WILMINGTON — Opening a day shelter for homeless individuals is one step closer to becoming a harder undertaking in the City of Wilmington, despite several calls for the city to pump the brakes on a new land code amendment.
At its Nov. 3 meeting, the Wilmington City Council voted 4-2 — David Joyner absent from the meeting — on the first reading to establish a specific land use for group day facilities. The amendment would also require conditional zonings for their approval and mandating the facilities shut down if they accumulate a certain number of code violations.
City rules call for the city to take two votes on the amendment, though council can waive this requirement with a unanimous vote. However, the motion to waive second reading didn’t meet this threshold and will need to be voted on at the next meeting.
READ MORE: Proposed homeless day shelter restrictions split city planning commission
Mayor Pro Tem Kevin Spears and council member Chakema Clinton-Quintana voted against the measure. Both wanted to take more time to review the change, in light of concerns brought forward by Living Hope Day Center founder Tony Perez.
“I’m not afraid of regulation, but what I want to be sure that we don’t do is that we have a short-term reaction to a really vocal handful of folks that creates a precedent moving for forever forward for this entire city,” Perez said.
The proposed amendment is coming forth after Living Hope Day Center’s attempt to relocate its operation for homeless individuals to the former Sorrow Drowner space at 10th and Dock streets. It was working out of First Baptist Church, but renovations to the church required the center to look elsewhere.
Living Hope Day Center was allowed to reopen at 10th and Dock streets by-right, meaning without any approval or conditions from the planning commission or city council. The current land code classifies the shelter as a community center use, allowed by-right in the Sorrow Drowner property’s zoning.
However, Perez pulled his plans for the property after intense community pushback, which also prompted the city to revive its groups day facility use.
The city’s code specified group day facility use before the 2021 land code update, though planning staff has repeatedly said they don’t know how it was removed.
The provision on code violations is new, though staff said it matches the code requirements for overnight shelters.
The proposed amendment states the day center’s operations could be jeopardized if it has more than three confirmed violations of the city code within one month or six within a year. Perez took issue with putting Living Hope Day Center on the hook for its guests’ actions when the same isn’t done for other businesses.
“We all are aware of some of the situations that happen downtown at 2 o’clock in the morning, it’s all over the news; the restaurants and the bars, do they get a three strikes and they’re out rule?” Perez said, refraining from naming specific businesses. “I don’t know, but my suspicion is they do have rules and regulations, and that’s policies and procedures. That’s what we’re setting up. But they don’t live under the threat of being able to operate based on the reactions of the people who walk through their door.”
Mayor Bill Saffo thanked Perez for his comments, but said he would actually prefer to have more control over the bars and restaurants in downtown. He pointed out Alcohol Law Enforcement is responsible for enforcing the law and establishing best practices, though this requires ALE officers to investigate where local officers cannot.
Several violent incidents have occurred in and around downtown establishments this year, including the stabbing of a 21-year-old Marine and a 23-year-old who was shot and killed at the Front Street nightclub Unhinged. The city declined to participate in a pilot program targeted at nightlife solutions, despite acknowledgement of downtown’s problems.
“I think there’s some bar owners that just let things go by, and do whatever the hell they want,” Saffo said. “But there’s a distinction: I can’t shut down a bar. The ALE can. That’s the state. If I could, believe me … it’d be a different act down there than what’s currently happening.”
Perez still pushed back, noting his shelter should not be held to the same standards as bars and restaurants.
“We’re not providing the thing that creates the issue and I’m very directly meaning alcohol,” Perez said. “We’re not part. We’re not adding fuel to the fire. We’re trying to, in fact, extinguish a lot of the fuel that shows up on our door.”
Ultimately, Perez asked council to slow down and discuss the amendment further before passing it. Mayor Pro Tem Spears agreed.
“Maybe we need to explore this a little more; maybe this has happened a little too fast,” Spears said.
He made a motion for staff “to go back to the drawing board” and potentially obtain more feedback from Perez, community members and council. Though the amendment wasn’t discussed in depth with these groups before being formally proposed, the public was allowed to speak at the planning commission and council’s public comment period.
City Manager Becky Hawke suggested the board could pass the reestablishment of the group day center use and its conditional zoning requirement without stipulations on code violations.
“We can at least get this definition on the books, so that if a proposal does come in, we have something that fits this type of use that we can then respond to … right now the code is silent on that and that is a hole that we currently have, that we have discovered, and we are anxious to close that hole,” Hawke said.
Council member JC Lyle motioned to approve the changes without the code violation language.
Council as a whole still took issue with the proposed amendment, particularly the clause barring day centers from within 1,000 feet of schools; this also split the planning commission last month. Chris Bauer, Jack Pollock and Ace Cofer were in favor of the setback, while Adams, Jones and Lanier voted against though favored the amendment overall.
City attorney Meredith Everhart told council that staff ultimately kept the setback requirement because of the city’s broad definition of schools. Because the definition could include not just public schools, but homeschools, pre-Ks, daycares, private schools and charters, the setback requirement could greatly limit the parcels available for a day center.
“That is something that you will be able to still consider when it comes before you; you’ll just do it on an individual basis, based on whether you feel that it’s appropriate for that particular location,” Everhart said.
As for Living Hope Day Center, it could only have another two weeks before the amendment constrains its site selection, though Perez told Port City Daily Monday he was not close to finding another site for the center.
“We are in a little bit of a holding pattern to see what city council ends up doing regarding the zoning issues,” Perez said.
At Port City Daily, we aim to keep locals informed on top-of-mind news facing the tri-county region. To support our work and help us reach more people in 2026, please, consider helping one of two ways: Subscribe here or make a one-time contribution here.
We appreciate your ongoing support.
