Shooting at Brandywine & Connecticut Ave NW This Afternoon

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The caseworkers essential to the city’s housing-first approach work for service providers contracted by the District. They are supposed to help program participants like Watts with tasks that include creating household budgets, building community support networks and connecting with mental health and substance abuse services. For this, city contracts show, the Department of Human Services pays $755 per tenant per month. The contracts allow caseloads of up to 25 clients per caseworker.

Under the agreement, caseworkers must make at least two contacts with participants a month, one of which must be in person — down from a minimum of four contacts a month required until last year.

Yikes, that is not much and it's my understanding that participants do not need to even open the door if a caseworker knocks, never mind be compliant with MH treatment, addiction treatment, etc. Housing First does not allow requirements re: job training or education or moving toward self-sufficiency, in fact DC seems to have recently converted what used to be 1 year vouchers into PSH, not sure how that will be financially sustainable or if the end is built in when the buildings will be emptied, tenants who could exercise TOPA rights gone years before, and flipped to condos? No idea if audits are done to substantiate even these extremely minimal contacts, we know from WMATA how often records are faked.

If this is true then Housing First is Bull* in terms of benefiting ANY constituents, and I will no longer listen to a word they say. Is it?

Take up your complaints with HUD and George Bush.

[Anonymous]

Can you imagine living a life full of bad decision-making and no employable skills only to end up living for free in a luxury apartment building in toney NWDC. Only in America!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The caseworkers essential to the city’s housing-first approach work for service providers contracted by the District. They are supposed to help program participants like Watts with tasks that include creating household budgets, building community support networks and connecting with mental health and substance abuse services. For this, city contracts show, the Department of Human Services pays $755 per tenant per month. The contracts allow caseloads of up to 25 clients per caseworker.

Under the agreement, caseworkers must make at least two contacts with participants a month, one of which must be in person — down from a minimum of four contacts a month required until last year.

Yikes, that is not much and it's my understanding that participants do not need to even open the door if a caseworker knocks, never mind be compliant with MH treatment, addiction treatment, etc. Housing First does not allow requirements re: job training or education or moving toward self-sufficiency, in fact DC seems to have recently converted what used to be 1 year vouchers into PSH, not sure how that will be financially sustainable or if the end is built in when the buildings will be emptied, tenants who could exercise TOPA rights gone years before, and flipped to condos? No idea if audits are done to substantiate even these extremely minimal contacts, we know from WMATA how often records are faked.

If this is true then Housing First is Bull* in terms of benefiting ANY constituents, and I will no longer listen to a word they say. Is it?

https://endhomelessness.org/resource/housing-first

The people who seem to benefit seem to be landlords ($1,000/month OVER market rate in DC adds up) and whoever they are kicking the overpayments back to. Many severely mentally ill people stuck in studios with no furniture or oversight seem to suffer greatly, as do their neighbors, who may try mightily to get them help. Criminals too, as dealers (who may not be voucher holders but adjacent) as they are provided bases of operation in new to them markets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The caseworkers essential to the city’s housing-first approach work for service providers contracted by the District. They are supposed to help program participants like Watts with tasks that include creating household budgets, building community support networks and connecting with mental health and substance abuse services. For this, city contracts show, the Department of Human Services pays $755 per tenant per month. The contracts allow caseloads of up to 25 clients per caseworker.

Under the agreement, caseworkers must make at least two contacts with participants a month, one of which must be in person — down from a minimum of four contacts a month required until last year.

Yikes, that is not much and it's my understanding that participants do not need to even open the door if a caseworker knocks, never mind be compliant with MH treatment, addiction treatment, etc. Housing First does not allow requirements re: job training or education or moving toward self-sufficiency, in fact DC seems to have recently converted what used to be 1 year vouchers into PSH, not sure how that will be financially sustainable or if the end is built in when the buildings will be emptied, tenants who could exercise TOPA rights gone years before, and flipped to condos? No idea if audits are done to substantiate even these extremely minimal contacts, we know from WMATA how often records are faked.

If this is true then Housing First is Bull* in terms of benefiting ANY constituents, and I will no longer listen to a word they say. Is it?

Once again, why should basic housing have requirements? When you have too many unhoused people, crime will arise because those people have nothing to lose. That is a dangerous place to back a human into a corner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The caseworkers essential to the city’s housing-first approach work for service providers contracted by the District. They are supposed to help program participants like Watts with tasks that include creating household budgets, building community support networks and connecting with mental health and substance abuse services. For this, city contracts show, the Department of Human Services pays $755 per tenant per month. The contracts allow caseloads of up to 25 clients per caseworker.

Under the agreement, caseworkers must make at least two contacts with participants a month, one of which must be in person — down from a minimum of four contacts a month required until last year.

Yikes, that is not much and it's my understanding that participants do not need to even open the door if a caseworker knocks, never mind be compliant with MH treatment, addiction treatment, etc. Housing First does not allow requirements re: job training or education or moving toward self-sufficiency, in fact DC seems to have recently converted what used to be 1 year vouchers into PSH, not sure how that will be financially sustainable or if the end is built in when the buildings will be emptied, tenants who could exercise TOPA rights gone years before, and flipped to condos? No idea if audits are done to substantiate even these extremely minimal contacts, we know from WMATA how often records are faked.

If this is true then Housing First is Bull* in terms of benefiting ANY constituents, and I will no longer listen to a word they say. Is it?

Once again, why should basic housing have requirements? When you have too many unhoused people, crime will arise because those people have nothing to lose. That is a dangerous place to back a human into a corner.

why should one person get to ruin the quality of life of others? if they can’t follow community norms, they can go elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

All people who live in society have responsibilities. Those who receive housing free of charge should not be exempt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The caseworkers essential to the city’s housing-first approach work for service providers contracted by the District. They are supposed to help program participants like Watts with tasks that include creating household budgets, building community support networks and connecting with mental health and substance abuse services. For this, city contracts show, the Department of Human Services pays $755 per tenant per month. The contracts allow caseloads of up to 25 clients per caseworker.

Under the agreement, caseworkers must make at least two contacts with participants a month, one of which must be in person — down from a minimum of four contacts a month required until last year.

Yikes, that is not much and it's my understanding that participants do not need to even open the door if a caseworker knocks, never mind be compliant with MH treatment, addiction treatment, etc. Housing First does not allow requirements re: job training or education or moving toward self-sufficiency, in fact DC seems to have recently converted what used to be 1 year vouchers into PSH, not sure how that will be financially sustainable or if the end is built in when the buildings will be emptied, tenants who could exercise TOPA rights gone years before, and flipped to condos? No idea if audits are done to substantiate even these extremely minimal contacts, we know from WMATA how often records are faked.

If this is true then Housing First is Bull* in terms of benefiting ANY constituents, and I will no longer listen to a word they say. Is it?

Once again, why should basic housing have requirements? When you have too many unhoused people, crime will arise because those people have nothing to lose. That is a dangerous place to back a human into a corner.

why should one person get to ruin the quality of life of others? if they can’t follow community norms, they can go elsewhere.

Why are you linking unhoused peoples with crimes of violence? Most unhoused people are not the ones committing acts with guns and smash and dashes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What are the options for addressing the concerning increase in violent crime in Ward 3? The mayor? The council? What can make things better?

Elect a councilmember that's concerned about this issue, not one who was actively trying to avoid it his first few months in office?

This.

[Anonymous]

I have no faith that a floor is going to be put in the crime situation in NW, never mind it improving.

Frumin is not someone who inspires confidence in the future and Bowser admin reps have attended countless community meetings with things only getting worse. The only one who seemed genuinely concerned about public safety was Chris Geldart and he had issues and is long gone.

It makes me quite sad and my family is going to have to look seriously at relocating, having been in DC for 30 years. We moved west for schools and safety after 20 years EOTP and that worked for a long time and now the calculus has changed again. I wish we had gone to the burbs a long time ago, and become established then, we are not at life stages that are super conducive to moving right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When I lived EOTP, it was common for me and neighbors to drive kids to Forest Hills Playground or to Rose Park or Palisades. That SHOOTERS ran across this playground at 3pm on a Saturday afternoon blows my mind. And basically crickets from the political class and somewhat of a shrug from residents. No community meeting scheduled as of yet...

https://dgs.dc.gov/page/dgs-forest-hills-park--play-dc-playground-project

3 shots were fired, 1 hit the victim, what do people think will protect you or your kids on the sidewalk from the other 2 as you go to the park, tennis courts, BreadFurst or Politics & Prose in broad daylight on a weekend?

If the provisions limiting the criminal background screenings and evictions were changed and landlords were held responsible for results or become ineligible for program, things would change. Too much money being made from status quo, I suppose. The WP series on Sedgewick Gardens laid out how disruptive tenants can be used to clear buildings of below market rent stabilized tenants and those who have the resources to exercise TOPA.

Curious- why didn’t you walk to your local playground? Or drive to one closer to your home?

DP but I almost find the naïveté here charming.

I also lived EOTP, walking distance to several playgrounds, and shootings in the vicinity were a thing more than once.

+1, but also, safety aside, did no one ever go to a different park just because you were sick of the ones near home? Admittedly, the shootings at the closest one to our house made for a compelling additional reason to go elsewhere, but still.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the police are well-funded, so what's the issue? Prosecutors failing to prosecute? Police failing to arrest? Lenient sentencing? Lenient bonds?

Charles Allen, Brianne Nadeau, et al. froze police hiring in 2020. Following the riots and Insurrection, retirement eligible veterans left the force. The Council took a strong anti-law enforcement stance and passed legislation prohibiting pursuits and making police personnel records public. Meanwhile, the USAO and Superior Court judges stayed home for 2 years, meaning arrests for gun and other violent crimes went unprosecuted. Racine and Schwalb were and are unapologetic in their stance that there should not be any consequences for juvenile crime. In this environment, MPD staffing shrunk to its lowest levels in 50 years, and even if applicants wanted to go to DC with a hostile Council and prosecutors who don’t prosecute, with a year-long background/training cycle, it will be years before staffing returns to its pre-pandemic level.

^^ most accurate narrative here thus far. It tracks with what we’ve heard from two different police officials in the city. Talk to people in law enforcement to understand what’s happening to them, what they see and experience, rather than getting into divisive speculation. That way we can identify and fix problems. And it’s useful for engaging local officials - stats on how many police officers there are now, stats on what gets prosecuted, stats on how many ppl across the city have been victim to gun violence, etc. it’s harder for them to shrug you off that way.

[Anonymous]

Charles Allen even explicitly stated how they were moving funds away from policing in order to shrink the police force:

https://twitter.com/charlesallen/status/1277421573192986625

Read that link, he clearly talks about how the raw numbers are misleading, explains how the budget actually works, and shows how he and the rest of the Council are cutting funds below what's necessary to maintain the police force in order to force it to shrink. Fast forward to today, and now the police force is the smallest it's been in years.

The people who keep claiming that the police were never defunded are spreading disinformation. It was done explicitly with Councilmembers breaking down exactly how the police would be defunded and how that would make the police force shrink.

[Anonymous]

With Frumin in until 27, what is the solution here? What can the community actually do? Surely there must be something, otherwise we all might as well move.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The caseworkers essential to the city’s housing-first approach work for service providers contracted by the District. They are supposed to help program participants like Watts with tasks that include creating household budgets, building community support networks and connecting with mental health and substance abuse services. For this, city contracts show, the Department of Human Services pays $755 per tenant per month. The contracts allow caseloads of up to 25 clients per caseworker.

Under the agreement, caseworkers must make at least two contacts with participants a month, one of which must be in person — down from a minimum of four contacts a month required until last year.

Yikes, that is not much and it's my understanding that participants do not need to even open the door if a caseworker knocks, never mind be compliant with MH treatment, addiction treatment, etc. Housing First does not allow requirements re: job training or education or moving toward self-sufficiency, in fact DC seems to have recently converted what used to be 1 year vouchers into PSH, not sure how that will be financially sustainable or if the end is built in when the buildings will be emptied, tenants who could exercise TOPA rights gone years before, and flipped to condos? No idea if audits are done to substantiate even these extremely minimal contacts, we know from WMATA how often records are faked.

If this is true then Housing First is Bull* in terms of benefiting ANY constituents, and I will no longer listen to a word they say. Is it?

Once again, why should basic housing have requirements? When you have too many unhoused people, crime will arise because those people have nothing to lose. That is a dangerous place to back a human into a corner.

why should one person get to ruin the quality of life of others? if they can’t follow community norms, they can go elsewhere.

Why are you linking unhoused peoples with crimes of violence? Most unhoused people are not the ones committing acts with guns and smash and dashes.

We’re talking about the voucher recipients who are very much linked to a whole lot of disorder. Not all of them, but many.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have no faith that a floor is going to be put in the crime situation in NW, never mind it improving.

Frumin is not someone who inspires confidence in the future and Bowser admin reps have attended countless community meetings with things only getting worse. The only one who seemed genuinely concerned about public safety was Chris Geldart and he had issues and is long gone.

It makes me quite sad and my family is going to have to look seriously at relocating, having been in DC for 30 years. We moved west for schools and safety after 20 years EOTP and that worked for a long time and now the calculus has changed again. I wish we had gone to the burbs a long time ago, and become established then, we are not at life stages that are super conducive to moving right now.

Well that’s a little excessive. Unless you live in the Sedgewick or on top of the Tenleytown metro, it’s not going to get that much worse.