New homeless shelters and impacted schools

[Anonymous]

I think OP asks a very legit question. The council has definitely improved upon Bowser's initial proposal. But still thoughtful questions remain. What types of wrap around services will these children receive, in and out of school? Can affected schools receive specific accommodations (an extra counselor, some level of additional resources, etc) to provide support? Will there be resources to pay for things like aftercare or before care at schools? If these are 120 day shelters, and families are moved again, will kids be cycled in and out of schools? (yes, understanding the federal law at play here, but how can we serve kids in a way that provides stability to them?) Etc. Those are the nitty gritty that still need to be worked out.

[Anonymous]

I agree DCPS needs to plan for how to provide service to all students in the schools. Many schools in the higher SES neighborhoods do not even have a full time social worker or psychologist, let alone a counselor who has an 800 student caseload. That will not be adequate to serve the needs of all. Lets not drop kinds into an environment that is not prepared to serve their needs. Let get the staff and services in place first.

[Anonymous]

Any updates here?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any updates here?

Here's a DC City Paper update:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/city-desk/blog/20781274/councils-revised-dc-general-plan-raises-familiar-questions-about-process

We're still left to wonder how Bowser thought she could get away with a $160 million windfall to her campaign contributors, what with the "expedited" approval process and zero notice to the communities of the addresses she expected to push through the DC Council. You have to think she THOUGHT she could get away with it, what with the "F-Bomb" she dropped on Mendelson in the Council's public hallway. I have to admit I can't figure her out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any updates here?

Here's a DC City Paper update:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/city-desk/blog/20781274/councils-revised-dc-general-plan-raises-familiar-questions-about-process

We're still left to wonder how Bowser thought she could get away with a $160 million windfall to her campaign contributors, what with the "expedited" approval process and zero notice to the communities of the addresses she expected to push through the DC Council. You have to think she THOUGHT she could get away with it, what with the "F-Bomb" she dropped on Mendelson in the Council's public hallway. I have to admit I can't figure her out.

What a Mayor mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The financials of the Bowser's plan were laughable and amateurish. Bowser's team was counting on hysterical and anti-inclusion backlashes from the identified communities especially in NW, in order to switch the stage from math to a political duel (NW versus SE). Nothing of this happened, communities, ANC Commissioners and Council members all stayed very cool, defending the inclusion principle but rejecting the financial projections and the plan of building public facilities on private leased properties (with leasing prices agreed at several orders of magnitude above market prices...especially for Ward 3).

Bowser's plan sucked, would have generated a 30+ year damage to the District finances, and a misuse of public resources to return political favors.

Voters are not impressed with Bowsers' hysterical yells at Mendelson , while trying to transfer on the Council the responsibility of any delays in the closing of DC General.

She and her team are revealing themselves for what they are..... Citizens, communities, ANC members and Council members have given them a lesson of civil sense, integration and solidarity values, transparency and good governance principles.

Same is happening in this forums. A handful of contributors trying to light a fire, with community members replying with facts and solid arguments about the inadequacy of the plan (thanks Glover Park poster with kids above Stoddert age).

Bowser's plan was a joke, on that I agree. However, I am not giving credit to affected communities just yet. These people are expert, world class level NIMBYs. No longer do they stand in the street with placards reading, "Keep X out of my town". No, they state that they are "for inclusion" while simultaneously opposing every practical method to actually implement the shelter plan in reality. Watch as the Council's plan gets put through the ringer and ground down to nothing that could possibly be effective for homeless families.

DC General will still be open five years from now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The financials of the Bowser's plan were laughable and amateurish. Bowser's team was counting on hysterical and anti-inclusion backlashes from the identified communities especially in NW, in order to switch the stage from math to a political duel (NW versus SE). Nothing of this happened, communities, ANC Commissioners and Council members all stayed very cool, defending the inclusion principle but rejecting the financial projections and the plan of building public facilities on private leased properties (with leasing prices agreed at several orders of magnitude above market prices...especially for Ward 3).

Bowser's plan sucked, would have generated a 30+ year damage to the District finances, and a misuse of public resources to return political favors.

Voters are not impressed with Bowsers' hysterical yells at Mendelson , while trying to transfer on the Council the responsibility of any delays in the closing of DC General.

She and her team are revealing themselves for what they are..... Citizens, communities, ANC members and Council members have given them a lesson of civil sense, integration and solidarity values, transparency and good governance principles.

Same is happening in this forums. A handful of contributors trying to light a fire, with community members replying with facts and solid arguments about the inadequacy of the plan (thanks Glover Park poster with kids above Stoddert age).

Bowser's plan was a joke, on that I agree. However, I am not giving credit to affected communities just yet. These people are expert, world class level NIMBYs. No longer do they stand in the street with placards reading, "Keep X out of my town". No, they state that they are "for inclusion" while simultaneously opposing every practical method to actually implement the shelter plan in reality. Watch as the Council's plan gets put through the ringer and ground down to nothing that could possibly be effective for homeless families.

DC General will still be open five years from now.

Your accusation of "NIMBYism" is not shown by current news stories about the new sites chosen by the DC Council. As stated by the DC City Paper, the Ward 6 location is only causing concern there because, as before, the community was not given notice of the location. But they're not crying foul about it now, until they learn more. Neither are any of the other Wards expressing any kind of concern. So, I think you need to check your disapproval of these communities until they try to change the new sites. IMO, they were all really mad at Bowser for her original plans, not the Council's new one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any updates here?

The Council's revised plan just passed the Council's 2nd vote with Bowser's support. Bowser issues a press release saying that the plan is complete, everyone will move on from the debate and focus on execution. Changes to the previous version are to move the Ward 6 shelter to 850 Delaware Ave SW (200 K St NW was being considered), and to finalize the Ward 5 shelter at 1700 Rhode Island Ave NE (326 R St NE was being considered). The final sites will be:

10th/V St. NW- Ward 1
2nd District Police Station (3320 Idaho Ave NW) - Ward 3
5th and Kennedy NW- Ward 4
MPD building on 1700 block of Rhode Island Ave NE- Ward 5
850 Delaware Avenue SW- Ward 6
5004 D Street SE- Ward 7
6th/Chesapeake SE- Ward 8

Ward 2 has the new women's shelter which is coming online shortly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The financials of the Bowser's plan were laughable and amateurish. Bowser's team was counting on hysterical and anti-inclusion backlashes from the identified communities especially in NW, in order to switch the stage from math to a political duel (NW versus SE). Nothing of this happened, communities, ANC Commissioners and Council members all stayed very cool, defending the inclusion principle but rejecting the financial projections and the plan of building public facilities on private leased properties (with leasing prices agreed at several orders of magnitude above market prices...especially for Ward 3).

Bowser's plan sucked, would have generated a 30+ year damage to the District finances, and a misuse of public resources to return political favors.

Voters are not impressed with Bowsers' hysterical yells at Mendelson , while trying to transfer on the Council the responsibility of any delays in the closing of DC General.

She and her team are revealing themselves for what they are..... Citizens, communities, ANC members and Council members have given them a lesson of civil sense, integration and solidarity values, transparency and good governance principles.

Same is happening in this forums. A handful of contributors trying to light a fire, with community members replying with facts and solid arguments about the inadequacy of the plan (thanks Glover Park poster with kids above Stoddert age).

Bowser's plan was a joke, on that I agree. However, I am not giving credit to affected communities just yet. These people are expert, world class level NIMBYs. No longer do they stand in the street with placards reading, "Keep X out of my town". No, they state that they are "for inclusion" while simultaneously opposing every practical method to actually implement the shelter plan in reality. Watch as the Council's plan gets put through the ringer and ground down to nothing that could possibly be effective for homeless families.

DC General will still be open five years from now.

Your accusation of "NIMBYism" is not shown by current news stories about the new sites chosen by the DC Council. As stated by the DC City Paper, the Ward 6 location is only causing concern there because, as before, the community was not given notice of the location. But they're not crying foul about it now, until they learn more. Neither are any of the other Wards expressing any kind of concern. So, I think you need to check your disapproval of these communities until they try to change the new sites. IMO, they were all really mad at Bowser for her original plans, not the Council's new one.

I'll believe it when they begin laying the foundations and not a second before.

[Anonymous]

These kids have been dealt a bad hand in life. But I seriously wonder if air dropping them into a high achieving, high SES school is in their best interest. Without the right support I think they will be traumatized. I know I would be. Let's not further victimize them in order to score political points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These kids have been dealt a bad hand in life. But I seriously wonder if air dropping them into a high achieving, high SES school is in their best interest. Without the right support I think they will be traumatized. I know I would be. Let's not further victimize them in order to score political points.

Aaaaagh, this site is so infested with trolls it's ridiculous. Call Orkin.

[Anonymous]

Latest report:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/news/city-desk/blog/20781446/dc-council-unanimously-passes-revised-homeless-shelter-plan

"There were folks saying behind the scenes that 2018 was unlikely" as a target date for closing D.C. General through the Council's plan, Mendelson said. "I think that with determination, it’s possible that the replacement shelters can be all up and running by the end of 2018... I’m hopeful that because the mayor has claimed this as a top priority, that the city administration will be on top of the costs to catch [any construction or development] overruns before they occur."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any updates here?

The Council's revised plan just passed the Council's 2nd vote with Bowser's support. Bowser issues a press release saying that the plan is complete, everyone will move on from the debate and focus on execution. Changes to the previous version are to move the Ward 6 shelter to 850 Delaware Ave SW (200 K St NW was being considered), and to finalize the Ward 5 shelter at 1700 Rhode Island Ave NE (326 R St NE was being considered). The final sites will be:

10th/V St. NW- Ward 1
2nd District Police Station (3320 Idaho Ave NW) - Ward 3
5th and Kennedy NW- Ward 4
MPD building on 1700 block of Rhode Island Ave NE- Ward 5
850 Delaware Avenue SW- Ward 6
5004 D Street SE- Ward 7
6th/Chesapeake SE- Ward 8

Ward 2 has the new women's shelter which is coming online shortly.

Ward 6....what a mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any updates here?

The Council's revised plan just passed the Council's 2nd vote with Bowser's support. Bowser issues a press release saying that the plan is complete, everyone will move on from the debate and focus on execution. Changes to the previous version are to move the Ward 6 shelter to 850 Delaware Ave SW (200 K St NW was being considered), and to finalize the Ward 5 shelter at 1700 Rhode Island Ave NE (326 R St NE was being considered). The final sites will be:

10th/V St. NW- Ward 1
2nd District Police Station (3320 Idaho Ave NW) - Ward 3
5th and Kennedy NW- Ward 4
MPD building on 1700 block of Rhode Island Ave NE- Ward 5
850 Delaware Avenue SW- Ward 6
5004 D Street SE- Ward 7
6th/Chesapeake SE- Ward 8

Ward 2 has the new women's shelter which is coming online shortly.

Ward 6....what a mess.

The whole thing is a mess.

I didn't support "moody" Catania, thinking that Bowser would at the very least be a competent planner and manager.

What a mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:40% of the children at DC General are under age 2 (as in, age 0 or 1). When you consider the kids who are 2, or 3 but missed the deadline, most kids won't be going to any DCPS or charter school.

Of those that will, they'll be all different ages. Some will want to stay at their current school, some will already be enrolled at the IB school where their shelter is located, and some will enroll as new IB students at the school. But no grade or school is going to get a large influx of homeless children. And if families who enrolled at their new IB school move out of shelter, their kids can finish the school year there, and return at principal's discretion (same as kids who move OOB for other reasons).

None of it sounds unreasonable or too daunting to me. Most schools already have a number of homeless children. The ones that don't certainly have the fundraising and volunteer capacity to provide adequate services to the few kids who would attend.

That's a great stat....but 48% of the kids at DC general are elementary school aged. This will have a very large impact on the elementary schools....