Libraries as homeless centers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My toddlers adore the library but I feel increasingly like they only cater to the homeless. For instance, they wanted to go tonight and I had my days mixed up. It closed at 5pm right as we arrived. Saturday and Sunday have limited hours. Basically they have bankers hours which don’t work for my family who works.

How does your disorganization have anything to do with the homeless? Oh right, it doesn’t. Go online and check on the hours if you can’t keep them straight.

Because their hours cater to the homeless and not the toddlers of working parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really get it... it seems like very different needs than libraries were designed for or librarians have the skill set for (though I know they try their best). My husband had to work with the librarian to call the police in a homeless creeper in the kids section the other day (not saying they all are, but it's two very different populations in a small space). The only solution I can think of is to offer a homeless service station next door. Warming station, social worker,coffee donuts, paper, computer bank, and bathroom to groom in. Thoughts?

Even if you offered those things, which you would never get funding for, there will still be people who prefer to go to the library, the same way that there are shelters and there are still people who prefer the street. I think it's fairly irrelevant whether you think it's two different populations in the same space. It is a public space, and while perhaps the "creeper" in question was actually doing something inappropriate, simply being in the children's section, or the rest of the library, is not inappropriate. Homeless people go to the library because it is quiet and calm and there is stuff to do. When I (a social worker) worked with homeless outreach, what I saw over and over was that there is only so much that you can really do to end homelessness. Many of the people on the streets actively refuse services, often because those "services" come with rules that they are not willing to comply with or safety issues that they are not willing to experience. I knew a lot of people who refused to go to shelters, for example, because others would steal their stuff, or because there were strict no-intoxication rules that didn't exist on the street. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be rules or that stealing is okay, but both of those issues were real enough for the people I worked with that they would not go to the shelter except as a last resort.

I disagree. Adults who are not accompanying children (or checking out children's books) should not be in the children's section. Period. The only way to make sure public space is kept orderly for everyone is to have objective rules like this, and enforce them.

The Tenley library definitely enforces no adults at the computers or tables of the children's section so the homeless people stay upstairs at the adult computers.

What’s with the very noticeable recent spike in street people in Tenleytown, esp. within a block of the Metro!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really get it... it seems like very different needs than libraries were designed for or librarians have the skill set for (though I know they try their best). My husband had to work with the librarian to call the police in a homeless creeper in the kids section the other day (not saying they all are, but it's two very different populations in a small space). The only solution I can think of is to offer a homeless service station next door. Warming station, social worker,coffee donuts, paper, computer bank, and bathroom to groom in. Thoughts?

Alas, probably won't help. The Reston library is right next door to a homeless shelter. Nevertheless, they come into the library, watch porn on the computers, wash themselves in the restroom (which pretty much makes it unusable for normal people, especially children, I'd never send DS in there), periodically expose themselves to women, and generally stink up the place.

Stopped going there...can't use the restroom, run a gauntlet of lounging smoking groups to get in. Nowhere to sit - it's the homeless shelter clubhouse. Years ago-decades + used to drop kids off there who met others for study/HW.

Also RTC Balduccis is a hangout and Harris Teeter. Fairfax County is putting a park next to the library. Who will be able to use it?

Oh, please. I go there weekly with my 4-year-old and have for years. Never encountered any problems. The restrooms are fine, plenty of seating, I’ve never encountered any suspicious adults in the children’s area. Never smelled a thing, for goodness sake. Never seen anyone bothered or harassed.

There are usually several people sitting out front, and sometimes a few are smoking, although not near the entrance. Once an obviously mentally ill man was talking to himself outside. Which happens everywhere. That’s it. Some of you are just appalled that the homeless have the gall to be VISIBLE to TAXPAYERS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't really get it... it seems like very different needs than libraries were designed for or librarians have the skill set for (though I know they try their best). My husband had to work with the librarian to call the police in a homeless creeper in the kids section the other day (not saying they all are, but it's two very different populations in a small space). The only solution I can think of is to offer a homeless service station next door. Warming station, social worker,coffee donuts, paper, computer bank, and bathroom to groom in. Thoughts?

Even if you offered those things, which you would never get funding for, there will still be people who prefer to go to the library, the same way that there are shelters and there are still people who prefer the street. I think it's fairly irrelevant whether you think it's two different populations in the same space. It is a public space, and while perhaps the "creeper" in question was actually doing something inappropriate, simply being in the children's section, or the rest of the library, is not inappropriate. Homeless people go to the library because it is quiet and calm and there is stuff to do. When I (a social worker) worked with homeless outreach, what I saw over and over was that there is only so much that you can really do to end homelessness. Many of the people on the streets actively refuse services, often because those "services" come with rules that they are not willing to comply with or safety issues that they are not willing to experience. I knew a lot of people who refused to go to shelters, for example, because others would steal their stuff, or because there were strict no-intoxication rules that didn't exist on the street. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be rules or that stealing is okay, but both of those issues were real enough for the people I worked with that they would not go to the shelter except as a last resort.

I disagree. Adults who are not accompanying children (or checking out children's books) should not be in the children's section. Period. The only way to make sure public space is kept orderly for everyone is to have objective rules like this, and enforce them.

The Tenley library definitely enforces no adults at the computers or tables of the children's section so the homeless people stay upstairs at the adult computers.

What’s with the very noticeable recent spike in street people in Tenleytown, esp. within a block of the Metro!

Yes, there are so many. The bathrooms in Starbucks, whole foods, libraries are so splashed up and gross. The people lying in the streets and bus stops and doorways give it a medieval feel. Kudos to our Mayor and Council for their good work helping these souls -- but at least they are working hard on making Go-Go DC's official music and legalizing prostitution. Way more important than mental health.

[Anonymous]

They did knock down all those housing projects to build up the area around navy yard and ballpark so an increase in homelessness was predictable.
A lot of homeless are disabled and can’t work. The federal SSI payment is $771/month. It’s hard to find even a studio apartment for less than that (saving some of it for food, toiletries, medicine and other expenses). Without low income housing to house the disabled, there’s not much option for them other than the streets. And I’m sure it’s hard to stay sober once you’re living that way—I would want to be unconscious most of the time too.
And then there’s the seriously mentally ill, that really need intensive services that really no one is set up to offer them.
It’s terribly sad that we expect our libraries to solve this problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Remove the Internet from libraries. Stock them with books instead.

I never take my kids to the library anymore because they ignore the books and just play with the video games. I go to the kids section myself and check out books for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're *public* libraries. They serve *the public*.

They should be viewed as serving the "taxpayer", rather than the "public". Because the public doesn't fund libraries - taxpayers do. Without taxpayers you can still have a "public", but you won't have any libraries. Or any other community services, for that matter.

While the homeless are certainly members of the public, let's not delude ourselves that they are contributing to funding the library.

There should be a hierarchy of users of public services like libraries, with the needs of those who's taxes sustain libraries placed above the needs of those who contribute nothing and only consume services.

Yes, and let's also restrict voting to people who own land.

Besides which, EVERYBODY pays taxes of some kind unless no money ever passes through their hands.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They did knock down all those housing projects to build up the area around navy yard and ballpark so an increase in homelessness was predictable.
A lot of homeless are disabled and can’t work. The federal SSI payment is $771/month. It’s hard to find even a studio apartment for less than that (saving some of it for food, toiletries, medicine and other expenses). Without low income housing to house the disabled, there’s not much option for them other than the streets. And I’m sure it’s hard to stay sober once you’re living that way—I would want to be unconscious most of the time too.
And then there’s the seriously mentally ill, that really need intensive services that really no one is set up to offer them.
It’s terribly sad that we expect our libraries to solve this problem.

Except they didn't. See Washington Post article by Marc Fisher (July 14, 2018): "Before baseball, the neighborhood then known as Near Southeast was an urban backwater where some streets were unpaved, hardly anyone lived and commerce was negligible. This was where the city put things many people didn’t want to see — tangled scrap yards, dusty concrete plants, sex and strip clubs, and block after block of trash-strewn vacant lots."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, yes, if you "solve" your homelessness problem by housing homeless people in jail, your system is not a success.

There is no law against homelessness. There is a law against public intoxication. Big difference, although there is obviously some overlap between the two.

You were just telling us about Indiana's effectiveness in reducing the population of homeless people by locking up homeless people.

I pointed out that Indiana has a chronic homelessness rate that was 1/38 the level of DC's in 2018, and that one of the likely factors was that Indiana has very strong public intoxication laws. I think it would be appropriate for DC, Virginia, and Maryland to incarcerate intoxicated people who are passed out on park benches, sidewalks, and other public places. As a previous commenter noted, sometimes an arrest for public intoxication can save peoples' lives. I would also expect that the threat of incarceration for public intoxication would cause other people to choose not to go down the path of addiction. Now, if you are upset with the idea of jail, maybe you could think of it instead as a publicly-funded studio apartment.

The idea that the threat of incarceration for public intoxication would deter people from addiction is laughable. Sure, for the local exec or govt official who spends the night in the pokey after an embarrassing display, or the person in HR who just got the oinly DUI she will ever get. (Of course, Trump's press secretary didn't stop after her first DUI, she went on to get another). But in a country where more than 30% of American adults have been arrested for SOMETHING at some point, you really think the threat of going to jail for public intoxication is the answer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The idea that the threat of incarceration for public intoxication would deter people from addiction is laughable. Sure, for the local exec or govt official who spends the night in the pokey after an embarrassing display, or the person in HR who just got the oinly DUI she will ever get. (Of course, Trump's press secretary didn't stop after her first DUI, she went on to get another). But in a country where more than 30% of American adults have been arrested for SOMETHING at some point, you really think the threat of going to jail for public intoxication is the answer?

We're not talking about DUI here. Not relevant. Yes, I think the threat of strong penalties against public intoxication would dissuade some people from a life of addiction. By having the threat of a 180 day jail sentence for public intoxication, Indiana is clearly stating what behavior is out of bounds. It's not the only factor, but it is hard to argue that DC's approach is superior when it has a chronic homelessness rate that is 38 times higher than Indiana's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My toddlers adore the library but I feel increasingly like they only cater to the homeless. For instance, they wanted to go tonight and I had my days mixed up. It closed at 5pm right as we arrived. Saturday and Sunday have limited hours. Basically they have bankers hours which don’t work for my family who works.

How does your disorganization have anything to do with the homeless? Oh right, it doesn’t. Go online and check on the hours if you can’t keep them straight.

Any why do they have those hours pp? Perhaps their funding has been cut? That's usually the reason.

Write the library and find out. Talk to the library board members.

If no one complains, nothing changes and the funding will drop even more.

[Anonymous]

And, day hours are usually there to serve the retired, who are usually the most vocal. If working taxpayers with kids were more vocal, things would change.

[Anonymous]

We obviously need involuntary commitment and large treatment faciltiies..seems like DC General could have been purposed for that (ahem Muriel, blink blink)??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No disrespect to all the anonymous experts chiming in but I’m gonna go with what the American Library Association has to say about all this.

"Poor and/or Homeless Library Patrons"

People experiencing poverty or homelessness constitute a significant portion of users in many libraries today and this population provides libraries with an important opportunity to change lives. As the numbers of poor children, adults, and families in America rises, so does the urgent need for libraries to effectively respond to their needs.

Access to library and information resources, services, and technologies is essential for all people, especially the economically disadvantaged, who may experience isolation, discrimination and prejudice or barriers to education, employment, and housing.

http://www.ala.org/tools/atoz/poor-andor-homeless-library-patrons

American Library Association knows best.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No disrespect to all the anonymous experts chiming in but I’m gonna go with what the American Library Association has to say about all this.

"Poor and/or Homeless Library Patrons"

People experiencing poverty or homelessness constitute a significant portion of users in many libraries today and this population provides libraries with an important opportunity to change lives. As the numbers of poor children, adults, and families in America rises, so does the urgent need for libraries to effectively respond to their needs.

Access to library and information resources, services, and technologies is essential for all people, especially the economically disadvantaged, who may experience isolation, discrimination and prejudice or barriers to education, employment, and housing.

http://www.ala.org/tools/atoz/poor-andor-homeless-library-patrons

American Library Association knows best.

In this case, why dont we build an adjacent homeless services center so the library expert in homelessness could mingle and direct people to their showers and job search facility?