Bowser Spreads the Wealth opens homeless shelters in each DC ward

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's recap the reasons that a family shelter isn't appropriate in Ward 3:

1. Those living there are too rich and preppy and it would therefore be unfair to those in need of stable transient housing

2. There are homeless men in Tenleytown

3. Wilson High School

4. Someone had to take a bus with homeless people

5. People paid a shiteload of money for single-family homes in a location where their children wouldn't be exposed to the homeless and other poor people

6. DC General isn't all that bad

7. Ward 3 isn't their community

8. Families will eventually move out of the shelter

9. DC FEMS is a mess

10. DC needs to take children away from homeless parents

11) they will get so comfortable and happy they will immediately have more babies and stay in the temporary shelter forever

[Anonymous]

Oh yeah ...

11. Homeless families are flocking to DC because they get to live the American dream at a crappy motel in a remote area of NE or PG County and will keep having kids so they never have to leave

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While the plan is firm to house the homeless in each ward, the final locations are not set. In Ward 3 Tenelytown is still under active consideration, particularly because of good transportation access and the fact that many homeless in the Ward seem to be concentrated there already. DC owns the Tenley library site of course, which was built with reinforced supports to accommodate several additional floors for housing. The old St Ann's school is another possible locatition. Given that the intention is to house homeless families, locations adjacent to Janney make the most sense.

This may be a more cost-effective alternative to Glover Pk and the Tenley location makes more sense for people who depend on public transportation.

A) It would be great if libraries served readers and homeless service centers served homeless. Two often the two become one in DC. A coffee/newspaper/computer station next to a library specifically for homeless to warm up would be great.
B) Tenley has masses of homeless and some current homeless services for them. Can we get them off the streets and into these apartments you propose, or is this in addition? It looks / feels in Tenley like I imagine SF some days walking down the street. And it is the type of homeless who seem to pretty much refuse to be indoors. Pretty hardcore group. Can they head down to Glover?
C) I'm pretty sure the kids can walk a few blocks to Stoddert with equal ease as being right above Janney.
D) Your transport makes sense if the parents are required to work or be in a training program. Are they? Otherwise, Glover Park is on the bus line, nearer downtown offices, and close to schools (elementary and middle) and supermarkets.

You're talking about homeless MEN hanging around in Tenleytown. This proposal is for 8 shelters to house homeless FAMILIES (women and children; there will be very few men, and those will be dads with children). No, the homeless men in Tenleytown will not be moving into the shelter in Glover Park. It should go without saying that their reasons for being on the street are often very different than the forces that drive homeless women and their children into shelters.

Its men and women who are obviously long term unstable street dwellers, who see to be supported by the local service center and handouts from well meaning naive college kids. Tenley has a lot of homeless in the streets, plus our (well documented on other threads) raft of teen ill behavior when Wilson gets out. I think Tenley has enough on our plates that is not being addressed. Before we embark on a major building project above the library and launch a new service center, lets see the mayor and council work on some of what's already going on in the neighborhood.

I understand your concern about the adult homeless people in Tenleytown, though I would argue that there are similar numbers of homeless people in most areas where there is a lot of retail. There are more potential donations and plenty of places to duck inside and get warm. I work in Farragut Square and live in Columbia Heights and the same holds true for both of those locations as well.

However, we're still talking about 2 different things. Family shelters are different than the services you're concerned about. As I mentioned yesterday, the family shelters that are already in my neighborhood look like apartment buildings. What we are talking about is building an apartment community that has wraparound services for them and their kids - it's just that they don't have to pay for it because they are homeless. If the mayor just built it and didn't tell you, you probably wouldn't even notice any difference in neighborhood experience as a result of the shelter itself.

I also don't think it's fair to suggest that the behavior of high school students is relevant to this issue. You are conflating 3 different issues which are more or less unrelated: the behavior of homeless adults, the housing of homeless families, and the behavior of high school students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's recap the reasons that a family shelter isn't appropriate in Ward 3:

1. Those living there are too rich and preppy and it would therefore be unfair to those in need of stable transient housing

2. There are homeless men in Tenleytown

3. Wilson High School

4. Someone had to take a bus with homeless people

5. People paid a shiteload of money for single-family homes in a location where their children wouldn't be exposed to the homeless and other poor people

6. DC General isn't all that bad

7. Ward 3 isn't their community

8. Families will eventually move out of the shelter

9. DC FEMS is a mess

10. DC needs to take children away from homeless parents

11) they will get so comfortable and happy they will immediately have more babies and stay in the temporary shelter forever

+1. Yea. I would say that this about sums it up. LOL

[Anonymous]

Well, for what it's worth, the Ward 3 meeting was much more civil than the Ward 1 meeting. All those hipsters on U Street talk a good game about being liberal, but not in their own neighborhood thank you...

[Anonymous]

Another thing is that these are homeless FAMILIES. In many cases it's a homeless woman with children. I'd hope the city would help track down the fathers and help with getting judgements for the fathers to provide child support, and dealing with whether there's a compelling reason why that can't be done. Also, spreading the message that if you father a child, you have a duty and responsibility to provide for it. And for those where there are two parents, if at least one of them can work, why not help find the one a job? And if they aren't getting a job, seeing why not, and tracking the case and continually following up as a condition of their stay in housing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, for what it's worth, the Ward 3 meeting was much more civil than the Ward 1 meeting. All those hipsters on U Street talk a good game about being liberal, but not in their own neighborhood thank you...

Doesn't sound to me like any of the meetings were all that civil. Maybe some grumbled a little louder than others but thus far pretty much ever poster who has reported on their own Ward's meeting has reported that there were grumblings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While the plan is firm to house the homeless in each ward, the final locations are not set. In Ward 3 Tenelytown is still under active consideration, particularly because of good transportation access and the fact that many homeless in the Ward seem to be concentrated there already. DC owns the Tenley library site of course, which was built with reinforced supports to accommodate several additional floors for housing. The old St Ann's school is another possible locatition. Given that the intention is to house homeless families, locations adjacent to Janney make the most sense.

This may be a more cost-effective alternative to Glover Pk and the Tenley location makes more sense for people who depend on public transportation.

A) It would be great if libraries served readers and homeless service centers served homeless. Two often the two become one in DC. A coffee/newspaper/computer station next to a library specifically for homeless to warm up would be great.
B) Tenley has masses of homeless and some current homeless services for them. Can we get them off the streets and into these apartments you propose, or is this in addition? It looks / feels in Tenley like I imagine SF some days walking down the street. And it is the type of homeless who seem to pretty much refuse to be indoors. Pretty hardcore group. Can they head down to Glover?
C) I'm pretty sure the kids can walk a few blocks to Stoddert with equal ease as being right above Janney.
D) Your transport makes sense if the parents are required to work or be in a training program. Are they? Otherwise, Glover Park is on the bus line, nearer downtown offices, and close to schools (elementary and middle) and supermarkets.

You're talking about homeless MEN hanging around in Tenleytown. This proposal is for 8 shelters to house homeless FAMILIES (women and children; there will be very few men, and those will be dads with children). No, the homeless men in Tenleytown will not be moving into the shelter in Glover Park. It should go without saying that their reasons for being on the street are often very different than the forces that drive homeless women and their children into shelters.

Its men and women who are obviously long term unstable street dwellers, who see to be supported by the local service center and handouts from well meaning naive college kids. Tenley has a lot of homeless in the streets, plus our (well documented on other threads) raft of teen ill behavior when Wilson gets out. I think Tenley has enough on our plates that is not being addressed. Before we embark on a major building project above the library and launch a new service center, lets see the mayor and council work on some of what's already going on in the neighborhood.

I understand your concern about the adult homeless people in Tenleytown, though I would argue that there are similar numbers of homeless people in most areas where there is a lot of retail. There are more potential donations and plenty of places to duck inside and get warm. I work in Farragut Square and live in Columbia Heights and the same holds true for both of those locations as well.

However, we're still talking about 2 different things. Family shelters are different than the services you're concerned about. As I mentioned yesterday, the family shelters that are already in my neighborhood look like apartment buildings. What we are talking about is building an apartment community that has wraparound services for them and their kids - it's just that they don't have to pay for it because they are homeless. If the mayor just built it and didn't tell you, you probably wouldn't even notice any difference in neighborhood experience as a result of the shelter itself.

I also don't think it's fair to suggest that the behavior of high school students is relevant to this issue. You are conflating 3 different issues which are more or less unrelated: the behavior of homeless adults, the housing of homeless families, and the behavior of high school students.

But the problem is, the location in Ward 3 is not zoned for the kind of building and density that is being proposed. So in fact, we would notice--because we all purchased our homes with the knowledge that a large apartment building, with all the nuisances that that brings, would never go up on that property. I have absolutely no problem with a shelter going in at that address. But I have a major problem with the size. That is zoned for about 4 to 8 families, tops. Not 36.

[Anonymous]

Can those who were at the ward 3 meeting describe how concerns about accommodating children at stoddert were addressed? I'm one of those welcoming glover parkers but I don't know if I trust Bowser and DCPS to find a way to integrate students on what sounds to be a pretty short term basis. My concerns go both ways, for the existing students in an already over crowded school and for the poor children already suffering in difficult conditions and being asked to start fresh multiple times in one school year. Any thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While the plan is firm to house the homeless in each ward, the final locations are not set. In Ward 3 Tenelytown is still under active consideration, particularly because of good transportation access and the fact that many homeless in the Ward seem to be concentrated there already. DC owns the Tenley library site of course, which was built with reinforced supports to accommodate several additional floors for housing. The old St Ann's school is another possible locatition. Given that the intention is to house homeless families, locations adjacent to Janney make the most sense.

This may be a more cost-effective alternative to Glover Pk and the Tenley location makes more sense for people who depend on public transportation.

A) It would be great if libraries served readers and homeless service centers served homeless. Two often the two become one in DC. A coffee/newspaper/computer station next to a library specifically for homeless to warm up would be great.
B) Tenley has masses of homeless and some current homeless services for them. Can we get them off the streets and into these apartments you propose, or is this in addition? It looks / feels in Tenley like I imagine SF some days walking down the street. And it is the type of homeless who seem to pretty much refuse to be indoors. Pretty hardcore group. Can they head down to Glover?
C) I'm pretty sure the kids can walk a few blocks to Stoddert with equal ease as being right above Janney.
D) Your transport makes sense if the parents are required to work or be in a training program. Are they? Otherwise, Glover Park is on the bus line, nearer downtown offices, and close to schools (elementary and middle) and supermarkets.

You're talking about homeless MEN hanging around in Tenleytown. This proposal is for 8 shelters to house homeless FAMILIES (women and children; there will be very few men, and those will be dads with children). No, the homeless men in Tenleytown will not be moving into the shelter in Glover Park. It should go without saying that their reasons for being on the street are often very different than the forces that drive homeless women and their children into shelters.

Its men and women who are obviously long term unstable street dwellers, who see to be supported by the local service center and handouts from well meaning naive college kids. Tenley has a lot of homeless in the streets, plus our (well documented on other threads) raft of teen ill behavior when Wilson gets out. I think Tenley has enough on our plates that is not being addressed. Before we embark on a major building project above the library and launch a new service center, lets see the mayor and council work on some of what's already going on in the neighborhood.

I understand your concern about the adult homeless people in Tenleytown, though I would argue that there are similar numbers of homeless people in most areas where there is a lot of retail. There are more potential donations and plenty of places to duck inside and get warm. I work in Farragut Square and live in Columbia Heights and the same holds true for both of those locations as well.

However, we're still talking about 2 different things. Family shelters are different than the services you're concerned about. As I mentioned yesterday, the family shelters that are already in my neighborhood look like apartment buildings. What we are talking about is building an apartment community that has wraparound services for them and their kids - it's just that they don't have to pay for it because they are homeless. If the mayor just built it and didn't tell you, you probably wouldn't even notice any difference in neighborhood experience as a result of the shelter itself.

I also don't think it's fair to suggest that the behavior of high school students is relevant to this issue. You are conflating 3 different issues which are more or less unrelated: the behavior of homeless adults, the housing of homeless families, and the behavior of high school students.

But the problem is, the location in Ward 3 is not zoned for the kind of building and density that is being proposed. So in fact, we would notice--because we all purchased our homes with the knowledge that a large apartment building, with all the nuisances that that brings, would never go up on that property. I have absolutely no problem with a shelter going in at that address. But I have a major problem with the size. That is zoned for about 4 to 8 families, tops. Not 36.

You guys in Ward 3 aren't even remotely suffering as badly from the density explosion happening to us in Ward 6. But even so, we'd notice 50 new families for sure. The people-density increase and activity increase has been noticeable and dramatic with each new set of housing units to come online around here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

However, we're still talking about 2 different things. Family shelters are different than the services you're concerned about. As I mentioned yesterday, the family shelters that are already in my neighborhood look like apartment buildings. What we are talking about is building an apartment community that has wraparound services for them and their kids - it's just that they don't have to pay for it because they are homeless. If the mayor just built it and didn't tell you, you probably wouldn't even notice any difference in neighborhood experience as a result of the shelter itself.

I also don't think it's fair to suggest that the behavior of high school students is relevant to this issue. You are conflating 3 different issues which are more or less unrelated: the behavior of homeless adults, the housing of homeless families, and the behavior of high school students.

But the problem is, the location in Ward 3 is not zoned for the kind of building and density that is being proposed. So in fact, we would notice--because we all purchased our homes with the knowledge that a large apartment building, with all the nuisances that that brings, would never go up on that property. I have absolutely no problem with a shelter going in at that address. But I have a major problem with the size. That is zoned for about 4 to 8 families, tops. Not 36.

You guys in Ward 3 aren't even remotely suffering as badly from the density explosion happening to us in Ward 6. But even so, we'd notice 50 new families for sure. The people-density increase and activity increase has been noticeable and dramatic with each new set of housing units to come online around here.

I hear you and am sorry to see it happen. Which is precisely why our elected council member should be doing her part to protect her ward. Bring on the shelters for homeless families--all the homeless. It's impossible not to want this, especially as these bitter cold temperatures approach. But deliver shelter across northwest. Not in a high-density apartment building which will only stress the local infrastructure beyond what it was zoned for. Oh, but then the developer won't profit from his new purchase.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can those who were at the ward 3 meeting describe how concerns about accommodating children at stoddert were addressed? I'm one of those welcoming glover parkers but I don't know if I trust Bowser and DCPS to find a way to integrate students on what sounds to be a pretty short term basis. My concerns go both ways, for the existing students in an already over crowded school and for the poor children already suffering in difficult conditions and being asked to start fresh multiple times in one school year. Any thoughts?

+ Wilson is already beyond its limits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

However, we're still talking about 2 different things. Family shelters are different than the services you're concerned about. As I mentioned yesterday, the family shelters that are already in my neighborhood look like apartment buildings. What we are talking about is building an apartment community that has wraparound services for them and their kids - it's just that they don't have to pay for it because they are homeless. If the mayor just built it and didn't tell you, you probably wouldn't even notice any difference in neighborhood experience as a result of the shelter itself.

I also don't think it's fair to suggest that the behavior of high school students is relevant to this issue. You are conflating 3 different issues which are more or less unrelated: the behavior of homeless adults, the housing of homeless families, and the behavior of high school students.

But the problem is, the location in Ward 3 is not zoned for the kind of building and density that is being proposed. So in fact, we would notice--because we all purchased our homes with the knowledge that a large apartment building, with all the nuisances that that brings, would never go up on that property. I have absolutely no problem with a shelter going in at that address. But I have a major problem with the size. That is zoned for about 4 to 8 families, tops. Not 36.

You guys in Ward 3 aren't even remotely suffering as badly from the density explosion happening to us in Ward 6. But even so, we'd notice 50 new families for sure. The people-density increase and activity increase has been noticeable and dramatic with each new set of housing units to come online around here.

I hear you and am sorry to see it happen. Which is precisely why our elected council member should be doing her part to protect her ward. Bring on the shelters for homeless families--all the homeless. It's impossible not to want this, especially as these bitter cold temperatures approach. But deliver shelter across northwest. Not in a high-density apartment building which will only stress the local infrastructure beyond what it was zoned for. Oh, but then the developer won't profit from his new purchase.

Which infrastructure will be stressed?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can those who were at the ward 3 meeting describe how concerns about accommodating children at stoddert were addressed? I'm one of those welcoming glover parkers but I don't know if I trust Bowser and DCPS to find a way to integrate students on what sounds to be a pretty short term basis. My concerns go both ways, for the existing students in an already over crowded school and for the poor children already suffering in difficult conditions and being asked to start fresh multiple times in one school year. Any thoughts?

+ Wilson is already beyond its limits.

Yes, a handful of high-school age kids from the shelter will irreparably damage Wilson. SMH. Then again they would have the right to remain at their school of origin with their friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:This seems like a great plan and I commend the Bowser administration for it.

Clearly, you don't live near one of these sites.

No, though I think my neighborhood would be a great location for such a shelter and I would welcome it (can't speak for my neighbors though). We do have other group homes for various disadvantaged groups.

I live about two blocks from the 5500 5th street proposed site and I think it's a great idea. Deconcentrates the families from DC general and spreads resources into all wards with access to better transportation (and, thus, improves the chances to get employment) and better schools for the kids. The nimbyism that this is causing is terrifying.

One thing that I would like to see is homeless families getting access to lottery-only schools/programs in the area. For example, mandate that 3 &4 year olds staying in the shelters get to attend the local public school or a convenient charter. Not sure if that would draw widespread ire from those families that might already be on a waitlist, but it seems like an efficient use of government resources.

I'm too lazy to Google but DCPS policy permits homeless students to attend the inbound school for the shelter. This is the reason so many at DC General attend Payne. This may be mandated by the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act.

Yes, federal law trumps all. Per McKinney-Vento, homeless students can attend the neghborhood school (by the shelter) or their school of origin (former school). Transportation must be provided along with other supports. The naehcy site spells out all the protections for homeless students.

I think that only applies to grades k-12 and non-charter schools. I'm talking about the ece programs at inbounds schools and allowing kids to go to charter schools in the area.