State can officially use eminent domain to site a new homeless campus. What now?

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox officially signed a bill on Tuesday that not only cemented Salt Lake City’s partnership with the state to improve “public safety” within the capital city, but also one that could carry major implications for what comes next in the effort to dramatically expand the state’s emergency shelter bed capacity.

The bill, HB465, started out as a punitive measure — one that would have forced Salt Lake City to formally partner with the state to police camping and drugs or else risk losing state funds. The version ultimately passed by the Utah Legislature and signed by Cox, however, no longer includes those penalties — though it still requires Salt Lake City police to enter into an agreement with the Department of Public Safety by July 1. 

To Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall, who faced demands from state leaders ahead of the 2025 legislative session to better police camping, drugs and lawlessness in her city, the final version of HB465 is much more palatable than its original. 

State leaders call SLC police ‘ineffective,’ urge mayor to act — or state will step in 

“We went into this session with a goal of preventing a state takeover of our public safety,” Mendenhall told reporters during a media roundtable on Friday. “We succeeded in maintaining that core municipal function of Salt Lake City.“

But there’s another important provision in the bill that grants the state the power to “use eminent domain to condemn” a very specific type of parcel — “unincorporated land” owned by Salt Lake City “for the public use of constructing a new facility on the land for homeless services.” 

That’s a tool that state leaders could potentially use in their ongoing secret search for a 30-acre property meant to host what’s envisioned as a “transformative campus” to increase Utah’s homeless shelter capacity by somewhere in the ballpark of 1,200 to 1,600 beds.  

“We’re supportive of (the eminent domain provision) because we know the legal landscape surrounding the property options that we’re looking at, and this is a tool that we support in this bill,” said Mendenhall, who also serves on the Utah Homeless Services Board, the body that will make the final decision where to site the proposed homeless campus. 

Finding that site has proven difficult, State Homeless Coordinator Wayne Niederhauser has said. He told Utah News Dispatch on the final night of the 2025 session that the eminent domain provision of HB465 is an optional tool to help site a “permanent” facility — though he also said no decisions have been made. 

“We’re still looking at properties. This is one of the options,” Niederhauser said. “In order for that to be an option, eminent domain is required.” 

Utah lawmakers look to use eminent domain to help SLC site new homeless shelter

The mayor supported that eminent domain provision — which came about through negotiations with lawmakers — as a way to advance an effort that Mendenhall has long been urging state leaders to move on sooner rather than later: increase the number of emergency homeless shelter beds in the state’s homeless system. 

“Normally we would never agree to eminent domain,” Mendenhall said, but she added Salt Lake’s “highest priority in this conversation” was creating more homeless shelter space “as soon as possible.” 

That could allow the state to potentially use that city-owned property — which has not yet been publicly identified — for not just a temporary facility that Mendenhall offered in her public safety plan that she unveiled in December in response to state demands to improve “public safety” in Salt Lake City, but it could also eventually be a permanent home for the envisioned “homeless campus.”

When asked to clarify whether HB465 could be used to site the homeless campus, Mendenhall told reporters, “or a transitional facility until that point.” 

In order to immediately address what her plan described as a “shortage of 1,000 to 1,600 year-round emergency shelter beds,” Mendenhall previously said in her plan that Salt Lake City would be prepared to use a “city-owned property for a campus facility for up to 24 months if capital and operational costs can be allocated by the state and philanthropic partners” while state officials work to site a permanent property.

But as HB465 took shape, she indicated that she would be open to that property also hosting a permanent shelter.

“I’ve long said that the system needs more shelter. This is a humanitarian crisis that will not be resolved quickly,” Mendenhall said in a prepared statement to Utah News Dispatch last month when the new version of HB465 was first adopted. “As much as I would prefer to have more shelter and housing in all counties across the state, I also recognize the acute needs here. Specifically, we know how difficult it is to open winter beds every year that close and leave people outside all summer. That being said, we are willing to explore permanent shelter if it is fully funded by the state and philanthropic partners.”

Where is this city-owned property?

Details are scant on exactly where and when that city-owned property is located other than it’s on “unincorporated” land. HB465’s sponsor, House Majority Assistant Whip Casey Snider, R-Paradise, also gave another hint in a Senate committee hearing that it has an “easement against it for conservation.” 

However, at least one lawmaker — Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City — said she voted against HB465 out of concern that its eminent domain provision could impact west-side Salt Lake City. 

On the Senate floor, Escamilla worried it will lead state and city leaders to place “a very large building in the west side of Salt Lake City, and (it’s) very problematic because they won’t have a process for the community to engage.” 

When asked about Escamilla’s concerns about the property being near west-side Salt Lake City, a spokesperson for Mendenhall told Utah News Dispatch to contact the Office of Homeless Services about location specifics. A spokesperson for that office declined to comment. 

Previously, Mendenhall has advocated for other cities to do more to host homeless facilities since Salt Lake City already hosts many. Pressed on why she’s agreed to use city-owned land for the effort, Mendenhall said she would answer that question at a later date. 

“When we identify the site of the facility, we can talk about that,” she said. 

Asked when that site will be announced, Mendenhall also didn’t give an answer. 

“If I knew I probably couldn’t tell you, but I don’t even know just yet,” she said. 

When will we know more?

The bill has an effective date of May 7, so state leaders could potentially exercise their new eminent domain powers at any point after that date. However, it’s not clear exactly when the public will know more about that property, whether state leaders actually move to exercise their eminent domain power, or any other developments around the state’s search for a homeless campus. 

Utah homeless board OKs search for up to 1,200-bed ‘centralized campus.’ What now?

In response to questions about HB465’s eminent domain provision, state officials referred to a newly created website that lists a loose timeline for the “transformative campus.” 

A “final site announcement” isn’t expected until at least “summer 2025,” but no hard dates have been set, according to the website. After that announcement, state officials expect “community engagement to share plans, gather input and answer questions.” 

The first phase of the project isn’t expected to open until at least November 2025. 

But between now and then, many more details need to be hashed out. And lack of funding continues to be a major issue. 

Homeless board faces multimillion-dollar gap left unfunded by lawmakers

Last week, the Utah Homeless Services Board — the body that oversees and funds the state’s homeless system — held its first meeting since the conclusion of the 2025 Utah Legislature. 

In that meeting, Niederhauser updated board members on what lawmakers did and didn’t fund. 

 “This is a big challenge for our office,” Niederhauser warned. “The board needs to be aware of it.”

Cox recommended lawmakers spend at least $18.8 million on efforts to alleviate homelessness, including about $5.8 million in ongoing funds for a new family shelter that’s already been approved in South Salt Lake and about $13 million in one-time funding to keep temporary emergency shelter beds open through next winter and into spring 2026. 

Faith groups, advocates urge Utah Legislature to fund operations for new family shelter

However, the Legislature only funded $3.9 million for the family shelter and $5.5 million in one-time money for emergency shelter, Niederhauser said. 

“That does leave us short $1.9 million ongoing” for the family shelter, he said. 

The new family shelter is still expected to open within the next month, as it’s currently funded to stay open at least until the end of June, Niederhauser said, but it’s not yet clear what will happen to it unless state and local leaders scrape together more money for the shelter. 

“We met with The Road Home and Shelter the Homeless today, brainstorming how we might get more creative to fill that gap of $1.9 million,” Niederhauser said. “So we’re all going to be participating in that, looking to potentially the private sector and maybe also some more public sector money to fill that gap.” 

As for the money for winter and summer overflow beds — which helped house more than 900 people this year — Niederhauser said “we have a serious worry” that if state leaders don’t find more money to keep those beds open beyond April 30, 2026, there could be hundreds of people “looking for a place to sleep at night in and around probably Salt Lake City, the Jordan River, creeping into other communities nearby.” 

“I think we’re going to be about $5 million short to get us through next fiscal year,” Niederhauser said. 

He added that his office will be searching for solutions. “But unless we get some money, other public funds maybe through some other public entities and maybe some help from the private sector, it’s going to be a big challenge.” 

“My guess is we’ll be able to get through next winter without having to close beds,” he said. “But on April 30 (2026), without some additional money, I think we’re going to have a lot of beds close.” 

Mendenhall, in her public safety plan, urged the 2025 Utah legislature to allocate a “stable, dedicated funding source” for homeless services. That didn’t happen. She told reporters Friday that was the No. 1 thing lacking from this year’s legislative session. 

Meanwhile, there’s an even bigger hurdle that lawmakers haven’t yet taken on. There’s no ongoing funding yet identified to fully fund operations for the homeless campus, “which we really, desperately need,” Niederhauser. 

Last year, the Utah Legislature appropriated $25 million for a new large homeless shelter, but officials have not yet spent that cash while they continue to look for a site for the homeless campus. But ongoing funding is a much bigger problem. 

Lawmakers fund $25 million toward new 600-800 bed homeless shelter

“That’s going to have to be a big discussion that we have this summer and into next legislative session,” Niederhauser said. 

He noted Haven For Hope in San Antonio — which Utah leaders visited last year as they shaped their vision for Utah’s homeless campus — costs an estimated $30 million a year to operate. 

“So that’s a big nut to crack,” he said. “That’s going to be a big nut for the Legislature to consider. So we are going to have to come together and figure this out as a whole community. That’s the state, county, cities, and the private sector, to figure out how that’s going to work.” 

Despite the challenges, Niederhauser said he’s “bullish” that leaders will find a way to make the campus a reality. 

But in the meantime, if homeless service providers have to cut back on case management in order to fill the funding gaps the 2025 Legislature left, that could create more issues that run contrary to the Homeless Service Board’s goal to not just warehouse people, but help them get back on their feet. 

Jim Behunin, a former legislative auditor who now serves on the Homeless Services Board, said “we cannot be asking our providers to come up with any more efficiencies.” 

“I’ve seen how short they are in their funding already,” he said. “We are already underfunding for supportive services.” 

However, Behunin also said as he’s spoken with legislators, “there is a lack of confidence” in the state’s homeless system to support added investment, especially “new funds” through a tax that would likely be needed to support operations of the new campus. 

“They’re not ready to bite on that offer,” he said. “There’s still a lot of concern about whether the funds would be spent effectively. And how we bridge that gap is something that we all need to be grappling with somehow.”