Anonymous wrote:Apparently this was an easy decision for Mary Cheh to make. It should abut her home. #skininthegame
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The people in Ward 3 who pay the most for the City get rewarded with a homeless shelter, a big middle-finger from the DC gov. Why not put the homeless shelter in the prison?
I don't support putting it in the prison. I do support putting it At current DC General (refurbished or razed or rebuilt) or in an out of the way place that actually does not invite permanent living. People should be moving to mixed income living if they are able to help themselves and their children and THAT should be the city's focus--especially with the amount of transitional neighborhoods and opportunities we have. If they're unable, they should be in dorms or hospital type setting receiving care and services.
Anonymous wrote:The people in Ward 3 who pay the most for the City get rewarded with a homeless shelter, a big middle-finger from the DC gov. Why not put the homeless shelter in the prison?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What do you say about the people who's home value will decrease due to proximity to the shelters?
I say (1) provide proof of this phenomenon and (2) spell whose properly.
Different poster (who hopefully will pass the grammar test!).
HUD research paper addressing property values and crime associated with homeless shelters.
https://www.huduser.gov/Publications/pdf/support_1.pdf
Quantitative Analysis of Property Value Impacts
Overall, we found that the set of eleven supportive housing facilities we analyzed for the
price impact analysis was associated with a positive impact on house prices in the surrounding
neighborhood. ... While the average relationship between this set of supportive housing facilities and
proximate house prices was positive, not all site/neighborhood combinations in Denver
experienced the same relationship. When we disaggregated our analysis to measure impacts for
different common clusters of sites/neighborhoods, we found that the set of five supportive housing
sites located in low-valued, heavily minority-occupied (typically majority Black-occupied)
neighborhoods consistently evinced the positive price impacts noted above. By contrast, the site
in the highest-value, overwhelmingly white-occupied neighborhood apparently had a negative
effect on house prices, as did another (poorly maintained) site in a modestly valued, high-density
core neighborhood having 24 percent of its population classified as Hispanic.
(page xii)
Anonymous wrote:The people in Ward 3 who pay the most for the City get rewarded with a homeless shelter, a big middle-finger from the DC gov. Why not put the homeless shelter in the prison?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:What do you say about the people who's home value will decrease due to proximity to the shelters?
I say (1) provide proof of this phenomenon and (2) spell whose properly.
Different poster (who hopefully will pass the grammar test!).
HUD research paper addressing property values and crime associated with homeless shelters.
https://www.huduser.gov/Publications/pdf/support_1.pdf
Quantitative Analysis of Property Value Impacts
Overall, we found that the set of eleven supportive housing facilities we analyzed for the
price impact analysis was associated with a positive impact on house prices in the surrounding
neighborhood. ... While the average relationship between this set of supportive housing facilities and
proximate house prices was positive, not all site/neighborhood combinations in Denver
experienced the same relationship. When we disaggregated our analysis to measure impacts for
different common clusters of sites/neighborhoods, we found that the set of five supportive housing
sites located in low-valued, heavily minority-occupied (typically majority Black-occupied)
neighborhoods consistently evinced the positive price impacts noted above. By contrast, the site
in the highest-value, overwhelmingly white-occupied neighborhood apparently had a negative
effect on house prices, as did another (poorly maintained) site in a modestly valued, high-density
core neighborhood having 24 percent of its population classified as Hispanic.
(page xii)
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You should hold your first meeting at DC General. Just in case you have a shred of empathy in you anywhere.
Having empathy would mean you are actually going to address the DC General problem in a more substantive way. Slicing it up into 8 pieces and spreading it around doesn't actually address any of the underlying issues around how DC General got so bad in the first place. And as such the same problems will recur, only this time in 8 facilities instead of one.
So before you go rushing to the defense of the plan touting "empathy" I think you need to take a step back and recognize that none of the proposals, whether Bowsers' or Council's counterproposal actually address those underlying problems.
It does solve a problem. Just like large concentrated projects were a failed experiment of the 60s, a city-wide large scale shelter is a failure today. I'm tired of hearing people profess to have concern about the "underlying problems" facing the homeless, but only when the homeless are moving into their neighborhood.
Anonymous wrote:The people in Ward 3 who pay the most for the City get rewarded with a homeless shelter, a big middle-finger from the DC gov. Why not put the homeless shelter in the prison?