Anonymous wrote:I live near the proposed location on Idaho and we and are neighbors are all on the phones with our realtors. It's great to talk about the theory of why this is good for diversity purposes and to aid the homeless, but when you have a front row seat, it's not so great. Promise property values down by 10% in immediately surrounding areas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I live near the proposed location on Idaho and we and are neighbors are all on the phones with our realtors. It's great to talk about the theory of why this is good for diversity purposes and to aid the homeless, but when you have a front row seat, it's not so great. Promise property values down by 10% in immediately surrounding areas.

The best part about watching real estate values skyrocket all over town is reading petulant homeowners threaten to "take their ball and go home" over one issue or another. School boundaries, Ward redistricting, and now this.

Please go! And post your MRIS number, I'm always looking to pick up homes at a discount.

Anonymous wrote:I live near the proposed location on Idaho and we and are neighbors are all on the phones with our realtors. It's great to talk about the theory of why this is good for diversity purposes and to aid the homeless, but when you have a front row seat, it's not so great. Promise property values down by 10% in immediately surrounding areas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that the proposal doesn't actually fix anything. It's like putting a bandaid on a broken leg. The people applying the bandaid will pat themselves on the back for doing something even though they didn't actually do anything to solve the problem. But someone made money selling bandaids and I guess that's all that matters?

Council needs to slam the brakes on. Council needs to look at DC's social services and look there first. There are reasons why DC General got as horrifically bad as it did and Council needs to look into that and solve that BEFORE just going ahead and replicating DC General in smaller form across 8 wards.

Why the urgency? If it's because there's a deadline because of deals already made, that's too bad, they are deals that should not have been made.

The scary part is that the same people who brought us DC general are bringing us this. If you hated DC General you are really going to hate this shelter plan. Btw, has anyone figured out how much the local scum bag Doug Jamal is going to make of this shelter deal?

Anonymous wrote:And our next meeting should be how to field a serious independent, libertarian or Republican candidate for ward 3. It's time for Mary Cheh to go. She does not fight hard enough for the issues that affect her constituents - rising crime, transport/parking woes- she may be making these worse, this plan, schools. She spends too much time on her pet projects. I have respect for her, I think she's consistent, but she does not consistently represent me which is what I need in a local councilmember.

Anonymous wrote:I live near the proposed location on Idaho and we and are neighbors are all on the phones with our realtors. It's great to talk about the theory of why this is good for diversity purposes and to aid the homeless, but when you have a front row seat, it's not so great. Promise property values down by 10% in immediately surrounding areas.

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that the proposal doesn't actually fix anything. It's like putting a bandaid on a broken leg. The people applying the bandaid will pat themselves on the back for doing something even though they didn't actually do anything to solve the problem. But someone made money selling bandaids and I guess that's all that matters?

Council needs to slam the brakes on. Council needs to look at DC's social services and look there first. There are reasons why DC General got as horrifically bad as it did and Council needs to look into that and solve that BEFORE just going ahead and replicating DC General in smaller form across 8 wards.

Why the urgency? If it's because there's a deadline because of deals already made, that's too bad, they are deals that should not have been made.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not the PP. However, if you are charging all D.C. Residents with culture change and breaking the cycles of dysfunction (a worthy goal but a little paternalistic to suggest that Ward 3"is responsible for Ward XYZ) my question is where is the money best spent. Yes, I think most homeless families in DC live in deep dysfunction. I think they need basic, well managed services that meet the needs of as many as possible, not lattes. And if we have money left over it should go to the schools (including charters like KIPP) and mixed income housing in new developments (like the waterfront) that will help lift these families out of poverty. The fact that Bowsers original plan was rushed though, 600 million over 30 years, left the city with nothing, and would reach a fraction of people who need it -shows me she is not serious about deploying city resources (my tax dollars) well. Tweaking and revising a ridiculous plan does not satisfy me. The plan should be scrapped and start over.

"Not lattes???"

Sorry but all you want scrapped is the proposed locations. I am quite certain your conversion to advocacy for the homeless is about as recent as the announcement of Bowser's plan. Come to think of it, if putting a homeless shelter in your neighborhood causes you to be concerned about solving the larger problem, then it is a brilliant move. You care when you have to live next to them.