New Ward 3 Homeless Families Shelter Site

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Why would we trust them to build 8 more shelters when they couldn't fix and run the one they had? Seems a stretch to me.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Why would we trust them to build 8 more shelters when they couldn't fix and run the one they had? Seems a stretch to me.

X5000000

I have seen nothing to suggest that DC will be better equipped to manage 8 new decentralized shelters, I can easily see most of these shelters descending to **** after a few years like what happened with DC General.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why would we trust them to build 8 more shelters when they couldn't fix and run the one they had? Seems a stretch to me.

I have seen nothing to suggest that DC will be better equipped to manage 8 new decentralized shelters, I can easily see most of these shelters descending to **** after a few years like what happened with DC General.

PP from 9:34. I agree DC has a poor track record, and likely will not manage these shelters well. Because they're smaller, they won't seem as bad as DC General though. Spreading the mismanagement and blight out will allow Bowser & Co. to make it seem less horrible.

For that reason, I think it's important that neighbors push hard to put some teeth in the "Good Neighbor Agreements" that DC claims it will create for each site. I recall reading a sample Good Neighbor Agreement at one point, and it had some real terms that prohibited drug/alcohol use; prohibited litter, late-night guests, etc; and allowed residents to be removed quickly for any violations of the rules.

These Good Neighbor Agreements are important for all the neighborhoods that are hosting these shelters, because they are the documents that will allow problem residents to be removed. No matter what neighborhood you're in, push hard for a clear Good Neighbor Agreement! Shelter residents who follow the rules will be positive additions to our neighborhoods, but it's important to have a clear path to remove those that cause problems and break rules.

https://dmhhs.dc.gov/homewarddc
https://dmhhs.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dmhhs/publication/attachments/Meeting%20Minutes%20Ward%204%20STFH%20AT%20Meeting_4.06.17.pdf

Sample good neighbor agreements:
http://www.boulderhousing.org/sites/default/files/Bud%20Clark%20Commons%20GNA%20final.pdf
https://www.transformyakima.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/TransformYakimaTogether-HomelessShelterPlan.pdf
http://www.directionshome.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Appendix-F-2_Lawrence-Kansas-Shelter-Good-Neighbor-Agreements.pdf
https://www.quesnel.ca/sites/default/files/docs/our-community/elliott_street_gna_final.pdf
http://www.44thward.org/site/files/1026/121701/410209/688595/BYC_Agreement.pdf
http://www.ymcacolumbus.org/pdf/Good-Neighbor-Agreement-v5.pdf

Topics the GNA should cover:
- maximum occupancy of shelter
- guidelines for how shelter residents and neighbors will act together to benefit the neighborhood
- clear rules of conduct for shelter residents
- security issues
- regular reports (monthly) to the neighborhood
- regular meetings (quarterly) with the neighborhood to address any issues
- sex offender issues
- removal of rule violators from shelter
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Why would we trust them to build 8 more shelters when they couldn't fix and run the one they had? Seems a stretch to me.

X5000000

I have seen nothing to suggest that DC will be better equipped to manage 8 new decentralized shelters, I can easily see most of these shelters descending to **** after a few years like what happened with DC General.


Maybe that's the point. With shelters spread out in various Wards the community will be more attuned to their condition and will be more apt to make their voices heard to prevent them from descending to **** after a few years, unlike DC General which was basically "out of sight out of mind" since it and everything else in SE is subject to neglect and apathy.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


Oh geez another Ward 3 snowflake.

There won't be hordes of homeless over-running McLean Gardens because there is a family homeless shelter a couple of blocks away.

And it is a win for the entire city when new housing gets built. And bonus for Ward 3 (which always fights new housing) in this case the new housing is on the other side of town so McLean Gardens residents won't need to worry about rubbing shoulders with any newcomers.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


+1 billion
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Why would we trust them to build 8 more shelters when they couldn't fix and run the one they had? Seems a stretch to me.

I have seen nothing to suggest that DC will be better equipped to manage 8 new decentralized shelters, I can easily see most of these shelters descending to **** after a few years like what happened with DC General.

PP from 9:34. I agree DC has a poor track record, and likely will not manage these shelters well. Because they're smaller, they won't seem as bad as DC General though. Spreading the mismanagement and blight out will allow Bowser & Co. to make it seem less horrible.

For that reason, I think it's important that neighbors push hard to put some teeth in the "Good Neighbor Agreements" that DC claims it will create for each site. I recall reading a sample Good Neighbor Agreement at one point, and it had some real terms that prohibited drug/alcohol use; prohibited litter, late-night guests, etc; and allowed residents to be removed quickly for any violations of the rules.

These Good Neighbor Agreements are important for all the neighborhoods that are hosting these shelters, because they are the documents that will allow problem residents to be removed. No matter what neighborhood you're in, push hard for a clear Good Neighbor Agreement! Shelter residents who follow the rules will be positive additions to our neighborhoods, but it's important to have a clear path to remove those that cause problems and break rules.

https://dmhhs.dc.gov/homewarddc
https://dmhhs.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dmhhs/publication/attachments/Meeting%20Minutes%20Ward%204%20STFH%20AT%20Meeting_4.06.17.pdf

Sample good neighbor agreements:
http://www.boulderhousing.org/sites/default/files/Bud%20Clark%20Commons%20GNA%20final.pdf
https://www.transformyakima.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/TransformYakimaTogether-HomelessShelterPlan.pdf
http://www.directionshome.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Appendix-F-2_Lawrence-Kansas-Shelter-Good-Neighbor-Agreements.pdf
https://www.quesnel.ca/sites/default/files/docs/our-community/elliott_street_gna_final.pdf
http://www.44thward.org/site/files/1026/121701/410209/688595/BYC_Agreement.pdf
http://www.ymcacolumbus.org/pdf/Good-Neighbor-Agreement-v5.pdf

Topics the GNA should cover:
- maximum occupancy of shelter
- guidelines for how shelter residents and neighbors will act together to benefit the neighborhood
- clear rules of conduct for shelter residents
- security issues
- regular reports (monthly) to the neighborhood
- regular meetings (quarterly) with the neighborhood to address any issues
- sex offender issues
- removal of rule violators from shelter


While I would LOVE to see something like this, I doubt the city is going to make it easy to remove problem children from these shelters. "MPD is right there, so there shouldn't be any problems!" -some may say, but I sincerely doubt they're going to have the resources to monitor the shelters 24/7.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


Oh geez another Ward 3 snowflake.

There won't be hordes of homeless over-running McLean Gardens because there is a family homeless shelter a couple of blocks away.

And it is a win for the entire city when new housing gets built. And bonus for Ward 3 (which always fights new housing) in this case the new housing is on the other side of town so McLean Gardens residents won't need to worry about rubbing shoulders with any newcomers.


How close do you live to a shelter, moron? Easy to ride your high horse when someone else saddles it.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


Oh geez another Ward 3 snowflake.

There won't be hordes of homeless over-running McLean Gardens because there is a family homeless shelter a couple of blocks away.

And it is a win for the entire city when new housing gets built. And bonus for Ward 3 (which always fights new housing) in this case the new housing is on the other side of town so McLean Gardens residents won't need to worry about rubbing shoulders with any newcomers.


How close do you live to a shelter, moron? Easy to ride your high horse when someone else saddles it.


I've lived in neighborhoods in DC you would be too terrified to even get out of your car in.

The impact of homeless shelters on surrounding communities has been studied in great depth and there is lots of credible scholarship that they have no negative impact on surrounding communities.

BTW no doubt you are aware that there are other entities serving the homeless in Ward 3 - do you need me to list them for you?

I live around the corner from one that serves the long term homeless, dozens of whom visit every day and they aren't being escorted in police cars or monitored and we've never had a problem.

So yeah I am walking the walk on this one while you cower in fear and ignorance in McLean Gardens and post ignorant screeds on DCUM.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


Cathedral commons did a very nice job of creating a small and likeable dining/shopping district. The wide sidewalks and good upkeep and good restaurants attract many. I think their investment should be protected as well. The residents of the shelter should have a work or study requirement. The children shod be in school. Is there a designated play and study area for them after? In that way they will be good neighbors. Functioning like other nearby families - in work or in school as most are. Where do they cook their evening meal? Is there a lounge or evening living space? The sidewalk of Cathedral Commons should not be expected to provide that.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


Cathedral commons did a very nice job of creating a small and likeable dining/shopping district. The wide sidewalks and good upkeep and good restaurants attract many. I think their investment should be protected as well. The residents of the shelter should have a work or study requirement. The children shod be in school. Is there a designated play and study area for them after? In that way they will be good neighbors. Functioning like other nearby families - in work or in school as most are. Where do they cook their evening meal? Is there a lounge or evening living space? The sidewalk of Cathedral Commons should not be expected to provide that.


You don't seem to know much about poverty, the population this shelter is intended for or the homeless in general and are mostly dropping ignorant right wing talking points.

Hopefully you are aware there are two types of homeless - long term and short term - and one of the smartest things a jurisdiction can do is keep the latter group from transitioning to the former?

Hopefully you are also aware that many people who are homeless are not mentally ill and in fact work full time? And many homeless are not criminals or a threat to the community?

Rather than post fear based conservative generalizations on DCUM maybe you should spend some time reading about homelessness and its myriad costs?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:You realize that Bowser's main impetus to close DC General isn't to enhance services for homeless families? (The mayor has yet to explain how DC will deliver services more capably and efficiently on a vasty decentralized basis when it was incapable of delivering them in one principal location.) No, the main reason, dear readers, is that Bowser's developer cronies want to redevelop the DC General property for upscale housing and mixed-use.


And why is that necessarily a bad thing? It is a big piece of under utilized property that hosted a poorly functioning shelter. Fix the shelter and redevelop the property - seems like a win win to me?


Win for the cronies and perhaps a win for the mayor whose nest they feather. Perhaps not such a win-win for homeowners in McLean Gardens and Idaho Ave. Whether it's a win for the homeless depends on how well DC scales poor services that it couldn't deliver in one location to eight separate locations.


Oh geez another Ward 3 snowflake.

There won't be hordes of homeless over-running McLean Gardens because there is a family homeless shelter a couple of blocks away.

And it is a win for the entire city when new housing gets built. And bonus for Ward 3 (which always fights new housing) in this case the new housing is on the other side of town so McLean Gardens residents won't need to worry about rubbing shoulders with any newcomers.


How close do you live to a shelter, moron? Easy to ride your high horse when someone else saddles it.


I've lived in neighborhoods in DC you would be too terrified to even get out of your car in.

The impact of homeless shelters on surrounding communities has been studied in great depth and there is lots of credible scholarship that they have no negative impact on surrounding communities.

BTW no doubt you are aware that there are other entities serving the homeless in Ward 3 - do you need me to list them for you?

I live around the corner from one that serves the long term homeless, dozens of whom visit every day and they aren't being escorted in police cars or monitored and we've never had a problem.

So yeah I am walking the walk on this one while you cower in fear and ignorance in McLean Gardens and post ignorant screeds on DCUM.


I find the long term homeless your shelter serves a real nuisance. If they were in your shelter it would be one thing. The ones. In the bus shelter who smell so horribly, the ones lying in the bushes who one worries are dead (I've called police a few times to wellness check), people shouting. Obscenities or threats on the top of their lungs... Please please don't glorify the existence or presence of long term homeless. These are people with deep and often frightening substance of mental health issues, such as schizophrenia. They should be in a state of the heart facility providing care. Would you sit in 8 blankets in DC summer? How. Many simultaneous health issues do you think they suffer at once? If the council actually cared about them they would have revamped DC general and. Updated involuntary commitment laws and services. Instead theyive incredibly uncomfortable lives eating thrown away food. And eking out a terrible existence by visiting service stations like yours. I never give money to the. Homeless. I pay taxes and the city should spend those dollars far more thoughtfully.
Anonymous
And sorry, typing on my phone. I don't question your kind intentions. I question that they are really helping. I think the homeless need far more. Intervention and support than simply being spread around. And I think it shod be acknowledged that they exhibit many nuisance behaviors that are hard on neighbors. These are very dysfunctional humans who need serious help, not cite strays that it's fun to feed.
post reply Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics
Message Quick Reply
Go to: