Pottstown Candidates Outline Housing Viewpoints

Michael Hays
1 day ago
11 min read

Pottstown Borough has a competitive mayor’s race and several council seats on the ballot.

The aspiring public servants in Montgomery County’s 62 municipalities have broad latitude over policy decisions related to community development, land use, zoning, and much more. They appear on your local ballot this November 4, 2025.

**Note that write-in candidates were not contacted for this article. The requirement to get on the primary ballot is a minimum of 10 petition signatures.

Responses have not been edited and appear below verbatim.

Candidates for Mayor:

Jarred Haring (Republican) - No responses received

Mayor Stephanie Henrick (Democrat) * incumbent

1.Tell us about your overall vision and goals for community development. What specific steps will you take, and why?

My vision is a safe, welcoming, mixed-income Pottstown where long-time residents and new neighbors can afford to live, work, and age in place, and participate in a growing local economy. We have been, and continue to, pair housing production and preservation with services that stabilize households and reduce street homelessness. This in turn ensures public spaces remain welcoming and our police can focus on safety, not homelessness response.

Specific steps:

Housing First: All municipalities in Montgomery County need to prioritize and expand rapid re-housing and bridge/interim housing capacity in coordination with Montgomery County’s Your Way Home system and the Homeless Assistance Program (HAP), both of which fund bridge housing, rental assistance, case management, and emergency shelter functions. These programs shorten the time someone is homeless and stabilize tenancies.

Production & Preservation: All municipalities need to get creative and produce attainable homes quickly by advance zoning updates that encourage adaptive reuse and infill (vacant commercial/upper-story conversions, small-lot infill). To preserve what is available, a rental rehab program tied to code compliance and rent-stability commitments should be created. Within that, additional funds for small-landlord repair should be created by leveraging PHARE (PA Housing Affordability and Rehabilitation Enhancement Fund) and CDBG (Community Development Block Grants)/HOME dollars.

2. Does your municipality have enough rental dwellings to accommodate recent college graduates, seniors who wish to sell their homes, service workers, and other individuals who want to live in Montgomery County, yet may not envision home ownership as part of their future? If not, what is your plan to boost construction and availability for these individuals?

Unfortunately, Pottstown and the surrounding municipalities in Montgomery County do not have enough attainable rentals to accommodate senior citizens, recent graduates or service workers. The sad reality is that it will only get worse in the upcoming months.

As an example, Sanatoga Ridge (home to over 80 independent senior residents) has just doubled its monthly maintenance fees from $900 to $1,800 beginning Jan. 1, 2026. Most of these residents don’t have an extra $900 a month left over from their monthly Social Security income, and are pinching pennies at the grocery store. In addition, their food and medical benefits are being cut by the government. Where are they supposed to go? They can’t get the equity from their homes to rent/buy another home, until Sanatoga Ridge finds a new tenant which could take many months. And…this is not the only 55+ community this is happening to.

To prevent our parents/grandparents from being relegated to “tent city”, all municipalities need to boost construction and availability.

In order to do this, we all need to target upzoning and adaptive reuse. Streamline approvals for downtown mixed-use and adaptive reuse (e.g., former commercial/industrial buildings) with height or density bonuses tied to on-site affordable units. In addition, offering by-right conversions of large single-family homes to 2–3 units where infrastructure allows (with design standards) would help.

As I said before, we need to get creative to overcome the shortfall of housing, and get comfortable with smaller spaces. We can do this by enabling duplexes/triplexes, accessory dwelling units micro-units, and senior-friendly flats near transit and services, with clear, by-right standards.

Inclusionary incentives, such as a local Affordable Housing Trust set-asides when feasible, should be used along with leverage county/state/federal funds (e.g., PHARE, HOME-ARP, Rapid Re-Housing) to close gaps and keep rents attainable for the workforce and fixed-income seniors.

To keep existing low-rent buildings habitable and affordable (which is faster and cheaper than new construction) we can create a small-landlord rehab/NOAH preservation program. We should pair expedited approvals with a voluntary affordability set-aside and modest fee reductions for projects meeting workforce-rent targets. We should also create a “landlord risk mitigation” fund and master-leasing to bring more units into the pool quickly while protecting small owners. The goal is to preserve the existing affordable rental housing and convert vacant buildings to attainable housing.

3. The U.S. Supreme Court case Grants Pass vs. Johnson from June 2024 states that municipalities can criminally penalize people for sleeping outside, even when there are no shelter beds available. Given this, what is your opinion about how local leaders should address homelessness, and will your administration serve criminal penalties to the unhoused?

In Grants Pass v. Johnson (June 28, 2024), the Supreme Court held that localities may enforce generally applicable camping/sleeping bans without violating the Eighth Amendment; it did not require enforcement, nor did it resolve local policy judgments about the right approach.

Local leaders should address homelessness by prioritize housing offers, services, and lawful time-and-place management that protects health and safety without punishing status. Enforcement should be narrow, last-resort, and behavior-based (e.g., imminent hazards or violent conduct), coupled with diversion to services. This aligns with federal guidance that emphasizes housing-based encampment resolution over punitive sweeps.

Pottstown will not use criminal penalties against people for the unavoidable act of sleeping outdoors when they lack alternatives. Instead, we will look to our community partners to create a Community-led Homeless Outreach & Response Team (CoHORT), which will be a trauma-informed, multi-disciplinary, outreach team. The team will include social services, non-profit organizations, case workers, medics, peer support groups, behavioral health therapists, substance abuse counselors, religious leaders and people with lived experiences. These services all currently exist within the Pottstown community but the collective effort would benefit from a cohesive approach.

The CoHORT would be tasked with locating housing alternatives (non-congregate shelter, safe stays, rapid rehousing) and use time-place-manner rules only to address specific safety/health hazards, with notice, outreach, storage, and offers of placement—consistent with federal best-practice guidance. National evidence supports Housing First as more effective than punishment-based approaches. Accordingly, our enforcement posture is housing-led and outreach-first; citations or arrests are last-resort tools for imminent threats—not for status.

Our goal is to formalize a co-responder model so clinicians and trained outreach staff take the lead on homelessness-related calls, reserving police for true safety threats—consistent with national practice guidance.

4. A few months ago, a significant “tent city” with many unhoused residents was displaced. How will you ensure its former residents have safe alternatives now that the encampment is gone?

We recognized that the encampments posed public health and safety risks, but if not handled carefully, efforts to mitigate these conditions could interrupt ongoing homeless outreach and response efforts, rupture trust, and disrupt the stability and “family” that the encampment provided.

It is evident that individuals and families without homes are much more likely to be victims of crime and to suffer serious health issues, compared to the general public. The safety of people experiencing unsheltered homelessness is a critical concern. The trauma of not having a safe place to live is all-consuming and difficult to fully convey to those who have never experienced homelessness. The constant struggle for survival is a traumatic, anxiety-ridden experience which increases mental health crises and can lead to exacerbated substance abuse. Encampment sweeps push people into more hidden areas, where this vulnerable population is more at risk.

Without a plan, we have seen many residents return to their original locations, leading to a cycle of displacement without addressing the root causes of their homelessness.Sweeps can be viewed by the community as an attempt to avoid responsibility and may violate ethical standards and human rights.

Therefore, in anticipation of the “tent city” sweep, many community partners met to brainstorm on safe housing alternatives for the soon to be hundreds of displaced individuals. With the generosity of the Switchpoint Foundation, partnership with Opportunity House, County commitment, and a meeting of the minds of Borough Council, we transformed a nearby mostly-vacant motel into a safe alternative.

This housing-led encampment resolution plan in coordination with Your Way Home, enables individualized housing plans, triages and prioritizes medically fragile individuals, removes documentation barriers (IDs, income verification), and establishes and individualized mental/physical/addiction/behavioral health program.

But we can’t do it alone if we want permanent solutions. Throughout the County, it is imperative that supportive housing is created for those who have a multitude of complex medical, mental health and/or substance abuse issues that are co-occurring and need permanent housing with no time restrictions. In addition, the Tri-County area needs to increase the availability of psychiatric hospitals, since the closing of Norristown hospital, especially for those individuals who cannot live in group settings.

Collaboration is the key to addressing the root causes of homelessness, and to providing the resources and support needed for long-term solutions. Let us share our strengths and make a commitment to offer a hand-up to our most vulnerable neighbors.

Ward 3 - Borough Council

Raymond Rose (Democrat)

No Republican opponent

1. Tell us about your overall vision and goals for community development. What specific steps will you take, and why?

I want to help Pottstown become a place where my own children will raise their children. When my wife and I moved to Pottstown, we discovered that it was a good place to raise children. You have wonderful schools, a walkable community, a downtown full of great places to go, an amazing library (woo-woo!), and a town that you can love, support, and contribute to. It’s a place where you can proudly serve. I want to help shape Pottstown into a place that will serve our future citizens’ needs while addressing the needs of the current citizens. Future thinking to make it an even better place.

Yes, we have a high level of rental properties. There is also some new construction in the Borough of apartment buildings that are utilizing old industrial spaces in a new way.

I don't want to penalize the unhoused in any way. We have no idea what the circumstances are that have resulted in the situation that they are in. We probably can’t begin to understand their situation, so how can we punish them? The Borough needs to find opportunities to support the organizations that we have in town that address the needs of the unhoused. We have wonderful organizations in town like Beacon of Hope that are doing amazing work with the unhoused. We need to be communicating with them to understand the unhoused situation, how people are ending up on the streets, and what we can do to support these organizations.

4. A few months ago, a significant “tent city” with many unhoused residents was displaced. How will you ensure its former residents have safe alternatives now that the encampment is gone?

Again, getting a strong idea of the current situation, where those people who were in ‘tent city’ are now, and what we can do to support current and developing programs that address their needs. We need to understand the result of that displacement and where those people went to make more informed decisions in the future.

Ward 5

Joshua Kagi (Democrat)

No Republican opponent

1. Tell us about your overall vision and goals for community development. What specific steps will you take, and why?

Pottstown deserves stable taxes, safe and welcoming neighborhoods, and homes that fit our character. My plan is to grow smarter—adding homes where services already exist and lightening the load on current taxpayers.

To make that real, I will focus on two priorities:

Build more homes where it makes the most sense
Adopt transit‑district rules that allow mid‑rise, mixed‑use housing by right in the urban core and along primary transit corridors.
Set a modest workforce set‑aside (10–20% in transit districts) paired with density bonuses and streamlined approvals so people who serve Pottstown—nurses, teachers, EMTs, and young families—can afford Pottstown.
Use objective design standards and historic‑scale guidelines so new buildings fit our borough’s character.
Grow the tax base with intention
Prioritize infill and adaptive reuse of vacant and underutilized properties within our small borough footprint—upper‑story residential downtown, conversion of suitable commercial spaces, and shovel‑ready lots near transit.
Offer time‑limited tax abatements only for code‑compliant rehabs and mixed‑income projects that bring idle parcels back to life and onto the rolls.
Focus growth where we already plow, police, and light the streets. Infill adds assessed value without pushing services farther out, which helps keep per‑household pressure down.

Why this approach

Homes near jobs and transit cut commute costs, support our borough economy, and reduce traffic.
Balanced, mixed‑income projects strengthen neighborhood stability and fairness.
More taxpayers sharing fixed costs is how we keep bills predictable for everyone.

Pottstown currently has a high share of rentals. That brings needed flexibility, but long‑term stability comes when more residents can put down roots. I support clear pathways to homeownership so neighbors aren’t displaced as the market heats up. At the same time, Montgomery County as a whole faces a shortage of homes. Adding supply—especially near transit and jobs—is essential so rents don’t spike and entry‑level homes are within reach.

Pottstown is well positioned for both. We offer a walkable urban core, abundant green space, welcoming social businesses, and relatively easy commutes to King of Prussia and Reading. With more remote and hybrid work, we’re an excellent fit for young professionals and first‑time homebuyers.

My plan:

Protect renters from displacement with fair‑notice requirements, proactive code enforcement, and support for quality, safety‑first rehabs.
Expand starter‑home options through small‑lot infill, accessory dwelling units (ADUs), and adaptive reuse of existing structures—building types that complement Pottstown's historic twin‑home character.
Pair down‑payment assistance and first‑generation buyer programs with local counseling partners so renters who want to become owners can do so here.
Encourage mixed‑income projects so service workers, seniors, and recent grads also have options.

This balance—protections plus pathways, alongside more homes—keeps Pottstown inclusive, stable, and growing.

The act of simply existing should never be criminalized. Homelessness is a real and present challenge in Pottstown, and I’m proud of how local nonprofits, faith communities, and public partners have worked to humanize the issue and deliver practical help—from temporary housing and shelters to a longer‑term vision for supportive services.

My approach prioritizes dignity and safety:

No criminal penalties for being unhoused. Enforcement should focus on health and safety standards, not status.
Expand low‑barrier shelter and interim housing so people have a real alternative to sleeping outside, with a target of placement within 72 hours of outreach.
Fund street outreach, case management, and behavioral health support to stabilize people quickly.
Coordinate entry with county partners so services are matched to need and duplication is reduced.
Add permanent solutions: supportive housing, landlord partnerships with risk‑mitigation funds, and rapid rehousing.
Keep public spaces safe and welcoming through clean‑ups, storage options, and fair, clear time‑place‑manner rules.

This balanced approach treats neighbors with respect, addresses immediate needs, and invests in the housing and services that end homelessness—not just move it.

4. A few months ago, a significant “tent city” with many unhoused residents was displaced. How will you ensure its former residents have safe alternatives now that the encampment is gone?

We will strengthen borough participation alongside the organizations already doing the work. The most effective response is coordinated and accountable:

Formal partnership: Establish MOUs with leading providers to align outreach, shelter, and supportive services.
Shared funding: Prioritize joint grants and targeted borough contributions to expand beds, case management, and behavioral health.
Coordinated entry: Work with county partners to quickly match people to shelter, housing, or treatment.
Property solutions: Identify suitable borough or partner‑owned sites for interim housing and supportive housing pilots.
Accountability: Publish a quarterly dashboard on placements, returns to homelessness, and time‑to‑housing so we improve what works.

This approach strengthens trusted local partners, reduces duplication, and ensures people have safe, dignified alternatives—now and for the long term.