporary housing throughout the City.
SH 2.4 — Co-location of Facilities
Encourage a land use pattern that allows convenient access to daily goods and services, especially for those persons with limited mobility and/or transportation options.
SH 2.6 — Joint-Use Facilities
Provide for the joint use of facilities that clusters services for child or adult day care, health care, human services, libraries, schools, and cultural, recreational, and educational programs, as needed.
SH 3 — Arts and Cultural Enrichment
Support community image and identity through the arts and accessible art activities.
SH 3.3 — Public Art Incentives
Provide incentives such as bonus densities or increases in floor-area ratio and lot coverage to encourage the use of public art in commercial, industrial, and mixed-use developments.
[PDF page 17 of 86]
EXHIBIT B
1. Section 12.05.062 Siting of Basic City Facilities — Process
[PDF page 18 of 86]
Spokane Municipal Code
***Note: Many local criminal codes can now be located under Chapter 10.60 SMC while others are now cited under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), which was incorporated into the municipal code in 2022. (See SMC 10.58.010). Code Enforcement, including Noise Control and Animal Regulations are located in Chapters 10.62 through 10.74.
Home | Title 12 | Chapter 12.05 | Section 12.05.062
[PDF page 19 of 86]
Title 12 Public Ways and Property
Chapter 12.05 General City Property
Section 12.05.062 Siting of Basic City Facilities — Process
A. Prior to locating a Basic City Facility, or prior to locating a new city-owned or contracting for a city-funded emergency shelter or transitional housing, the City shall convene at least one public community meeting or open house and solicit written comment from members of the affected neighborhood council area(s) concerning the need(s) for the facility and the service(s) desired or required by the community, as well as identified service gap(s) to be addressed by the facility.
B. Siting of any new or relocated city-funded Basic City Facility providing emergency shelter or transitional housing shall be consistent with the “special needs temporary housing” provisions of the City’s approved comprehensive plan, as adopted pursuant to Title 17B of the Spokane Municipal Code, as such plan may be amended from time to time. In particular, siting shall place primary emphasis on satisfying the directive in the comprehensive plan to ensure that special needs housing facilities are evenly dispersed throughout all of the city’s neighborhoods.
C. City services shall not be provided at a Basic City Facility location unless the City Council has approved the location or relocation of a Basic City Facility. This subsection C shall not apply to the siting of city-funded facilities providing emergency shelter or transitional housing.
D. The requirements of this section shall not apply to Basic City Facilities sited before the effective date of this section.
Date Passed: Monday, June 16, 2025
Effective Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2025
ORD C36692 Section 4
[PDF page 20 of 86]
EXHIBIT C
1. ROW INITIATIVE
2. EMPIRE HEALTH FOUNDATION PALLET SHELTER NOTES
[PDF page 21 of 86]
Spokane Regional ROW Initiative Action Plan Summary
[This page contains a rotated action-plan table that could not be transcribed reliably. See the original page image.]
[PDF page 22 of 86]
[This page continues a dense, rotated action-plan table that could not be transcribed reliably. See the original page image.]
[PDF page 23 of 86]
EXHIBIT D
1. Refer to page 3 under “What is the timeline for HOC 2.0
[PDF page 24 of 86]
House of Charity 2.0
House of Charity 2.0 Overview
[Website navigation and cookie controls omitted.]
[PDF page 25 of 86]
House of Charity serves the most vulnerable members of our community, those on the streets battling the effects of mental illness, childhood trauma, and substance misuse. Many of our patrons have struggled to engage with formal and informal care systems, such as their families, schools, the mental health system, and every other shelter in town. These community members have sometimes given up hope that life can improve. We always endeavor to show them they do indeed have hope.
At House of Charity, we "hold the hope" for our patrons until it rekindles within them. We welcome any person in any condition, as long as they respect our staff, building, and rules. We believe each person, regardless of condition, is made in the image and likeness of Christ and deserves dignity and respect. We believe strongly that every human being should, at the very least, be able to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom indoors, in a safe place where they can also get the help and services they need to begin transforming their lives. We offer space, staff, and services to walk alongside them as they improve their health and wellness. We walk with them through their darkest valley, offering our reassuring presence to ease their fears slowly.
House of Charity is an all-inclusive, low-barrier emergency shelter that provides case management, meals, sleeping, and a respite program to individuals experiencing homelessness. We have been operating in Spokane since 1912. In 2000 we moved House of Charity from its old location on Main Street to its current location at the request and suggestion of the City of Spokane and the downtown business community.
Catholic Charities has acquired two sites to potentially build a new House of Charity 2.0 (HOC 2.0). This state-of-the-art facility would expand the current services of House of Charity in a new location outside the downtown core corridor, offering expanded capacity for both men and women, providing a wide range of all-inclusive shelter services. These services will be open 24/7 to anyone who needs emergency shelter and would like to transition towards temporary and more permanent housing services.
This project will continue to embody the core principle that Catholic Charities has maintained for over 50 years: Every human person is made in the image and likeness of God and thus demands basic dignity, respect, and compassion. Any person experiencing homelessness should be able to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom indoors, in a safe, welcoming space. This space should include behavioral health services they need to stabilize their lives and then be placed by our team on a path to permanent supportive housing.
HOC 2.0 will include a sleeping program for both men and women, respite care, case management, new augmented kitchen facilities that could be designed to accommodate freezing equipment to stockpile more meals tailored to meet the unique dietary needs of our patrons, increased security services covering a five-block radius of the new location, ample space to safely store personal gear and office space for community partners and outside providers to offer primary care, mental health, and substance abuse counseling delivered directly on-site. There will also be a large outdoor fenced utility area for seating, gathering, exercise, and other outdoor activities. In addition, case managers would be available on-site to administer intentional support services.
[PDF page 26 of 86]
The current House of Charity (HOC) facility located at 32 W. Pacific Avenue would remain in its current location. It would continue to provide support services to Catholic Charities clients and nearby housing residents with new opportunities to meet community needs. However, the current HOC location would no longer sleep or feed individuals experiencing homelessness. The first floor will be used for staffing needs to assist our permanent supportive housing units in the area. The upstairs sleeping space will remain intact and could be used as an additional sheltering space by regional emergency management groups during inclement weather, fire/smoke season, future contagious disease events, etc. It could also be activated if desired by emergency management groups, as a medical isolation and quarantine space, as needed by the city or county during times of crisis like pandemics or norovirus outbreaks.
HOC 2.0 would provide 24/7 shelter services to our most vulnerable community members outside the downtown corridor.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is HOC 2.0?
Catholic Charities has submitted a regional proposal to the City of Spokane and Spokane County to address homelessness for single adults called HOC 2.0. House of Charity 2 (HOC 2.0) would expand our ability to provide 24/7 shelter services to men and women enrolled in our program and support our most vulnerable community members outside the downtown corridor. Catholic Charities has secured three potential sites to relocate House of Charity out of the downtown core. The result would be a new comprehensive homeless shelter solution in a new location. This concept is built on the decades-long core value and guiding principle of Catholic Charities' homeless services strategy. Every human person is made in the image and likeness of God and thus demands basic dignity, respect, and compassion. People experiencing homelessness should be able to eat, sleep and go to the bathroom indoors, in a safe, welcoming space. This space should also provide behavioral health services people need to stabilize their lives. Once stabilized, each client should have a guided path and a Catholic Charities team member to walk alongside them as they transition to permanent supportive housing.
The House of Charity holds hope for people who have none. HOC 2.0 would continue to serve our most vulnerable neighbors with expanded capacity and provide intentional wraparound supportive services to help people move forward in their lives. This new, augmented model would allow multiple stakeholders such as the city, county, law enforcement, downtown business, real estate owners, and social service providers to achieve shared goals and outcomes. Most importantly, it provides the vulnerable men and women experiencing homelessness and living on our streets, parks, alleys, and underpasses to find access to resources and services delivered with dignity, love, and the hope they deserve.
What is the timeline for HOC 2.0?
Since the HOC 2.0 project was announced in April 2022, CCEW has had three viable sites west of downtown, all under ownership/control of CCEW, zoned appropriately and shovel ready. However, given the level of concern expressed by residents in west Spokane, the city has asked Catholic Charities to re-direct the search to find other location options. In August 2022, Catholic Charities began looking for a new site outside of the downtown core and in other areas outside of the city.
We are looking in all directions, but it could take several months to find an appropriate site with the correct zoning. Once a site is found it will take several months to perform due diligence and neighborhood outreach before it can be purchased. After that, it will be a year for construction, pushing out the new HOC 2.0 into Summer 2024, assuming all funding is provided as per current plans.
What needs does HOC 2.0 fill in the community?
HOC 2.0 would use a trauma-informed approach to provide 24/7 on-site services for men and [text cut off in source image].
[PDF page 27 of 86]
Who can access HOC 2.0?
HOC 2.0 is a low-barrier shelter. We want very few obstacles or reasons why an individual experiencing homelessness would not want to come in. The House of Charity has always had and will continue to have basic health and safety rules. Patrons are not allowed to drink or use illegal substances on-site; there is no sexual activity allowed on site; there are no weapons allowed on site, and violence of any kind is not tolerated. However, men and women in any condition, even if they are actively struggling with mental health or substance use disorder challenges, can receive services if they are respectful of themselves, other clients, and staff. There is no requirement for sobriety or religious education. We serve all people based on need, not creed. We are totally and unconditionally inclusive of every segment of our community. We believe that every individual deserves to be treated with respect and compassion—regardless of the choices that may be perceived to be contrary to them moving forward on their life journey. Sobriety and mental health stability are a journey that can take decades to complete/stabilize.
Will HOC 2.0 provide 24/7 services?
Yes, HOC 2.0 will provide on-site case management, vocational training, housing assistance, security, peer support & SUD (substance use disorder) services designed to support patrons on all aspects of their stability continuum. In addition, HOC 2.0 will provide round-the-clock services, including a bed, showers, laundry facilities, three meals, and access to other services to anyone currently enrolled.
What services can people access at HOC 2.0?
Clients can access augmented mental health counseling and care, substance use disorder counseling, medical respite, permanent housing services, vocational training, case management, and peer support counseling on-site with 24/7 security that patrols half a mile around the area. HOC 2.0 will also have dedicated apartment-style suites for hospice care for our homeless brothers and sisters, allowing them to go through end-of-life journeys with peace, tranquility, and specialized hospice care.
Why is Catholic Charities relocating House of Charity?
This is an opportunity to build a new facility that can incorporate all of the lessons learned from our current operations and processes, and design a space to honor those lessons. We will expand our ability to meet identified community needs, and create workflows and operations that are not possible in the current location.
Is HOC 2.0 a low-barrier shelter? Will there be other models of shelter for more engaged people?
HOC 2.0 will first and foremost be a low-barrier shelter. This does not mean there are no rules or requirements for maintaining health and safety. Low-barrier means that individuals choosing to access shelter will not be denied access based on race, religious beliefs, cultural background, mental health stability, gender identity, sobriety, or use of substances, and do not require completion of treatment as a requirement for program entry. In addition, we do not deny clients based upon poor credit or financial history, poor or lack of rental history, criminal history, history of victimization, status as a survivor of sexual assault or an affiliated person of such a survivor, health or mental health history, medication adherence, age, marital/family status, based upon behaviors that indicate lack of "housing readiness" or other unnecessary conditions. We also do not require any minimum income to be accepted into our program.
[PDF page 28 of 86]
Patrons ready to move forward in their stabilization journey will have access to other graduated service models and sleeping areas on-site. They will be offered case management and wraparound services to help support their journey. As clients engage with us at HOC 2.0, they take on more responsibility and accept more accountability. As they let us help them stabilize their lives, they will have progressively larger, more private sleeping spaces and more amenities/privileges on-site via a campus setting, with areas separated by client engagement and stability levels.
How will HOC 2.0 differ from House of Charity?
HOC 2.0 will have:
- Increased sleeping space
- Capacity for both men and women
- Increased transitional and medical respite care
- Expanded case management services with enough office space for community partners and providers to offer primary care
- Hospice suites and hospice services on-site
- Outdoor gathering spaces and reflection/spiritual growth spaces
- Built-in facility features to support pets
- Exercise/physical fitness areas
- Mental health and substance abuse counseling offered on-site
- State-of-the-art facility and kitchen designed to accommodate more meals tailored to meet the unique dietary needs of our patrons
- Extended security services
- Improved space to securely store personal possessions
- Large outdoor fenced utility area for outdoor activities and transportation
Where will the new site be located?
We are evaluating three potential sites that we have control over and that are zoned correctly.
Will HOC 2.0 help with transportation for clients?
Yes, a crucial feature of this new location will be working with the City of Spokane to solidify regular bus transportation services so clients have nonstop access to critical downtown corridor services, which would include providing transportation back and forth from hospitals after hours to ensure our vulnerable, medically fragile patrons have easy access to medical care 24/7.
How much will the HOC 2.0 cost?
The full extent of operational costs is still being finalized, pending the final site design. However, early estimates place the construction costs near $11 million. Costs could increase due to environmental factors at the building site, inflation, increased building material costs, timing, etc.
[PDF page 29 of 86]
What will happen to the current House of Charity location?
The current House of Charity (HOC) facility located at 32 W. Pacific Avenue would remain in its current location. It will continue to provide support services to Catholic Charities clients and nearby housing residents with new opportunities to meet community needs. However, the current HOC location would no longer sleep or feed individuals experiencing homelessness. The first floor would be used for staffing needs to assist our permanent supportive housing units in the area. The upstairs sleeping space will remain intact and could be used as an additional sheltering space by regional emergency management groups during inclement weather, fire/smoke season, future contagious disease events, etc. It could also be activated, if desired by emergency management groups, as a medical isolation and quarantine space, as needed by the city or county during times of crisis like pandemics or norovirus outbreaks.
[Professional contact details omitted from the reading text.]
Interested in supporting Catholic Charities! Get involved today!
12 E 5th Ave, Spokane, WA 99202
PO Box 2253, Spokane, WA 99210
© 2025 Catholic Charities Eastern Washington. All rights reserved.
[PDF page 30 of 86]
EXHIBIT E
WEST HILLS CONCENTRATION MAP OF SPECIAL NEEDS AND SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SERVING HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS WITH MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBTANCE ABUSE DISORDER
[PDF page 31 of 86]
WEST HILLS MAP
Corner of Sunset & Government Way
Mapped facilities
- Shangri-La Motel — 20 units
- Catholic Charities: St. Agnes Haven — 24 units
- New Roots Pallet Shelter Village — 30 units
- Catholic Charities: St. Agnes / Frontier Behavioral Health — 24 units
- Beloved Sunset Apartments — 27 units
- West Wynn Motel — 34 units
- Ascenda Sober Living Community
- Catholic Charities Catalyst — 79 units, 1 mile away
- Passages Respite Home — 4 units, 1.2 miles away
Map key
- Supportive housing serving homeless individuals
- Mental health facilities and housing
- Low-income housing
- Motels that take City-funded vouchers
- Sober-living facility
- New development
[PDF page 32 of 86]
EXHIBIT F
1. FIRE INCIDENTS AND MEDIA
[PDF page 33 of 86]
https://www.kxly.com/news/more-suspicious-fires-pop-up-in-spokanes-west-hills-neighborhood/article_098bed84-3713-11ee-a201-dfa8f664054c.html
More suspicious fires pop up in Spokane's West Hills neighborhood
Vanessa Perez
August 9, 2023
[PDF page 34 of 86]
SPOKANE, Wash. — The hunt for the person or people responsible for starting fires in Spokane is on.
Several fires broke out around the West Hills last week, causing some people to evacuate. Written notes were found downtown with threats to burn down Spokane right before the fires started.
Almost a week later, more suspicious fires popped up in the same area.
[PDF page 35 of 86]
The Spokane Fire Department has major concerns and is unsure if there's a connection from last week's fires, despite them in the same general area.
Fire crews responded to a fire on the edge of Browne's Addition on a steep hill located on West Sunset Boulevard and south Coeur d'Alene Street.
Firefighters were able to keep the fire small. SFD says the suspicious fires are taking up resources and causing a threat to the community.
"It smelt like a fire so I came out of my apartment and just saw the smoke going up and it was pretty thin. It wasn't really that big at the time,” Alex Menko said.
Menko says people ran over with hoses to stop the fire from spreading before firefighters arrived.
"It did just rain but prior it's been super dry, a lot of dead stuff around here, so I mean it can spread really fast. In this valley, it's so open and there are so many spots to kind of just do whatever," Menko said.
Fires can escalate in just a matter of minutes and force people to evacuate like we saw last week.
"We've got a lot of these areas of fuel around the city. Little pockets like maybe they're not big but you get fire in them and they are really problematic," Spokane Fire Department Public Information Officer Justin De Ruyter said.
SFD is asking people to stay vigilant to call 9-1-1 if you see any smoke or fires. If you have any information regarding the suspicious fires, you are encouraged to call the Spokane Fire Department Investigations Unit at 509-625-7120.
"We've got somebody running around or at least some people or some persons that are running around starting these fires so getting them identified and taken off the streets, that's quite a concern of ours right now," De Ruyter said.
Related: Threats of arson discovered in different locations before multiple fires started around Spokane
Copyright 2023 by KXLY. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
[PDF page 36 of 86]
Vanessa Perez, Reporter
[PDF page 37 of 86]
https://www.spokesman.com/stories/2023/aug/16/woman-accused-of-west-hills-fires-transferred-to-s/
NEWS > CRIME/PUBLIC SAFETY
Woman accused of West Hills fires transferred to Spokane, bond set at $75,000
August 16, 2023
Updated August 17, 2023 at 8:35 p.m.
A “Burn Spokane Down” message can be read Aug. 4 under the railroad viaduct on Lincoln Street in downtown Spokane. Five fires started on the west side of the city on Aug. 3 afternoon, hours after the graffiti and other similar messages were reported to police. (Garrett Cabeza / The Spokesman-Review)
By Garrett Cabeza
[Professional contact details omitted from the reading text.]
A homeless woman accused of setting fires in the West Hills Neighborhood earlier this month because she was upset with the local housing crisis made her initial appearance Wednesday in Spokane County District Court.
[PDF page 38 of 86]
Vickie L. Smith, 53, was arrested Aug. 10 in Tukwila, Washington, on suspicion of three counts of first-degree arson. She was transferred to the Spokane County Jail Tuesday to face those charges before District Court Judge Jennifer Fassbender maintained Smith’s bond at $75,000 Wednesday.
Smith remained in jail Wednesday afternoon.
The brief hearing mostly included Smith, who wore gray Spokane County Jail clothing, answering “yes” to Fassbender’s questions and saying she did not have a current address.
The Aug. 3 fires caused residents to evacuate and threatened dozens of structures, but none were burned and no injuries were reported.
Cynthia Miraglia, who lives on the Indian Canyon Golf Course, told police she saw Smith near her home that day bending down and noticed a flicker of a lighter or match.
Smith reportedly told Miraglia she was hiding there to smoke marijuana because she lived at the Catalyst Project, a nearby shelter, and would get in trouble if she was caught smoking near the shelter.
Miraglia called 911 and walked Smith out of the neighborhood.
On the walk, Smith told Miraglia she was frustrated with the Catalyst program because they didn’t feed her, among other things.
Kelly Keenan, senior vice president of advancement and impact at Catholic Charities Eastern Washington, said Smith has never been a participant at Catalyst and never lived at the facility. Catalyst is a program under Catholic Charities.
Keenan also said Catalyst participants receive three meals a day.
Police linked graffiti in downtown Spokane referring to burning Spokane on Aug. 3 to Smith.
Officers reviewed surveillance video footage that showed a woman writing the graffiti on the Washington Trust Bank Building downtown, according to court documents.
Smith was confronted by police early in the morning of Aug. 4 during a trespassing investigation at another Washington Trust Bank in the Logan Neighborhood.
When police arrived, Smith asked whether she was being arrested for lighting the fires. She told officers she lit the fires to get housing after 12 years of being homeless.
Smith said the housing crisis in Spokane was unfair and demanded officers give her somewhere to live, according to court records.
Officers did not arrest her at that time, but police later matched the woman doing graffiti downtown to Miraglia’s photos and police body camera footage of Smith, according to court documents.
Officers obtained an email address linked to Smith and messaged her. They received a response detailing how the writer had set eight fires in the area, five in Dishman Hills and three near Sunset Hill, according to court documents.
The Dishman Hills fires set Aug. 3 were quickly extinguished.
Spokane police spokeswoman Julie Humphreys said Spokane police will investigate the Dishman Hills fires.
Fassbender said Smith’s court dates will be in Spokane County Superior Court.
Editor's note: The story was updated August 17, 2023, to reflect that Smith never lived at Catalyst Project, according to a Catholic Charities Eastern Washington official.
[PDF page 39 of 86]
[Author biography and subscription controls omitted.]
[PDF page 40 of 86]
https://my.spokanecity.org/fire/news/2023/08/04/major-wildland-fire-in-sunset-hills-causes-evacuations/
Major Wildland Fire in Sunset Hills Causes Evacuations
Justin de Ruyter, Spokane Fire PIO
[Professional contact details omitted from the reading text.]
Friday, August 4, 2023 at 8:59 a.m.
At 1:57 pm this afternoon, Spokane Fire Engine 4 was dispatched to 1405 South Rustle St for a report of smoke in the area. As firefighters drove up Sunset Hill, they upgraded the call to a brush fire response due to the visible smoke column. Upon arrival, they discovered a fire burning on the south side of Sunset Highway behind the Catholic Charities shelter. Fire behavior was high, with trees torching and numerous embers starting new spot fires.
Even with the extra resources arriving, the fire quickly overwhelmed firefighters, so additional alarms were called, ultimately going to three alarms with additional resources added. Other alarms also brought mutual aid resources from Spokane County, District 3, District 10, Bureau of Land Management, and the Department of Natural Resources.
The fire quickly jumped to the north side of Sunset Highway and started running towards houses up the hill off of West Deska Dr. Fire intensity was high, with trees torching and a complete burn of vegetation. Evacuation levels were raised to Level 3 "Go" to an area immediately surrounding the fire.
Air resources quickly arrived soon after, which consisted of fixed wings and helicopters dropping both retardant and water. The air resources were the key factor in keeping fire on the north side of the road out of the structures; without them, there most certainly would have been significant damage to the structures.
[PDF page 41 of 86]
With the assistance of the air resources, firefighters could access the fire on the north side with hose lines and hand tools, successfully stopping the forward progression. Once the fire was contained with fire line, mop-up activities began next to the perimeter, working towards the interior.
The fire is under control and will be staffed tonight and tomorrow in the mop-up stage. Firefighters will watch the weather tomorrow for some upper-level disturbances that can lead to gusty winds in the region.
Evacuation levels were lowered to Level 1 for homes on the north side of Sunset Highway, and all other evacuations were lifted. Residents are encouraged to sign up for evacuation notices on their cell phones by registering with ALERT Spokane through the Spokane County Department of Emergency Management website.
There were no reported civilian or firefighter injuries and no value loss to structures. Value saved numbers are unavailable at this time, but will be in the millions.
[Related photos and website footer omitted.]
[PDF page 42 of 86]
EXHIBIT G
911/EMS RESPONSE AT THE CATALYST PROJECT IN WEST HILLS
[PDF page 43 of 86]
Monthly 911 Call Volume at 4301 W. Sunset Blvd. (2021-2024) with Trendlines
[This page contains a rotated bar chart. See the original page image for the monthly values and trendlines.]
[PDF page 44 of 86]
Prior Calls
Thursday, October 9, 2025 - 07:06:35
Incident | Date | Time | Location | FDID | Nature
- 2025086513 9/28/2025 01:01:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 7802E-Burns, Unknown Status, Explosion
- 2025086135 9/26/2025 19:38:13 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2025077742 8/31/2025 03:17:57 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 28C01K-Stroke, Not Alert, CLEAR Evidence
- 2025077118 8/28/2025 23:39:53 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D04-Breathing Problem, Clammy
- 2025076301 8/26/2025 12:59:42 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12002-Seizure, CONTINUOUS
- 2025071284 8/11/2025 08:33:13 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 17D04W-Fall, Not Alert, Patient weight over X lbs
- 2025066194 7/26/2025 20:38:56 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32-UNKNOWN
- 2025063934 7/20/2025 02:01:22 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26A08-Sick, Other Pain
- 2025063518 7/18/2025 16:23:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26D01-Sick, Not Alert
- 2025057051 6/30/2025 00:00:16 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D01-Overdose, Arrest
- 2025051735 6/13/2025 12:38:46 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A04-Sick, Fever/Chills
- 2025048404 6/3/2025 23:01:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 23D01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2025048114 6/3/2025 00:33:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D04-Chest Pain, Clammy
- 2025046503 5/28/2025 23:40:23 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25B03-Psychiatric, THREATENING SUICIDE
- 2025045573 5/26/2025 04:40:21 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2025043959 5/21/2025 01:23:48 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 18C04X-Headache, Sudden / Severe, No Stroke Evidence
- 2025043340 5/19/2025 04:55:27 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 11S-STRUCTURE FIRE, Single Response
- 2025039790 5/7/2025 14:27:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D02-Chest Pain, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025032483 4/14/2025 08:32:30 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 10D01-Chest Pain, Not Alert
- 2025032226 4/13/2025 10:43:44 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26D01-Sick, Not Alert
- 2025032186 4/13/2025 07:54:14 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32-4UNKNOWN
- 2025031134 4/9/2025 12:30:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 19D02-Heart, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025029210 4/3/2025 06:32:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32959 26A11-Sick, Vomiting
- 2025028627 4/1/2025 11:39:02 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26C01-Sick, ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS
- 2025027717 3/29/2025 13:57:20 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D04-Chest Pain, Clammy
- 2025024676 3/20/2025 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 28CO1K-Stroke, Not Alert, CLEAR Evidence
- 2025024347 3/19/2025 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 1118-POSSIBLE ILLEGAL BURN
- 2025024247 3/18/2025 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2025023576 3/16/2025 19:09:21 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32-4UNKNOWN
- 2025023199 3/15/2025 12:07:51 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 1D01-Abdominal Pain, Not Alert
- 2025023088 3/15/2025 01:35:11 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 7A01-Burns, < 18% Body Area
- 2025022563 3/13/2025 11:28:02 4301 W SUNSET BLVD. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 9E01-Death, Not Breathing at all
- 2025022235 3/12/2025 10:58:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 32-UNKNOWN
- 2025020651 3/7/2025 02:09:15 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 26-SICK
- 2025018197 2/27/2025 09:09:43 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6002-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025017357 2/24/2025 14:13:54 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25A01-Psychiatric, Non-suicidal/Alert
- 2025015366 2/17/2025 19:49:35 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2025013492 2/12/2025 08:49:55 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 31A01-Unconscious, Alert >= 35, No Cardiac History
[PDF page 45 of 86]
- 2025013269 2/11/2025 15:02:44 4301 W SUNSET BLVD. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23E01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2025013169 2/11/2025 10:53:55 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 10D05-Chest Pain, Heart Attack/Angina History
- 2025012462 2/9/2025 03:48:02 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 18C04K-Headache, Sudden / Severe, CLEAR Stroke
- 2025010757 2/4/2025 05:01:14 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 1118-POSSIBLE ILLEGAL BURN
- 2025010668 2/3/2025 19:25:28 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2025010444 2/3/2025 04:46:27 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2025008384 1/27/2025 17:25:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12D02-Seizure, CONTINUOUS
- 2025007471 1/24/2025 18:07:16 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D02-Chest Pain, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025007255 1/24/2025 03:49:26 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 19-HEART
- 2025007160 1/23/2025 18:25:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2025006959 1/23/2025 07:56:55 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26C02-Sick, Abnormal Breathing
- 2025006504 1/21/2025 17:16:46 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2025005166 1/17/2025 13:24:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 9B01a-Death, OBVIOUS DEATH, Unquestionable
- 2025004558 1/15/2025 14:57:46 4301 W Sunset Blvd, [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2025004224 1/14/2025 13:34:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 9B01a-Death, OBVIOUS DEATH, Unquestionable
- 2025002537 1/9/2025 02:09:03 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 31D02-Unconscious, Abnormal Breathing
- 2025002456 1/8/2025 19:04:12 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6C01-Breathing Problem
- 2025002203 1/8/2025 03:19:32 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2025001289 1/5/2025 01:08:59 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26028-Sick, Wound Infected
- 2025001033 1/4/2025 08:53:38 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2025000809 1/3/2025 14:59:32 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 28C03L-Stroke, Speech Problems
- 2024113717 12/28/2024 17:16:09 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 21B01M-Hemorrhage, POSSIBLY DANGEROUS, Medical
- 2024113410 12/27/2024 16:31:34 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26C01-Sick, ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS
- 2024111081 12/19/2024 20:27:12 4301 W Sunset Blvd, [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D01A-Overdose, Arrest, Accidental
- 2024110885 12/19/2024 10:30:55 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 CARES-CARES RESPONSE TEAM
- 2024110096 12/17/2024 05:45:02 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6D01-Breathing Problem, Not Alert
- 2024107297 12/7/2024 22:19:02 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02E-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING, COPD
- 2024106093 12/4/2024 12:20:59 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 23D02A-Overdose, Unconscious, Accidental
- 2024105005 11/30/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26C01-Sick, ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS.
- 2024104709 11/29/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6DO1E-Breathing Problem, Not Alert, COPD
- 2024104504 11/29/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D02-Chest Pain, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2024103713 11/26/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 10C03-Chest Pain, Breathing Normally >= 35
- 2024102001 11/20/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25-PSYCHIATRIC
- 2024100448 11/15/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 9E01-Death, Not Breathing at all
- 2024100434 11/15/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18FALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2024099829 11/13/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26A08-Sick, Other Pain
- 2024099765 11/12/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd, [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6C01-Breathing Problem
- 2024094112 10/25/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2024091468 10/17/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 CARES-CARES RESPONSE TEAM
- 2024091112 10/16/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 1CO1-Abdominal Pain, SUSPECTED Aortic Aneurysm >= 50
- 2024089666 10/11/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32599 6-DIFFICULTY BREATHING
[PDF page 46 of 86]
- 2024087224 10/3/2024 12:42:13 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 CARES-CARES RESPONSE TEAM
- 2024086102 9/30/2024 04:33:28 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2024084319 9/26/2024 03:20:50 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 31-UNCONS
- 2024082456 9/19/2024 07:30:53 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2024080282 9/12/2024 14:23:37 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2024078842 9/8/2024 01:48:32 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 30D03-Trauma, Not Alert
- 2024078265 9/6/2024 11:19:18 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 2D01-Allergic, Not Alert
- 2024077884 9/5/2024 09:54:15 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2024074229 8/25/2024 06:08:30 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 1A01-Abdominal Pain
- 2024071275 8/15/2024 10:15:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6-DIFFICULTY BREATHING
- 2024070587 8/13/2024 03:51:29 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2024069778 8/10/2024 03:53:45 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25A01-Psychiatric, Nan-suicidal/Alert
- 2024065208 7/27/2024 06:19:46 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25A01-Psychiatric, Nan-suicidal/Alert
- 2024062208 7/17/2024 23:40:31 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2024061919 7/17/2024 01:56:18 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25-PSYCHIATRIC
- 2024060065 7/11/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6002-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2024057513 7/4/2024 :21 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 11SI-SMOKE INVESTIGATION
- 2024055493 6/28/2024 07:11:40 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32989 31-UNCONS
- 2024052975 6/20/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02E-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING, COPD
- 2024052906 6/20/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 2D02-Allergic, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2024049541 6/9/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 1A01-Abdominal Pain
- 2024047444 6/2/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 32-UNKNOWN
- 2024047439 6/2/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 32D01-Unknown Prablem, LIFE STATUS QUESTIONABLE
- 2024041513 5/14/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2024039170 5/6/2024 18:11:04 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D02-Overdose, Unconscious
- 2024037055 4/30/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 32D01-Unknown Problem, LIFE STATUS QUESTIONABLE
- 2024035492 4/24/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 31D01-Unconscious, AGONAL/INEFFECTIVE BREATHING
- 2024026683 3/26/2024 13:11:58 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 23E01H-Overdose, Arrest, Intentional, Carfentanil
- 2024026535 3/25/2024 23:03:03 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2024025776 3/23/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6D01-Breathing Problem, Not Alert
- 2024025752 3/23/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12-SEIZURE
- 2024017856 2/26/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response.
- 2024014304 2/13/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 28CO1L-Stroke, Not Alert
- 2024001933 1/6/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D02-Chest Pain, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2024001741 1/6/2024 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 10D04-Chest Pain, Clammy
- 2023107273 12/29/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2023107190 12/29/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D02D-Overdose, Unconscious, Accidental, Fentanyl
- 2023104590 12/20/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023101279 12/9/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 30B01-Trauma, POSSIBLY DANGEROUS Body Area
- 2023100818 12/7/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32989 31C03-Unconscious, Female 12-50, Abdominal Pain
- 2023098864 12/1/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
[PDF page 47 of 86]
- 2023098029 11/29/2023 01:40:43 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25B03-Psychiatric, THREATENING SUICIDE
- 2023092361 11/9/2023 20:30:18 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32989 6D01E-Breathing Problem, Not Alert, COPD
- 2023091904 11/8/2023 13:20:14 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2023091250 11/6/2023 07:31:58 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A10-Sick, Unwell/Ill
- 2023086721 10/22/2023 08:00:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12D02-Seizure, CONTINUOUS
- 2023077259 9/20/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023076889 9/19/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2023074744 9/12/2023 06:42:30 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12A02-Seizure, Nat Seizing Now, Unknown Disorder
- 2023071588 9/1/2023 14:51:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02E-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING, COPD
- 2023070189 8/28/2023 00:39:01 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 6D02-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING
- 2023065795 8/14/2023 16:32:12 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 12B01E-Seizure, Breathing not Verified, Known Disorder
- 2023063144 8/5/2023 16:21:09 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 14S-BRUSH FIRE, Single Response
- 2023063130 8/5/2023 15:38:36 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 20D01H-Exposure, Not Alert, Heat
- 2023062452 8/3/2023 14:05:51 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023057422 7/18/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26A11-Sick, Vomiting
- 2023053156 7/4/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 17801G-Fall, POSSIBLY DANGEROUS Body Area, On Ground
- 2023049538 6/22/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2023039966 5/21/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 111B-POSSIBLE ILLEGAL BURN
- 2023038232 5/15/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2023036074 5/8/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6D02A-Breathing Problem, DIFFICULTY SPEAKING, Asthma
- 2023036022 5/7/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023032920 4/27/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 29-MVA
- 2023032588 4/26/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2023030355 4/19/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023025804 4/3/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2023018914 3/9/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-QVERDOSE
- 2023018731 3/8/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd, [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2023014070 2/20/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023004454 1/17/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 4-ASSAULT
- 2023003765 1/14/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023003447 1/13/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26C01-Sick, ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS
- 2023003075 1/11/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2023002996 1/11/2023 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response.
- 2022108534 12/30/2022 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 19-HEART
- 2022107323 12/26/2022 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23D02-Overdose, Unconscious
- 2022106772 12/25/2022 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 26A01-Sick, No Priority Symptoms
- 2022106476 12/24/2022 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A01-Sick, No Priority Symptorns
- 2022101892 12/10/2022 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999/999999 28C09U-Stroke, History, Unknown
- 2022100717 12/7/2022 :43 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2022099441 12/3/2022 10:27:25 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2022099134 12/2/2022 10:02:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
[PDF page 48 of 86]
- 2022098507 11/30/2022 10:02:14 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 30A02-Trauma, NOT DANGEROUS Body Area
- 2022034500 5/2/2022 20:31:05 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 32-UNKNOWN
- 2022033865 4/30/2022 19:23:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 6C01-Breathing Problem
- 2022028399 4/11/2022 01:01:17 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 4-ASSAULT
- 2022024284 3/27/2022 03:03:40 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A10-Sick, Unwell/Ill
- 2022013722 2/17/2022 02:57:41 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26D01-Sick, Not Alert
- 2022011797 2/10/2022 08:27:45 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 23-OVERDOSE
- 2022005767 1/20/2022 03:44:28 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 25-PSYCHIATRIC
- 2022002985 1/10/2022 13:55:24 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 25A01-Psychiatric, Non-suicidal/Alert
- 2022002446 1/8/2022 15:11:04 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A04C-Sick, Fever/Chills, Suspected COVID
- 2021103034 12/29/2021 22:20:57 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32989 29-MVA
- 2021077321 10/1/2021 14:17:27 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 29-MVA
- 2021072902 9/16/2021 18:18:21 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 32-UNKNOWN
- 2021072398 9/15/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd, [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 4-ASSAULT
- 2021069184 9/4/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 4-ASSAULT
- 2021067208 8/29/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 32-UNKNOWN
- 2021064968 8/21/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A04C-Sick, Fever/Chills, Suspected COVID
- 2021043264 6/15/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 25A01-Psychiatric, Non-suicidal/Alert
- 2021041300 6/8/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26A10-Sick, Unwell/Ill
- 2021033409 5/12/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 17D04G-Fall, Not Alert, On Ground < 1 hr
- 2021032545 5/9/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010 32B01-Unknown Problem, Standing/Sitting
- 2021030394 5/1/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26C01-Sick, ALTERED LEVEL OF CONSCIOUSNESS
- 2021024087 4/8/2021 16:10:37 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 30B01-Trauma, POSSIBLY DANGEROUS Body Area
- 2021024003 4/8/2021 10:32:03 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 21A01T-Hemorrhage, NOT DANGEROUS, Trauma
- 2021018204 3/16/2021 11:42:50 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2021015317 3/4/2021 12:02:24 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 17B04G-Fall, Unknown Status, On Ground < 1 hour
- 2021000607 1/3/2021 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25-PSYCHIATRIC
- 2020075822 11/10/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 25-PSYCHIATRIC
- 2020066717 10/5/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010 32-UNKNOWN
- 2020058912 9/3/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2020054898 8/19/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2020054720 8/18/2020 4301 W Sunset Hwy. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 26-SICK
- 2020054665 8/18/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 19-HEART
- 2020054187 8/16/2020 4301 W Sunset Hwy 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
- 2020048995 7/28/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32205 14S-BRUSH FIRE, Single Response
- 2020048318 7/25/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd 32010/32999 29B05-MVA, Unknown Status
- 2020038606 6/17/2020 4301 W Sunset Blvd. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999 28C01L-Stroke, Not Alert
- 2020028459 5/4/2020 4301 W Sunset Hwy 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2020024255 4/15/2020 4301 W Sunset Hwy 32010 18F-ALARM SYSTEM, Full Response
- 2020018430 3/18/2020 4301 W Sunset Hwy. [unit number omitted] 32010/32999/999999 10D05-Chest Pain, Heart Attack/Angina History
- 2020003596 1/15/2020 4301 W Sunset Hwy 32010/32999 CC-CALL CANCELLED
[PDF page 49 of 86]
- 2020002909 1/12/2020 19:43:23 4301 W Sunset Hwy 32010/32999/999999 17B01-Fall, POSSIBLY DANGEROUS Body Area
[PDF page 50 of 86]
EXHIBIT H
NEWS MEDIA REGARDING RECENT DRUG INVESTIGATION IN WEST HILLS
[PDF page 51 of 86]
https://www.khq.com/news/spokane-valley-drug-investigation-leads-to-fentanyl-seizure-arrest/article_e2a63778-d428-4ccc-945d-9082a5b2e119.html
Spokane Valley drug investigation leads to fentanyl seizure, arrest
Oliver Waite, NonStop Local Digital Producer
April 8, 2026
Courtesy of Spokane County Sheriff's Office
SPOKANE VALLEY, Wash. — After serving search warrants in March tied to an ongoing drug sales investigation, Spokane Valley Investigative Unit (SVIU) detectives arrested a suspect and reportedly seized a large quantity of suspected fentanyl, methamphetamine, cash and other property.
According to the Spokane County Sheriff's Office (SCSO), detectives were granted warrants on March 18 for a motel in the 2700 block of West Sunset Boulevard and two storage units in the 5600 block of West Sunset Highway. Investigators also developed probable cause to arrest a suspect for drug distribution charges.
[PDF page 52 of 86]
SVIU detectives served the warrants and arrested a 45-year-old female suspect on the morning of March 19. According to SCSO officials, the suspect was booked into the Spokane County Jail on two counts of possession of a controlled substance with intent to distribute.
Detectives reported that approximately 1 kilogram of suspected fentanyl powder, more than 3,100 pills suspected of containing fentanyl and more than $46,800 in cash were seized following the arrest. They also reported finding methamphetamine, scales, other drug paraphernalia, a Jeep Wrangler, precious metals and other property that authorities believed to be stolen.
[Video promotion and website cookie controls omitted.]
[PDF page 53 of 86]
Photo text: “Over 3,100 pills containing suspected fentanyl.”
SCSO officials stated that the suspect posted a $50,000 bond after her first appearance in Spokane County Superior Court. She was released from jail on March 24.
The investigation remains underway and more charges or arrests are expected.
Oliver Waite, NonStop Local Digital Producer
[Website cookie controls omitted.]
[PDF page 54 of 86]
EXHIBIT I
WEST HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL LETTER TO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
[PDF page 55 of 86]
February 23, 2026
Members of the Spokane City Council Spokane City Hall
808 W. Spokane Falls Blvd.
Spokane, WA 99201
In re: Request for Clarification — New Roots Village Siting Process and Comprehensive Plan
Alignment
Dear Members of the Spokane City Council:
The West Hills Neighborhood Council respectfully requests clarification regarding the City’s process for siting the New Roots Village transitional housing project under the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan and implementing land-use ordinances. This request is not a policy objection to housing or services. It is a request for administrative clarification regarding how adopted City law was applied to the New Roots Village project.
Governing Legal Framework
The Spokane Comprehensive Plan is adopted by ordinance and constitutes City law.
Relevant policies include:
- SH 2.2 — Special Needs Temporary Housing, which directs the City to “disperse special needs temporary housing evenly throughout all neighborhoods”; examples include emergency shelters, foster care facilities, group homes, transitional housing, and homeless shelters.
- SH 2.3 — Compatible Design of Special Needs Facilities, which directs the City to “ensure that facilities that accommodate special needs populations blend in with the existing visual character of the neighborhood in which they are located.”
- LU 5.5 — Compatible Development, which directs the City to “ensure that infill and redevelopment projects are designed to be compatible with and complement surrounding uses and building types.”
[PDF page 56 of 86]
- H 1.13 — Siting of Subsidized Low-Income Housing, which directs the City to “set clear site selection criteria for publicly subsidized housing to minimize geographic concentration of publicly subsidized housing projects in neighborhoods with high percentage of minority or low-income households”; and
- ED 8.1 — Quality of Life Protection, which directs the City to “protect the natural and built environment as a primary quality of life feature that allows existing businesses to expand and that attracts new businesses, residents, and visitors.”
Under the City Council Rules of Procedures, Rule 1.3.1, Councilmembers have an explicit ethical duty, in which “every council member must uphold the constitution, laws, and regulations of the State of Washington and the Charter and ordinances of the City.”
This duty is affirmative. When credible questions arise regarding the application of adopted ordinances and Comprehensive Plan policies, clarification and review help ensure that this obligation is fulfilled through transparent governance.
Given the proximity of multiple special-needs and recovery-oriented facilities in the West Hills area, residents seek clarification regarding how dispersal, compatibility, and siting considerations were evaluated and documented under the City’s adopted policies.
Public Process
Meaningful public participation in City-funded projects is not discretionary. SMC 12.05.062: Siting of Basic City Facilities requires consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and establishes public process requirements prior to the siting of City-funded transitional housing facilities. These requirements state, “the City shall convene at least one public community meeting or open house and solicit written comment from members of the affected neighborhood council area(s).”
To date, the West Hills Neighborhood Council has not received a formal community meeting hosted by the City pursuant to the siting requirements of SMC 12.05.062.
[PDF page 57 of 86]
While Waters Meet Foundation (WMF) hosted two informational meetings regarding the New Roots Village proposal, those meetings were applicant organized. The City did not host or formally conduct those meetings under its siting authority. Councilmember Paul Dillon attended the first meeting as a guest, and Councilmember President Betsy Wilkerson attended the second meeting as a guest. However, attendance by individual elected officials does not substitute for a City-conducted community meeting as contemplated under SMC 12.05.062.
The distinction is important. The Code places the obligation on the City—not the applicant—to ensure that required public process steps occur prior to siting City-funded facilities. Without a formally convened City process demonstrating how dispersal, compatibility, and Comprehensive Plan policies were evaluated, the public is left without the transparency and procedural safeguards intended by the ordinance.
Basis for Clarification
In the West Hills neighborhood, the following facilities are within approximately 500 feet of one another: Ascenda Sober Living, Catholic Charities and Frontier Behavioral Health's St. Agnes Family Haven (currently under active development), and the proposed New Roots Village transitional housing project (presently in development and construction planning).
The Catalyst Project, an already established transitional housing facility, is located less than one mile from these sites.
In addition, the surrounding one-mile radius includes other recovery-oriented or publicly supported housing and behavioral health service providers, including: Passages Treatment Services; two privately owned motels (West Wynn Motel and Shangri-La Motel) that accept city-funded vouchers for the purpose of serving individuals experiencing homelessness; and subsidized low-income family housing at Beloved Sunset Apartments, where 27 of 60 units are set aside for Project Based Vouchers (PBVs) managed through the Spokane Housing Authority.
When considered cumulatively, the approximate number of housing units or placements within this one-mile West Hills/Sunset corridor is as follows:
- Catalyst Project — 79 units (The Catalyst, 2025)
- St. Agnes Family Haven — 48 units (Bullock, 2025)
- New Roots Village (proposed) — 30 units (CHHS, 2025)
- Passages Treatment — 4 units (National Alliance on Mental Illness, 2024)
[PDF page 58 of 86]
- Beloved Apartments — 27 units (Spokane Housing Authority, 2025)
- Shangri-La Motel (city-funded vouchers) — 20 units (West Wynn & Shangri-La Motel, n.d.)
- West Wynn Motel (city-funded vouchers) — 34 units
Total: 242 units within approximately a one-mile radius.
Regardless of how each facility was permitted individually, the cumulative presence of 242 service-intensive and/or publicly supported housing units within a concentrated one-mile area raises legitimate questions regarding dispersal, compatibility, and geographic concentration under the Comprehensive Plan policies cited above.
The issue presented is not the legality of any single project in isolation, but whether the aggregate siting pattern within this corridor reflects equitable distribution and policy-aligned dispersal across neighborhoods citywide.
Next Steps
West Hills residents are not attempting to create conflict. We are attempting to uphold and understand the land-use laws and Comprehensive Plan the City itself adopted—laws intended to protect public safety, neighborhood integrity, and overall quality of life. The West Hills Neighborhood Council respectfully submits this request for written clarification regarding the siting of New Roots Village.
Responsive Communication, Accountability, and Trust
[PDF page 59 of 86]
As outlined above, approximately 242 service-intensive or publicly supported housing units are located within a one-mile radius of the West Hills/Sunset corridor. These cumulative impacts have prompted legitimate concerns from neighborhood residents and the West Hills Neighborhood Council. The Neighborhood Council and West Hills community members have submitted repeated written inquiries to City officials and departments; however, no formal written response addressing these concerns has been provided to date. No substantive two-way dialogue has occurred that has resulted in clarity, shared understanding, or documented explanation of how these policies were implemented. The absence of written findings or responsive clarification creates the appearance that the SMC siting requirements and the Comprehensive Plan function symbolically rather than as enforceable standards guiding City decision-making.
Meaningful public participation in City-funded projects is not discretionary. SMC 12.05.062 (Siting of Basic City Facilities) requires consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and establishes public process requirements prior to the siting of City-funded transitional housing facilities. Those provisions contemplate more than notice—they contemplate engagement sufficient to demonstrate how adopted dispersal and compatibility policies were evaluated and applied.
Accountability requires that governance tools and oversight mechanisms be used before disputes escalate externally. Courts serve as a final safeguard—not a substitute for transparent legislative and administrative review. When internal clarification processes are not utilized, the result may include:
- Increased legal exposure
- Avoidable taxpayer expense
- Further erosion of public trust
When the City receives detailed written input regarding cumulative impact of concentrated special needs facilities yet provides no substantive response or policy-based clarification, residents are left without a meaningful administrative pathway for resolution. The lack of internal engagement places unnecessary financial, emotional, and procedural burdens on community members and risks pushing matters into adversarial forums that should be a last resort.
We remain willing to participate in a productive, policy-focused dialogue and respectfully request written clarification so that communication can move forward in an informed and constructive manner. Clarification of this matter would:
[PDF page 60 of 86]
- Identify where and how Comprehensive Plan dispersal and compatibility policies were evaluated, applied, and documented in the siting of New Roots Village, including how opportunities for meaningful and timely public participation were incorporated into that process.
- Specify the land-use classification applied to New Roots Village and the corresponding siting standards relied upon in approving the project.
- Provide documentation of the procedural steps the City followed in applying adopted land-use law and Comprehensive Plan policies prior to approving the siting of this transitional housing facility.
- Provide transparent clarification of the City’s process that would not only address legitimate policy questions but also help restore public trust in the consistent and lawful application of adopted standards.
Accordingly, the West Hills Neighborhood Council respectfully requests written clarification of the City’s process for siting New Roots Village, including identification of where and how Comprehensive Plan policies and siting standards were evaluated and documented.
Thank you for your time and for your continued role in ensuring that City law is applied consistently and transparently.
Respectfully,
West Hills Neighborhood Council
Noah Dickens, Chair
Stephen Cummins, Vice Chair
Susan Arnesen, Communications Director
Maggie Toland, Community Assembly Representative
Stuart Lee, Alternate Community Assembly Representative
[PDF page 61 of 86]
References
Bullock, E. (2025, April 24). St. Agnes family haven project expected to address housing needs. Journal of Business. https://www.spokanejournal.com/articles/17023-st-agnes-family-haven
Catholic Charities Easter Washington (2025). The Catalyst Project.
https://www.cceasternwa.org/catalyst
Community Housing and Human Services Department. (2025, September). Request for proposal and application September 2025: New roots village tiny homes operator. https://static.spokanecity.org/documents/chhs/funding-opportunities/chhs/2025-08-20/tiny-homes-operator/tiny-homes-operator-rfp-application.pdf
National Alliance on Mental Illness. (2024, April 24). A new local behavioral health service: Passages’ Termonn peer respite home. https://namispokane.org/a-new-local-behavioral-health-service-passages-termonn-peer-respite-home/
Spokane Housing Authority (2025). Project based vouchers.
https://www.spokanehousing.org/housing-choice-vouchers/waiting-lists/project-based-vouchers/
West Wynn & Shangri-La Motel. (n.d.). Shangri-La Motel in Spokane, WA.
https://www.spokanejournal.com/articles/1 7023-st-agnes-family-haven
West Wynn & Shangri-La Motel. (n.d.). West Wynn motel in Spokane, WA.
https://www.spokanewamotels.com/west-wynn-motel
[PDF page 62 of 86]
EXHIBIT J
ST AGNES FRONTIER BEHAVIOUR HEALTH COLLABORATION WITH CHATHOLIC CHARITIES OF EASTERN WASHINGTON
[PDF page 63 of 86]
Help for Today | Hope for Tomorrow
Frontier Behavioral Health
Supportive housing program changes lives
Trueblood: In the News
January 2026
[PDF page 64 of 86]
THE PARTNERSHIP
- Catholic Charities of Eastern Washington
- Frontier Behavioral Health: Trueblood resources
February 25, 2022 — FBH and Catholic Charities of Eastern Washington entered a subrecipient agreement for MTH2.
[PDF page 65 of 86]
MOTHER TERESA HAVEN II
[PDF page 66 of 86]
CCEW ON-SITE STAFF
Care Coordinator
- Intensive case management services
- Lease compliance support
- Support with ABD/SSI applications
- SHA voucher support
Peer Support Specialist
- Conflict management
- Release and recovery support
- Maintaining resident rapport with on-site team
Healthcare Coordinator
- Transportation to healthcare appointments
- Medication pickup/drop off
Mental Health Wellness Coach
- Supplemental to FBH outpatient wellness services
- Crisis support
[PDF page 67 of 86]
APPLICATION PROCESS
1. FBH provides CCEW with an application packet to begin the background-check process.
2. CCEW notifies the individual and FHARPS in writing of the application decision and selection criteria.
3. FHARPS also sends written notification of the decision to the referring provider and individual referred.
[PDF page 68 of 86]
UNIT PREPARATIONS
- Kitchen cookware and dining items
- Bathroom items
- Bedding
- Cleaning supplies and items
- Laundry items
- Area rugs and lamps
- Television and Internet
- Wagon
- Welcome basket
- Laminated information sheet
- Resource guide
[PDF page 69 of 86]
FURNITURE PURCHASES
- Couch with ottoman
- Entertainment table
- Dining table and chairs
- End tables and nightstand
- Mattress/bed frame
- Dresser
[One additional quantity line is not clearly readable in the source image.]
[PDF page 70 of 86]
THE RESULTS
[PDF page 71 of 86]
CRISIS CONTACT AND INVOLUNTARY HOSPITALIZATION
July 2022–June 2023
- RCL/988: 94
- Crisis Response–DCR: 50
- ITA orders: 28
- ED admits: 125
- ITA bed days: 392
July 2023–June 2024
- RCL/988: 37
- Crisis Response–DCR: 39
- ITA orders: 28
- ED admits: 53
- ITA bed days: 435
July 2024–March 2025
- RCL/988: 51
- Crisis Response–DCR: 37
- ITA orders: 19
- ED admits: 34
- ITA bed days: 268
[PDF page 72 of 86]
ARRESTS AND INCARCERATIONS
July 2022–June 2023
- Arrests: 18
- New charges: 48
- Jail days: 1,471
July 2023–June 2024
- Arrests: 14
- New charges: 13
- Jail days: 579
July 2024–March 2025
- Arrests: 13
- New charges: 4
- Jail days: 227
[PDF page 73 of 86]
10.77 EVALUATIONS AND IP RESTORATION DAYS
July 2022–June 2023
- 10.77 evaluations: 14
- IP restoration: 0
- Civil flip days: 387
July 2023–June 2024
- 10.77 evaluations: 3
- IP restoration: 0
- Civil flip days: 94
July 2024–March 2025
- 10.77 evaluations: 2
- IP restoration: 35
- Civil flip days: 0
[PDF page 74 of 86]
CCEW PROPERTY MANAGEMENT PROCESS WITH FBH
The process begins when either:
- PM/ICM becomes aware of a concern with a client or an inspection notice is posted; or
- an arrest occurs involving a TBCM.
Notification is sent to FBH through the CCEW TB distribution list.
- PM/ICM shares client concerns or the outcome of an inspection at the weekly property management meeting.
- FBH PA and a supervisor attend the meeting and create an individualized plan for clients identified by property management.
- The assigned care-team members coordinate and work toward a resolution.
- When needed, FBH develops a plan to help the client find alternative housing.
- FBH and CCEW staff provide updates at the next property management meeting about clients discussed the week before.
[PDF page 75 of 86]
NOTIFICATION OF CONCERNS
Change in Presentation
1. Increased anger/agitation, verbal aggression, inappropriate comments/actions
2. Changes in ability to care for self (personal hygiene decreases, inappropriate clothing)
3. Behavior/demeanor is not at baseline
4. Possible substance use.
Change in Level of Functioning
1. Changes in mood that differ from baseline/normal presentation.
2. Statements including suicidal ideation/homicidal ideation.
3. Increase of mental health symptoms (paranoia, delusions, hallucinations)
4. Deterioration due to SUD symptoms.
Change in Social Interactions
1. TBCM is isolating and remaining in their apartment and won't engage with staff.
2. TBCM's sleep patterns are disrupted (i.e. up at odd hours or sleeping excessively)
CCEW Notification to FBH
1. 48-hour Notice: Upcoming notice for inspection due to property damage, safety issues, pests.
2. 10-Day Notice: Comply or Vacate
3. 30-Day Notice: Pay or Vacate
4. 3-Day Notice to Quit
5. No notice (immediate eviction) will be provided for on-site offenses that lead to arrests of drug related and violent crimes.
6. Notice issued by staff for "Lease Violation Ticket"
7. Change in TBCM's Presentation, Level of Functioning, and/or Social Interactions (see above).
8. Guest(s) who are in violation of the TBCM's lease.
9. Anticipated date for turning over rooms to be rented.
FBH Notification to CCEW
1. Potential maintenance requests or addressing damages
2. Issues or concerns that may impact lease compliance
3. Change in TBCM's Presentation, Level of Functioning, and/or Social Interactions (see above)
[PDF page 76 of 86]
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT MEETING
Who is now included
- MTH PM and on-site ICM Team
- FBH PA and TB Supervisors
- FBH Trueblood & Forensic
- Mental Health Outpatient staff
Continuity of Care
- Clinical case discussions
- Clinical staff included in the lease compliance discussions
- Proactively focus on recurring compliance concerns with identified tenants
- Coordinated and collaborative follow-up between PM, Onsite ICM team and FBH teams
- Strengthen partnership
[PDF page 77 of 86]
SUPPORT FOR STAFF
Training for CCEW and FBH
- Crisis Response: ITA services
- Motivational Interviewing
Access to Resources
- Direct line to refer TBCMs to MRRCT
- MTH distribution email
- Identified TB supervisor for intakes
External Resources
- In-service with SPD re: co-deployed teams; 4th amendment
- Meetings with SPD Captain re: drug use
[PDF page 78 of 86]
[No readable text detected on this image-based page. See the original page in the slide viewer.]
[PDF page 79 of 86]
PHASE V: CONTINUUM OF HOUSING MODEL
HOUSING FOR LIFE
[PDF page 80 of 86]
CONTINUUM OF HOUSING
- Emergency
- Transitional
- Permanent Supportive Housing
[PDF page 81 of 86]
FBH ON-SITE SERVICES
- Transportation support for appointments and employment
- Supportive Housing Care Coordination
- Peer Support
- Healthcare Coordination
- Mental Health Services
- Substance Use Disorder Programming
- Goal Setting Support
- Daily Life Skills Programming
- Weekly Healthcare Clinics
- Workforce Training Programs
- Social Connectivity
[PDF page 82 of 86]
ADJUSTED SCORING MATRIX
- Lower risk score - priority for PSH
- Higher risk score - additional support for housing readiness, resulting in accessing transitional housing coupled with necessary support and resources to increase future success with PSH.
EXPANDING HOUSING READINESS/SUSTAINABILITY
- TBCM's history of living independently
- Previous group home placements
- Length of previous incarceration
[PDF page 83 of 86]
EMERGENCY HOUSING
Emergency housing is short-term (up to 30 days) and ideal for TBCMs precipitously released from jail or the hospital, whose current housing is not viable, there is a possible or confirmed notice or eviction, or respite from a current housing is needed to stabilize and mitigate the risk of contact with law enforcement.
10 apartments
Combined on-site staffing, seven days a week at Emergency and Transitional housing
- 1 FTE MA Supervisor
- 1 FTE MA
- 1 FTE SUDP
- 1 FTE BA
- 1 FTE Peer
[PDF page 84 of 86]
TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
Transitional Housing (up to 180 days) continues the momentum set in Emergency Housing and will support, advocate, and assist TBCMs to be ready for PSH and reduce their risk for arrest, detention, and recidivism.
15 Tiny Homes
Combined on-site staffing, seven days a week, at Emergency and Transitional housing
[PDF page 85 of 86]
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING
Two locations, providing ongoing services to sustain housing and find long term rental assistance.
44 units
On-site staffing, seven days a week, at St. Agnes and St. Jude locations
- 1 FTE MA Supervisor
- 1 FTE MA
- 1 FTE SUDP
- 1 FTE BA
- 1 FTE Peer
[PDF page 86 of 86]
ST. AGNES HAVEN
- 24 one-bedroom units
- On-site office for FBH staff
- Expected Completion: 2026
- Government Way and Sunset Blvd.
- Adjacent to bus services
- Grocery store
- Additional multi-family housing and the Finch Arboretum