Residents, survivors tell St. Louis committee: don’t put tiny homes on toxic Workhouse site

Dozens of survivors, advocates and neighborhood residents told the St. Louis City Public Safety Committee on the Workhouse parcel’s future that the mayor’s plan to place temporary tiny homes on the former jail site would re-create harms the city promised to end.

“I am calling on the mayor, Tishaura Jones, … to fund and implement the memorial community resource hub that has transitional housing built into it,” said Inez Bordeaux, deputy director of community collaborations at ArchCity Defenders and a campaign organizer and survivor. “Stand with us, and don’t let this happen.”

The testimony centered on three recurring points: speakers said the city’s own environmental review found arsenic, lead, benzene and other contaminants in the soil; many survivors and committee members said the Reenvisioning the Workhouse steering committee recommended an off-site memorial community resource hub and reparations; and advocates warned the tiny-home approach would isolate and re-institutionalize people who are unhoused.

Why it matters: The Workhouse site has a history of deaths and documented neglect that witnesses tied directly to decisions about future use. Advocates argued that placing temporary shelters on a parcel they described as toxic and remote would re-traumatize survivors and create a public-health hazard. Several speakers said the steering committee’s process—run with community participation—reached different conclusions than the administration’s proposal and should guide next steps.

Key evidence and claims: Zee Garlie, communications director at ArchCity Defenders, said research identified “at least 21 people who died in the Workhouse” between 1970 and 2019 and flagged limited public records about those deaths. Rachel Hurtado and others cited the city’s environmental report, saying it documents arsenic, lead and benzene on the site and warned that simple surface remediation (spreading gravel or topsoil) would not make the land safe for permanent habitation.

Speakers described the site as remote from grocery stores, transit and services and as difficult and unsafe to reach on foot. Multiple witnesses—former residents, community organizers and steering-committee members—urged the board to adopt the steering committee’s recommendations instead: fund and build an off-site memorial community resource hub with embedded transitional housing, and design a reparations process for survivors.

Claims and responses: Several witnesses alleged the administration commissioned an environmental evaluation without timely sharing it with the steering committee and that administration proposals effectively “revert the site back to the Workhouse.” Committee members did not dispute the testimony but repeatedly said their minds were not fully made up and that they had been listening; no administration representative rebutted the specific claims during the hearing.

Process and next steps: Chair Narayan said the committee wants to hear from as many people as possible and has considered extending hearings if the March 3:00 p.m. cutoff prevents public testimony. After the public comments the committee members thanked speakers and signaled they would continue reviewing submitted materials; the meeting adjourned after the committee completed the published agenda.

The committee received nine written submissions during the meeting and heard roughly two dozen in person and on Zoom. The record of what witnesses and steering-committee members said—the environmental findings, the steering committee’s recommendations, and repeated survivor testimony—will be central to any further council or administration decision about reuse of the Workhouse site.