Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs, let me ask you this. When Cathedral Commons came in, was there a community meeting to discuss that? What are your real concerns with creating a family shelter to provide temporary housing to 40 families? Set aside your concerns about droves of adults loitering at all hours of the day and night, since that's not the population that is being discussed.

If your concern is "how will this affect our schools" then that is valid. If your concern is "how will the construction of this building affect the traffic?" then that is valid too. But your other concerns, so far, seem to be that people are coming in from other jurisdictions, that these shelters will be serving individual adults, that there is some kind of a safety issue, etc. I am just having trouble understanding what you're worried about.

Is that so? Wasn't that the original premise for DC General too, before it became permanent housing and went from bad to worse till the current disaster?

Won't it be much more complex and costly to build and manage eight facilities than one?

Costly, yes. But much more effective in getting people back on their feet, which is what we all want.

Where is the data supporting that? Has the city run a pilot program already to prove it? That should be the obvious starting point to this conversation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, say good bye to that nice Guy Mason playground. It's going to be fun to see litter and people sleeping all over it at 3pm. I am a firm believer in NIMBY. What next, a methadone clinic?

Oh, and whatever schools these shelters will be inbounds for, prepare for those schools to go downhill fast.

So you are saying that homeless shelters should not be spread throughout the city and should be concentrated in less affluent neighborhoods? Well, the people in Ward 5 and Ward 6, who have shouldered the majority of the burden thus far, want to know what makes your ward so special? This is everyone's burden to bear. Sorry.

What I have not seen in this whole discussion is where those folks are coming from. From outside DC? Mostly from DC itself? If so, from which Ward? Sorry, but if (imagine) all homeless people were raised in Ward 5, and that's what they know best, it makes no particular sense to spread them across all Wards. If they all come from (say) Virginia, why should DC wear the burden?

If Bowser trying to help existing homeless people or to disrupt a number of neighborhoods and potentially bring even more homeless into the city? Those are different objectives

Bowser is trying to close DC General, the existing family shelter that houses ~230 families. These new shelters are for families who are living there, or in the NY Ave motels. I understand that there is the perception that homeless people are flocking to DC for our amazing homeless services, and while there is some truth to that, these families are overwhelmingly DC residents. I met with a man yesterday who is homeless and mentally ill from Ward 3 (born, raised, lived there when he had an address). He's not the target population of these shelters because he is a single adult male, but he is not a poor black man from Ward 8. Many of these young women are from SE, from Brookland, from Trinidad. There is an argument that if you house people in a community with better examples - working people, good schools, easily accessible grocery stores (vs. high unemployment, failing schools, and an overabundance of stripmall 7-Elevens) - they will be better situated to get out of poverty.

These are not shelters to "bring more homeless into the city." They are shelters to rehouse the people living in the toxic human rights violation that is DC General into humane living conditions and help them break the cycle of homelessness.

I wish I wrote for the Washington Post so that I could write that into the first line of every single story, since so many of you seem to think that these are shelters for individual adults from other jurisdictions.

Thank you for the thoughtful response. That argument may be a good one, but would require the buy-in from those communities asked to serve as "better examples," since they are working hard precisely to create safe and nurturing environments for the people actually living there. Did Bowser lead a process to engage relevant neighbors, or was this more of a Stalinist top-down decision?

I actually don't think that it does "require" buy-in from neighbors.

Let me put it to you this way. Up in Ward 3, you guys have amazing schools filled with children who are motivated to learn and families who support that learning. You have libraries with storytelling for young children. You have new playgrounds that are safe and nice to look at. You have multiple grocery stores with fresh produce. You have extensive public transit that (despite the previous remarks about the 30 buses) is reliable. I'm sure many of us read the article about the woman living in the motel on NY Ave with her kids, how long it takes to get her daughter to school, her concerns about safety for her kids, etc.? Those are the families that these shelters are being designed for. That woman, if she moved into the Wisconsin Avenue shelter, could send her daughter to Stoddert, perhaps get a job at one of the retail establishments in the area. There are options available to get high quality food because you have several actual grocery stores, rather than several bodegas with the week's shipment of bananas browning next to the bullet proof glass.

It would be great if the neighbors did buy in and welcome these families into the community. As a parent, I want my children hanging out with friends who set good examples so that everyone motivates everyone else to do better. The likelihood of that happening at a failing school is very low compared with a school like Stoddert where there are many opportunities and examples to excel. Please, please, please, Ward 3, welcome these women and give this a chance to work.

Well, thank you for that clarification. So, this was a Stalinist top-down decision. Don't be surprised then if the neighbors push back.

Serious question, why would you push back? What are you afraid of? Do you think you have the right to control who gets to live in your neighborhood?

Many of us don't have control over where we ourselves live. My family can't afford to live in some of the other wards. If the place I'm in now were to get any more expensive we'd probably have to move out of the city altogether. But evidently those less fortunate than ourselves can live wherever they want?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like at least one person is bitter that a few homeless families will have temporary shelter in a "nice" ward because they don't deserve to live there.

No that's not what I posted. I am just familiar with that neighborhood and it is really preppy and there's lots of shopping and restaurants etc... that are pricey so I was surprised that would be a good location for families with no money. I have no problem with them moving there. It was just my initial reaction to hearing that location.

The fact that a family has become homeless does not mean they have "no money." Guess what? Homeless people have cell phones and go shopping and ... gasp ... sometimes eat at restaurants. We're not talking about vagrants and panhandlers. So glad to hear that you have "no problem" with finding homes for families. Just make sure to lock the doors on your Range Rover when passing by. Have you ever driven by DC General or thought about families living in crappy motels on NY Avenue?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like at least one person is bitter that a few homeless families will have temporary shelter in a "nice" ward because they don't deserve to live there.

No that's not what I posted. I am just familiar with that neighborhood and it is really preppy and there's lots of shopping and restaurants etc... that are pricey so I was surprised that would be a good location for families with no money. I have no problem with them moving there. It was just my initial reaction to hearing that location.

Anonymous wrote:PPs, let me ask you this. When Cathedral Commons came in, was there a community meeting to discuss that? What are your real concerns with creating a family shelter to provide temporary housing to 40 families? Set aside your concerns about droves of adults loitering at all hours of the day and night, since that's not the population that is being discussed.

If your concern is "how will this affect our schools" then that is valid. If your concern is "how will the construction of this building affect the traffic?" then that is valid too. But your other concerns, so far, seem to be that people are coming in from other jurisdictions, that these shelters will be serving individual adults, that there is some kind of a safety issue, etc. I am just having trouble understanding what you're worried about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hawaii actually is having a major crisis with all of the homeless people that were sent there. Yes, people actually bought homeless folks a one way ticket to Hawaii to get rid of them.

Guiliani (sic) cleaned up NYC by giving them one-way tickets on Greyhound.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Before we open more shelter doors I hope they first look at whether those to whom we open doors are even from DC in the first place.

I'm fine with taking care of DC's existing homeless, but do we need to take care of the homeless for the entire eastern seaboard?

It's enough of an issue that we have well meaning but underfunded organizations that want to bring people here in order to take care of them.

It's enough of an issue that we fall victim to some other communities that bus their homeless here (and yes, it's common practice for police to round up homeless and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to the next biggest city).

Existing DC homeless families should have first crack.

I also think that the city needs to work on finding more ways to get people self sufficient and functional.

With the gentrification that's happened in DC over the past 20 years, with low income and home-unstable DC residents getting pushed out to the mostly-Maryland 'burbs, with spikes in incarceration and drug busts, yeah, I think DC can bring people back and do something good.

I live in a city (not DC) that has (finally) declared a homelessness crisis. 4,500 unsheltered (meaning homeless AND NOT IN A HOME WITH A ROOF). So we're not including people couch surfing just to stay out of the elements. Can you imagine? "Solution" is tent shelters. And, yes, every community gets one. And it's still not enough. Our very wealthy enclave has residents who organize food, clothing, and supplies runs to the tent city that's right up against our border. I'm ashamed that a tent shelter is the best our city can do, our fancy, expensive city with HUGE $$$ tech companies that--like all other corporations--don't pay appropriate taxes. It makes you angry. Very angry.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone looked at the current distribution of homeless shelters, homeless families and schools with homeless kids? Charles Allen said Ward 6 already has more homeless shelters than the other Wards. http://www.nbcwashington.com/blogs/first-read-dmv/Homeless-Shelters-to-Open-in-Each-Ward-of-DC-353215441.html

And, they already have several new housing projects in planning and already under construction which will have significant accomodations for low income. There's far more of that kind of housing coming online in Ward 6 than anywhere else in the city.

It sounds like the proposal just figures on distributing DC General's homeless more or less evenly across all Wards without consideration of what's already going on in many Wards.

It seems to me that the other Wards should be stepping up to the plate. Ward 6 has already absorbed a huge brunt where it comes to accommodating the homeless and low income.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

The crickets chirping here despite having posters who claim to be in the know on issues affecting the homeless in DC tells me that no, there isn't a more robust, equitable or well thought out plan. Sigh. Not surprised.

I don't have the information you are seeking. However, I saw a tweet from Kenyan McDuffie earlier tonight describing the number of homeless facilities in Ward 5. I would suspect that they would rival, if not exceed, the number in Ward 6.

Basically, the city has gone from concentrating homeless and other similar shelters in certain geographic areas to spreading them out. I understand there is some opposition to those who feel they are starting in a sort of hole already. But, any plan designed to concentrate these facilities in other geographic areas would probably be dead on arrival. At least this one has some chance of success. Consider it a good start.

Anonymous wrote:Before we open more shelter doors I hope they first look at whether those to whom we open doors are even from DC in the first place.

I'm fine with taking care of DC's existing homeless, but do we need to take care of the homeless for the entire eastern seaboard?

It's enough of an issue that we have well meaning but underfunded organizations that want to bring people here in order to take care of them.

It's enough of an issue that we fall victim to some other communities that bus their homeless here (and yes, it's common practice for police to round up homeless and put them on a bus with a one way ticket to the next biggest city).

Existing DC homeless families should have first crack.

I also think that the city needs to work on finding more ways to get people self sufficient and functional.

Anonymous wrote:Hawaii actually is having a major crisis with all of the homeless people that were sent there. Yes, people actually bought homeless folks a one way ticket to Hawaii to get rid of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs, let me ask you this. When Cathedral Commons came in, was there a community meeting to discuss that? What are your real concerns with creating a family shelter to provide temporary housing to 40 families? Set aside your concerns about droves of adults loitering at all hours of the day and night, since that's not the population that is being discussed.

If your concern is "how will this affect our schools" then that is valid. If your concern is "how will the construction of this building affect the traffic?" then that is valid too. But your other concerns, so far, seem to be that people are coming in from other jurisdictions, that these shelters will be serving individual adults, that there is some kind of a safety issue, etc. I am just having trouble understanding what you're worried about.

Is that so? Wasn't that the original premise for DC General too, before it became permanent housing and went from bad to worse till the current disaster?

Won't it be much more complex and costly to build and manage eight facilities than one?

Costly, yes. But much more effective in getting people back on their feet, which is what we all want.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs, let me ask you this. When Cathedral Commons came in, was there a community meeting to discuss that? What are your real concerns with creating a family shelter to provide temporary housing to 40 families? Set aside your concerns about droves of adults loitering at all hours of the day and night, since that's not the population that is being discussed.

If your concern is "how will this affect our schools" then that is valid. If your concern is "how will the construction of this building affect the traffic?" then that is valid too. But your other concerns, so far, seem to be that people are coming in from other jurisdictions, that these shelters will be serving individual adults, that there is some kind of a safety issue, etc. I am just having trouble understanding what you're worried about.

Is that so? Wasn't that the original premise for DC General too, before it became permanent housing and went from bad to worse till the current disaster?

Won't it be much more complex and costly to build and manage eight facilities than one?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PPs, let me ask you this. When Cathedral Commons came in, was there a community meeting to discuss that? What are your real concerns with creating a family shelter to provide temporary housing to 40 families? Set aside your concerns about droves of adults loitering at all hours of the day and night, since that's not the population that is being discussed.

If your concern is "how will this affect our schools" then that is valid. If your concern is "how will the construction of this building affect the traffic?" then that is valid too. But your other concerns, so far, seem to be that people are coming in from other jurisdictions, that these shelters will be serving individual adults, that there is some kind of a safety issue, etc. I am just having trouble understanding what you're worried about.

Is that so? Wasn't that the original premise for DC General too, before it became permanent housing and went from bad to worse till the current disaster?

Won't it be much more complex and costly to build and manage eight facilities than one?