Human Affairs Committee Meeting - July 20, 2026

The Human Affairs Committee met on July 20, 2026, at 7:00 PM in the Aldermanic Chamber to receive an update on the proposed Resource Center, Warming Station, and Transitional Housing project. The meeting was chaired by Alderman Lopez and included Aldermen Morgan, Sonnet, Rivan, Kelly, and Johnson, along with staff from Administrative Services, Community Development, and Public Health. The presentation led to extensive discussion about project scope, funding, timeline, and alternative approaches. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM.

Presentation on Resource Center Project

• Director Tim Cummings (Administrative Services) presented a high-level overview of the project, which includes three components: a warming station for 30–50 individuals, a seven-day-a-week resource center connecting individuals to services, and transitional housing (temporary housing bridging emergency shelter to permanent housing).
• Estimated budget: land acquisition (~$1 million), hard construction costs at $800/sq ft for 5,000 sq ft (~$4 million), soft costs and contingency (~$800,000), totaling between $5 and $6 million.
• Funding sources: $1.2 million secured from congressional directed spending (HUD) pending acceptance, a $2 million state grant application to New Hampshire Housing Finance Authority (due January 2027), and a city contribution of approximately $3 million (not currently included in the ad hoc capital plan).
• Timeline: If site selection is completed by spring 2027, design would take about a year, construction 6–12 months, with occupancy possible by spring 2029. The state grant requires the project to be substantially defined, with zoning approval and other conditions met before application.

Discussion Items

• Alderman Morgan asked why the project is not in the ad hoc capital plan; Director Cummings noted it has not been prioritized but the plan is dynamic and can be updated.
• Alderman Kelly inquired about the $1.2 million HUD funding: Director Bagley explained that the original request was for $3.6 million for a three-story facility with shelter beds, but the reduced award led to removing the shelter bed component to focus on the resource center and transitional housing. She also noted the HUD funds can be used within eight years.
• Alderman Sonnet asked about the feasibility of phasing the project; Director Sullivan and Cummings agreed that phasing is possible but may not be cost-effective and could complicate funding alignment.
• Alderman Kelly expressed concerns about a reactionary approach and advocated for a comprehensive gap analysis (legislation 2649) before committing to a specific project. Director Bagley countered that the city has been studying this for years and that the resource center model is based on best practices.
• Alderman Lopez highlighted the need for a coordinated plan, noting that the city's camping ban creates a moral obligation to provide shelter. He also discussed the challenges of using Elm Street Middle School for shelter due to code requirements and high renovation costs.
• Alderman Johnson questioned the $6 million cost estimate, recalling that the Mulberry Street property was listed for ~$730,000 and renovation estimates were $4.5 million. She suggested exploring city-owned properties or existing buildings (e.g., the library) to reduce costs and accelerate the timeline.
• Alderman Morgan proposed a hypothetical mixed-use development on a city-owned site (e.g., near public health) with parking and the resource center, but Director Cummings noted that would be a $15–20 million project, materially different from the current proposal.
• Director Cummings suggested a phased approach: identify a property, put it under agreement (cost ~$1 million), then conduct a 90-day limited design study to provide more confidence on costs and feasibility before committing to full construction. This would not preclude applying for the $1.2 million HUD funds.
• Director Bagley announced that a community partner has offered space for a temporary resource center (showers, bathrooms) as a proof of concept, potentially starting in September 2026, using existing trust funds. This would address daytime needs while the permanent project is developed.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes were taken. The committee directed staff to continue site evaluation and to explore the phased approach (option agreement plus limited design) as a way to advance the project with more certainty.
• The committee expressed interest in a special meeting before the full Board of Aldermen to share updates, particularly regarding the temporary resource center offer from a community partner.
• The gap analysis (legislation 2649) will proceed through the Personnel/Administrative Affairs Committee and is expected to inform the broader strategy within 90 days.
• Staff will work to refine the project scope and cost estimates, with an emphasis on speed, cost-effectiveness, and alignment with community needs.