Davis residents living near the city’s daytime Respite Center voiced mounting concerns Tuesday night about safety, public disturbances, and deteriorating neighborhood conditions—including drug use, vandalism, and overnight camping—prompting city officials to emphasize that they have heard the complaints “loud and clear” and are preparing a broader reassessment of homelessness services.
The Respite Center, located at 530 L Street, was opened in February 2020 as a daytime resource hub for unsheltered individuals. Managed by Downtown Streets Team since early 2024, the center provides basic services, case management, and employment assistance.
At the same time, neighborhood tensions have escalated—particularly in the Davis Manor area—over quality-of-life issues and concerns about safety and public behavior.
City staff, including acting City Manager Kelly Stachowicz, provided a comprehensive overview of the center’s history, operations, and recent efforts to gather neighborhood feedback. A survey distributed to residents in January 2025 elicited over 150 responses, primarily from the Davis Manor, Huntwood, and Old East Davis neighborhoods.
Survey data revealed that most respondents reported an uptick in visible homelessness, litter, public disturbances, and safety concerns since the Respite Center opened. Respondents cited seeing more encampments, public urination, vandalism, and individuals living in parked vehicles. Perhaps most troubling for residents was the perception of rising disorder and the lack of overnight shelter options, leaving many unhoused individuals lingering in the neighborhood after the center closes.
Top resident suggestions included relocating the center, expanding police presence, offering overnight shelter, and improving transportation options for unhoused individuals. In response, the city held a well-attended neighborhood meeting in March at Da Vinci Charter Academy, which served as a listening session for residents and city officials alike.
Stachowicz stressed that the Tuesday council update was not intended for action, but rather to place all information gathered thus far into the public record and provide a status update on mitigation efforts. She noted that Downtown Streets Team had recently undergone staff changes and was attempting more proactive outreach with neighbors and nearby businesses. Additionally, the city has initiated a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)-funded facade improvement project aimed at revitalizing the area around the Respite Center.
Vice Mayor Donna Neville, who co-leads the council subcommittee on homelessness with Councilmember Gloria Partida, reiterated that the city is listening. “We heard you loud and clear,” Neville said. “Even though we’re not making decisions tonight, this is far from the end of the conversation.”
She acknowledged resident frustration and emphasized that a more comprehensive, action-oriented discussion is scheduled for September. That discussion will evaluate the city’s entire ecosystem of homelessness services, including concerns about potential duplication between the Respite Center and Paul’s Place.
Partita added that one major takeaway from community feedback was the need to improve communication between the city and residents.
“We understand we have to have a bigger conversation around our plan for providing services to our unhoused population,” she said. “That includes making sure the resources we have are being used as effectively as possible.”
Councilmember Linda Deos asked for clarification on daily usage of the center and the status of the Downtown Streets Team contract. Staff reported that the center serves an average of 40 to 60 people per day and that the contract, which expired June 30, is in the process of being renewed.
Public comment revealed deep divisions within the community. Some residents described a deteriorating quality of life in the area around the center, citing drug use, bike theft, public defecation, and poor police responsiveness. “We’ve had no relief,” said Tim Hoban, a resident of K Street. “There is a constant fluid situation in the park across from us. People sleep off drugs for hours. The police don’t move them. The park is posted, but the rules aren’t enforced.”
Jesikah Maria Ross of the Davis Manor Neighborhood Council expressed appreciation for recent efforts at transparency and engagement, but raised equity concerns about siting a disruptive facility in a lower-income neighborhood with multiple liquor stores and high renter density.
“There’s been an uptick in crime,” she said. “And many neighbors have stopped calling the police because they don’t respond in time.”
Others voiced concern about the $500,000 annual cost of operating the center, questioning whether it’s the best use of public funds and suggesting permanent housing solutions would offer better long-term value.
“Let’s take a step back,” said resident Ben Masing. “Is a daytime respite center even the right investment? Wouldn’t permanent housing serve more people more effectively?”
Still, there was support for the center from several quarters.
Tracy Fauver, executive director of Davis Community Meals and Housing, praised city staff and noted her organization’s commitment to collaboration.
“We are always willing to come to the table,” she said. “And our services—including the new year-round flexible shelter—are making a real difference.”
Two callers into the meeting urged the council not to close the Respite Center without viable alternatives in place.
“As long as people don’t have housing, we need these resources,” one resident said. “Otherwise, the problems don’t go away—they just become more desperate and more visible elsewhere in the city.”
Subcommittee members acknowledged the legitimacy of both perspectives. Councilmembers emphasized that a long-term strategy is in the works—one that balances the needs of unhoused residents, the surrounding community, and city resources.
Staff said the Social Services Commission will be reviewing related outreach and services data in advance of the September council meeting, which is expected to be the next major step in determining the center’s future.
As the meeting closed, concerns lingered about equitable public participation.
“Email lists aren’t enough,” Ross noted. “Many people in our neighborhood don’t have the luxury of being plugged in that way. If we want meaningful engagement, we need to think outside the box.”
Mayor Bapu Vaitla assured the public that these concerns were being heard.
“The subcommittee is working to improve communication, and your input tonight will help guide that effort,” he said.
DG, this is an excellent summary of the meeting last night and the issues going on. Thank you for publishing this. This especially as I know the homeless is a deeply personal subject for you, and you and I don’t see eye at all on the root or solutions to the issue, so I genuinely appreciate that you published this article acknowledging the depths of the effects of the Respite Center on the three core-east Neighborhoods as it’s own issue, without involving the politics/disagreements on homeless services to cloud this specific issue as valid in itself.
Keep doing high-quality reporting on local issues like this and I might even send you some $$$ to keep the Vanguard going :-)
I just donated $50.
I post this not to aggrandize myself to those who worship at the alter of the Davis Vanguard, nor to set myself up for ridicule from those who those wish the Davis Vanguard be gone. But rather, to encourage others to make a donation in thanks for the coverage. The $50 to me is worth the price of admission for the recent coverage on this issue . . . but give whatever works for you.
First of all – thanks Alan.
One point to make on the issue of the respite center – no matter what you believe the best solution of homelessness is, it does no one any good to create huge problems for neighbors. That just doesn’t lead to good outcomes for anyone. I’m very encouraged by the tone of last night’s meeting and what you shared with us – it seems like everyone gets it and so now we’ll see if they can fix it.
Another comment — both the neighbors and those present from homeless services community in Davis that came last night had a long talk outside after the meeting at the Chamber Doors. It was mostly listening to each other’s concerns and no animosity at all.
I am glad that the council is listening.
I hope the staff response last night reflects potentially better communication going forward. The staff report was demoralizing because it was misleading and inappropriately optimistic. I urge more respectful and honest communication.
The litter, syringes, feces, graffiti, blighted properties, costly vandalism, dangerous interactions, and a tragic overdose are more than any neighborhood should be dealing with at all, much less for more than five years.
Police response time is good but at some point locals just stop calling because it makes no difference.
The city owns property that has become a significant blight on the neighborhood. The city has created a situation that is unsafe for the residents, for the businesses, and for the unhoused. The city is the only participant in these discussions that can solve the problem.
DS, the verbal report by Kelly Stachowicz was excellent. I rarely engage in nicities or thank anyone from the podium when I speak at Council Meetings, but I thanked Kelly last night because her presentation was very thorough and balanced, oddly so in contrast to the report – and I’m a bit perplexed as to how that even happened. This situation with the neighborhoods cannot be whitewashed, and the neighbors had enough years ago and are now boiling over in the pot of “Enough!”.
Kelly’s report is worth watching on the Council channel:
https://davis.granicus.com/player/clip/1851?view_id=6&redirect=true
Kelly’s report begins at 1:06