Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain the opposition?

NIMBY.

Anonymous wrote:I am opposed to Trumps immigration plans, but these kids are here unaccompanied. I work in trafficking and under the law that means without a legal guardian or parent- so a narrow definition. They can’t just be released into the country. Some of these kids are young. They need somewhere to go while a family member is located. I don’t want them with ICE they need to be in shelters. Where should these kids go?

Do you know that they arrived unaccompanied or, more likely, they were stolen from the parents that they arrived with? Surely they can be placed with family members instead of in a child jail?

Anonymous wrote:" Surely it doesn’t matter. The kids need a place to go. "

They need to go home, be it ever so humble. They do not belong here.

Well, most Democrat voters disagree with you. So, if we’re not sending them home and don’t want to keep them in cages at the border, they need a shelter to stay safe. Bring them to DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like the PP, I assumed the push back was because DC would not have control of how the shelter is run, the conditions, etc. and wouldn't want to welcome abuse of children into its city.

These facilities would be regulated by DC. The hypocrisy DC is showing is absurd. The kids don’t magically disappear if DC refuses to oversee a shelter here. If DC really wants to prevent abuse they would make sure these are run like a tight ship and the children are protected. This is a NIMBY issue instead of a real concern for child welfare.

DC would have no control over the running of the shelters.

I believe that any private contractor would have to comply with DC regs, only direct federal employees on federal property would be exempt. But the point remains ut hat there is NO outside space, no parking, it's unsuitable even if DC was in favor of it

There are lots of shelters that are not ‘suitable’. Likely this is better than having the kids kept in cages, at least.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like the PP, I assumed the push back was because DC would not have control of how the shelter is run, the conditions, etc. and wouldn't want to welcome abuse of children into its city.

These facilities would be regulated by DC. The hypocrisy DC is showing is absurd. The kids don’t magically disappear if DC refuses to oversee a shelter here. If DC really wants to prevent abuse they would make sure these are run like a tight ship and the children are protected. This is a NIMBY issue instead of a real concern for child welfare.

DC would have no control over the running of the shelters.

I believe that any private contractor would have to comply with DC regs, only direct federal employees on federal property would be exempt. But the point remains ut hat there is NO outside space, no parking, it's unsuitable even if DC was in favor of it

" Surely it doesn’t matter. The kids need a place to go. "

They need to go home, be it ever so humble. They do not belong here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like the PP, I assumed the push back was because DC would not have control of how the shelter is run, the conditions, etc. and wouldn't want to welcome abuse of children into its city.

These facilities would be regulated by DC. The hypocrisy DC is showing is absurd. The kids don’t magically disappear if DC refuses to oversee a shelter here. If DC really wants to prevent abuse they would make sure these are run like a tight ship and the children are protected. This is a NIMBY issue instead of a real concern for child welfare.

DC would have no control over the running of the shelters.

DC can negotiate a deal. DC gets control of the shelter if it gets approved.

This is an awesome opportunity to show Trump how it’s done.

That's not how it works.

Why not?

DC is a staunchly Democratic jurisdiction. Voters despise Trump and support illegal immigrants.

Offer to fund and control this shelter in exchange for approving zoning. Take good care of the kids and welcome them. The other option is Trump gets to keep them in cages at the border.

What seems like the better option? Simply criticizing Trump for everything doesn’t help the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The proposed site is on the corner of Laurel street, across from where they hold the Farmer's market. There's no playground, no parking, nothing!
Surely can't be zoned for that!

WAMU reporter on Twitter cites Board of zoning saying that indeed, the site would need to be rezoned for that kind of purpose. The city council and mayor are all stronlgy against this. I just worry that somehow Congress can bigfoot it and force it there.

The pressure is ramping up on Douglas Development, that owns the building in question to terminate the lease/planned lease.

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1161808665172688897?s=20

Can someone please explain why there is so much push back against this? What is the issue?

It is a prison for children who have done nothing wrong. We should not be tearing them from their families and keeping them in cages.

Where do you want the kids to go?? The parents did something wrong when they crossed the border illegally. Whether you agree or not, the kids need somewhere safe to go. Would you rather Trump is in charge of them or Bowser?

Prison is not a safe place for kids. They belong with their families instead of getting raped by an ICE agent.

ICE isn’t running this.

Also, DC can ask for control. With some oversight. Works great for everyone. You can guarantee that the kids are safe from ICE.

There is no reason for DC to oppose this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The proposed site is on the corner of Laurel street, across from where they hold the Farmer's market. There's no playground, no parking, nothing!
Surely can't be zoned for that!

WAMU reporter on Twitter cites Board of zoning saying that indeed, the site would need to be rezoned for that kind of purpose. The city council and mayor are all stronlgy against this. I just worry that somehow Congress can bigfoot it and force it there.

The pressure is ramping up on Douglas Development, that owns the building in question to terminate the lease/planned lease.

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1161808665172688897?s=20

Can someone please explain why there is so much push back against this? What is the issue?

It is a prison for children who have done nothing wrong. We should not be tearing them from their families and keeping them in cages.

Where do you want the kids to go?? The parents did something wrong when they crossed the border illegally. Whether you agree or not, the kids need somewhere safe to go. Would you rather Trump is in charge of them or Bowser?

Prison is not a safe place for kids. They belong with their families instead of getting raped by an ICE agent.

Please educate yourself. These shelters are not run by ICE. These shelters get the kids out of ICE custody.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The proposed site is on the corner of Laurel street, across from where they hold the Farmer's market. There's no playground, no parking, nothing!
Surely can't be zoned for that!

WAMU reporter on Twitter cites Board of zoning saying that indeed, the site would need to be rezoned for that kind of purpose. The city council and mayor are all stronlgy against this. I just worry that somehow Congress can bigfoot it and force it there.

The pressure is ramping up on Douglas Development, that owns the building in question to terminate the lease/planned lease.

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1161808665172688897?s=20

Can someone please explain why there is so much push back against this? What is the issue?

It is a prison for children who have done nothing wrong. We should not be tearing them from their families and keeping them in cages.

You’re right. That’s the point. Instead of keeping the kids in cages, they will be placed in a shelter with professionals who are knowledgeable about kids. Isn’t that better?

In theory, we shouldn’t have to deal with millions of illegal immigrants crossing the border. But we have welcomed them into the country with the promise of free education, free healthcare and free meals. Now it is our responsibility to provide that for the kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The proposed site is on the corner of Laurel street, across from where they hold the Farmer's market. There's no playground, no parking, nothing!
Surely can't be zoned for that!

WAMU reporter on Twitter cites Board of zoning saying that indeed, the site would need to be rezoned for that kind of purpose. The city council and mayor are all stronlgy against this. I just worry that somehow Congress can bigfoot it and force it there.

The pressure is ramping up on Douglas Development, that owns the building in question to terminate the lease/planned lease.

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1161808665172688897?s=20

Can someone please explain why there is so much push back against this? What is the issue?

It is a prison for children who have done nothing wrong. We should not be tearing them from their families and keeping them in cages.

Where do you want the kids to go?? The parents did something wrong when they crossed the border illegally. Whether you agree or not, the kids need somewhere safe to go. Would you rather Trump is in charge of them or Bowser?

Prison is not a safe place for kids. They belong with their families instead of getting raped by an ICE agent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like the PP, I assumed the push back was because DC would not have control of how the shelter is run, the conditions, etc. and wouldn't want to welcome abuse of children into its city.

These facilities would be regulated by DC. The hypocrisy DC is showing is absurd. The kids don’t magically disappear if DC refuses to oversee a shelter here. If DC really wants to prevent abuse they would make sure these are run like a tight ship and the children are protected. This is a NIMBY issue instead of a real concern for child welfare.

DC would have no control over the running of the shelters.

DC can negotiate a deal. DC gets control of the shelter if it gets approved.

This is an awesome opportunity to show Trump how it’s done.

That's not how it works.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Like the PP, I assumed the push back was because DC would not have control of how the shelter is run, the conditions, etc. and wouldn't want to welcome abuse of children into its city.

These facilities would be regulated by DC. The hypocrisy DC is showing is absurd. The kids don’t magically disappear if DC refuses to oversee a shelter here. If DC really wants to prevent abuse they would make sure these are run like a tight ship and the children are protected. This is a NIMBY issue instead of a real concern for child welfare.

DC would have no control over the running of the shelters.

DC can negotiate a deal. DC gets control of the shelter if it gets approved.

This is an awesome opportunity to show Trump how it’s done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The proposed site is on the corner of Laurel street, across from where they hold the Farmer's market. There's no playground, no parking, nothing!
Surely can't be zoned for that!

WAMU reporter on Twitter cites Board of zoning saying that indeed, the site would need to be rezoned for that kind of purpose. The city council and mayor are all stronlgy against this. I just worry that somehow Congress can bigfoot it and force it there.

The pressure is ramping up on Douglas Development, that owns the building in question to terminate the lease/planned lease.

https://twitter.com/maustermuhle/status/1161808665172688897?s=20

Can someone please explain why there is so much push back against this? What is the issue?

It is a prison for children who have done nothing wrong. We should not be tearing them from their families and keeping them in cages.

Where do you want the kids to go?? The parents did something wrong when they crossed the border illegally. Whether you agree or not, the kids need somewhere safe to go. Would you rather Trump is in charge of them or Bowser?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain the opposition?

No one wants an influx of poorly educated children concentrating in their neighborhood schools once they are released. No one wants to say it but they take up a lot of resources and it's well known that the sponsors they're going to are concentrated in certain areas.

This is not it. The zoned schools are already Title I, heavily populated with children of low-income immigrants.

IMO, DC doesn’t want to be a part of the abuse of children- and much of what we have learned from these facilities is that they are not well-run and are abusive for the children. We do not trust the Trump administration on treating immigrants humanely.

Then DC should welcome this.

DC can run the shelter and ensure there is no abuse if the kids. If you don’t trust the federal government, then this is the perfect opportunity for the DC community to step in. Show Trump how it’s done.

What is the other option for the kids? Send them back? Keep them at the border forever?