Cheh has plans to send the Circulator out to Annapolis

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)

Govt says all ok so go ahead with govt plan. Hilarious.

Anonymous wrote:People need to start paying the homeless to camp outside Cheh's home. She let's her white guilt get in the way of advocating for the interests of her constituents. She also gave use corrupt Vince Gray.

Did you see the article about her role in the circulator subsidy? Todays post, Colbert king. Seems like there is endless pits of others peoples money to spend on whims in dc, especially when they have to do with the homeless or the anti car lobby which is very Cheh. I have nothing against public transport but had no idea how heavily dc taxpayers were subsidizing this private company. We need to look at this as well. The Smithsonian bus I understand as tourist pay back the city through spending, but the other routes?

I hope Cheh and the mayor and the council and Lanier know it I possible to reverse the trend of people moving into the city with rising crime, crumbling metro, anti car/parking nightmares, capricious crony homeless deals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's idiotic to say that homeless shelters don't have a negative effect on property values. Maybe it is slim but of course it is negative.

The property value argument is a strawman. The vast majority of homeowners in ward 3 (and let's be honest, the majority is the nimby folks in this thread are ward 3) have likey seen property values skyrocket in the last decade. You can take a $20k hit, even though I don't believe it will happen. It will share the area with a police station for goodness sake.

Wow. This actually does sound like a Chavez land grab, if you pooh pooh a 20,000 'hit' on behalf of others. Why not redo DC general, where no new neighborhood will be impacted. Interesting what you say about the police. Hardened homeless are called out in front of the Giant there, sleeping under tree and bushes all the way up wisconsin ave. (you may not know it but we have homeless service stations in Ward 3), the from of the library in Tenleytown looks like a homeless celebration on the benches in the summer. We also have rising swoop in crimes and teen crime. Lets have the police, who haven't gotten a grip on that, babysit a shelter thats gone from 30 to 50 of uncertain population? How is this good for any neighborhood in D.C.? We have a sure which the local government has chosen not to renovate, it sounds like for financial and political gain.
WH has a script? Who to call? How to organize? This is the tip of the iceberg of D.C. Wealth redistribution which will help the poor about as much as it worked in Venezuela.

Oh my god. Yes, this is exactly like a "Chavez land grab."

Anyway, I live near DC General. I could equally argue that it is a "Chavez land grab" not to remove DC General which is artificially depressing my home value.

Did you know it was there when you bought?

People need to start paying the homeless to camp outside Cheh's home. She let's her white guilt get in the way of advocating for the interests of her constituents. She also gave use corrupt Vince Gray.

People need to start paying the homeless to camp outside Cheh's home. She let's her white guilt get in the way of advocating for the interests of her constituents. She also gave use corrupt Vince Gray.

Here's an easy test: Go to the real estate forum and ask people how they'd pick. If they are looking at two essentially identical houses but one is within 2 blocks of a homeless shelter, which do they choose? How many wil pick the one close to the shelter because they expect property values to rise there? I'm betting no one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's idiotic to say that homeless shelters don't have a negative effect on property values. Maybe it is slim but of course it is negative.

The property value argument is a strawman. The vast majority of homeowners in ward 3 (and let's be honest, the majority is the nimby folks in this thread are ward 3) have likey seen property values skyrocket in the last decade. You can take a $20k hit, even though I don't believe it will happen. It will share the area with a police station for goodness sake.

Wow. This actually does sound like a Chavez land grab, if you pooh pooh a 20,000 'hit' on behalf of others. Why not redo DC general, where no new neighborhood will be impacted. Interesting what you say about the police. Hardened homeless are called out in front of the Giant there, sleeping under tree and bushes all the way up wisconsin ave. (you may not know it but we have homeless service stations in Ward 3), the from of the library in Tenleytown looks like a homeless celebration on the benches in the summer. We also have rising swoop in crimes and teen crime. Lets have the police, who haven't gotten a grip on that, babysit a shelter thats gone from 30 to 50 of uncertain population? How is this good for any neighborhood in D.C.? We have a sure which the local government has chosen not to renovate, it sounds like for financial and political gain.
WH has a script? Who to call? How to organize? This is the tip of the iceberg of D.C. Wealth redistribution which will help the poor about as much as it worked in Venezuela.

Oh my god. Yes, this is exactly like a "Chavez land grab."

Anyway, I live near DC General. I could equally argue that it is a "Chavez land grab" not to remove DC General which is artificially depressing my home value.

Anonymous wrote:It's idiotic to say that homeless shelters don't have a negative effect on property values. Maybe it is slim but of course it is negative.

Not noticeable. I don't hear people in Georgetown protesting the Georgetown Street Mission. And property values did not decline when Arlington put in its new shelter. You can look at Zillow or Redfin if you don't believe me.

Churches provide meals and shelter all the time. It does not bring down property values.

Anonymous wrote:Why should the people who pay the most have to have a shelter in their neighborhood? Makes no sense.

Because people of all income groups are equal under the law.

Look on the bright side, Wisconsin Avenue will finally have a night life!! And the kids can walk to Wilson.

Why should the people who pay the most have to have a shelter in their neighborhood? Makes no sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's idiotic to say that homeless shelters don't have a negative effect on property values. Maybe it is slim but of course it is negative.

The property value argument is a strawman. The vast majority of homeowners in ward 3 (and let's be honest, the majority is the nimby folks in this thread are ward 3) have likey seen property values skyrocket in the last decade. You can take a $20k hit, even though I don't believe it will happen. It will share the area with a police station for goodness sake.

Wow. This actually does sound like a Chavez land grab, if you pooh pooh a 20,000 'hit' on behalf of others. Why not redo DC general, where no new neighborhood will be impacted. Interesting what you say about the police. Hardened homeless are called out in front of the Giant there, sleeping under tree and bushes all the way up wisconsin ave. (you may not know it but we have homeless service stations in Ward 3), the from of the library in Tenleytown looks like a homeless celebration on the benches in the summer. We also have rising swoop in crimes and teen crime. Lets have the police, who haven't gotten a grip on that, babysit a shelter thats gone from 30 to 50 of uncertain population? How is this good for any neighborhood in D.C.? We have a sure which the local government has chosen not to renovate, it sounds like for financial and political gain.
WH has a script? Who to call? How to organize? This is the tip of the iceberg of D.C. Wealth redistribution which will help the poor about as much as it worked in Venezuela.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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)

Had you bothered to read the study you would have known that it focused on supported living facilities for the mentally ill and developmentally disabled and explicitly excluded homeless shelters and transitional quarters. Fn. 1 at 1-2. Moreover of the total of 11 facilities examined, for which there were two home sales within designated distances from the facility, there was only one located in a predominately-white neighborhood which had the highest median home sales price: $195,000. By the way, this happened to be a group home for individuals with cerebral palsy. I'll leave it to others to judge whether you are being deceitful or just lazy.

Do you really want to dance on this? If you read the study, you'd know it was commissioned to study the exact problem at issue here: the impact of "supportive housing" on property values. The study looks at a variety of different types of supportive housing, and for what it's worth, suggests pretty strongly that the effects of homeless shelters are further down the list of desirability than developmental disability cases.

People asked for actual data on point, and I provided it. I'm sorry you're sad that actual studies don't support your (ridiculous) claim that shelters don't impact property values, but that is what this very clear and complete study shows.

If you'd like, I also can start quoting what it says about crime rates near shelters, but we both know that doesn't help your preconceived position either.

Follow the data and deal with it honestly. You're taking a predetermined position and discounting the research that refutes you.

Disappointing.

The study also says the supports housing facility located in the neighborhood with the highest property values was an outlier and therefore explicitly csutioned that no generalizations should be made from the results -- that is, diminished property values for a couple of nearby homes. Moreover. as the study point out, only two of the 11 sites produced reliable, statistically significant evidence of impacts.[\u]. The focus groups cited in the study were consistent with research confirming that negative expectation about what a supportive facility would bring to the neighborhood were not borne out and the facility was essentially "invisible" as it had no effect on quality of life.

As for crime, the study found proximity to supported housing had [u/]no significant effect on the rates of reported total, violent or property crime, with one exception, that being the number of reported instances of disorderly conduct within 500 feet of the facility, which doubled and resulted an overall increase in crime of 15 percent. To be fair, while there was some data suggesting that overall violent crime increased subsequent to opening of supportive housing facilities in predominantly white, higher income areas, the study once more cautioned not yo make any firm conclusions or generalize due to the small number of facilities:

If you want to equate a homeless shelter serving families with young children and group homes serving the mentally ill, feel free to do so. But at least try to be honest about the study you have cited if you want to preserve whatever little credibility you may have left.

Let's not, OP.