Re: Oregonian article followup on Shelter to Housing at City Council meeting Weds

Amalie Roberts

David Groff, I too live in Woodstock and have been having conversations with my neighbors about how this movement would look in real time- the use of outdoor spaces that are underused,  especially so in  post-covid days.  Parks don’t fall into that category in Portland.   We definitely need better press around how temporary shelters would look and the beautiful possibilities that exist.  Though they are prohibitive, the recently created small village living spaces in L.A. may whet the creative minds of some naysayers.
Amalie Roberts

 You have the
right to breathe and remain

Rosamond S. King
Amalie Roberts

On Mar 26, 2021, at 4:14 PM, Stanley Penkin via <stanleypenkin@...> wrote:

I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined.
From:<> On Behalf Of Barb Rainish
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Oregonian article followup on Shelter to Housing at City Council meeting Weds
I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding.
This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go.
Thanks for all the advocacy!
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021, 3:57 PM David Groff via<> wrote:
Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies.  My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks.  I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least.
David Groff
Interfaith Alliance on Poverty
On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: 
To: PDX Shelter Forum
Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian

Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian

followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks"

Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units. 

My comments posted on it: 

1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n

2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n. 

3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX, 
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3

Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story. 

Tim McCormick
Moderator PDX Shelter Forum, Editor at HousingWiki,
Organizer at Village Collaborative
Portland, Oregon 

Join to automatically receive all group messages.