|
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping
sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed
camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal
at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow
“sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this
week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to
March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff
coordinator). We have identified two
city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation
project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete.
We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what
works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean
Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner
Eudaly to support a pilot project at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned
sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with
Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of
eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE
Lafayette St.)
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part
of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into
the railroad right of way. The site is just south of a pedestrian bridge across
the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light
rail stop. It is reasonably flat with
two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option
#2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE
3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland
(PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel
Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
From:
pdxshelterforum@groups.io [mailto:pdxshelterforum@groups.io] On Behalf Of Aisha
Musa
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 12:08 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Portland to resume homeless camp
sweeps/cleanups
I know that Kaia Sand and others
from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so
I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board
chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 12:04 PM Mitchell Bender < mitchell.bender@...>
wrote:
Do
you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort
who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community
Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on
sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people
from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's
very well said Candee.
Is
there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless
community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't
know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while
officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the
city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply
that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in
moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could
there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N.
Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this,
and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Linda Witt <linda.witt@...>
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
From: pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io> On Behalf Of Will Denecke
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 2:16 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io; draymusa@...
Cc: 'Will Denecke' <willdenecke@...>; 'Sean Green' <green@...>; 'janice Yaden' <janiceyaden@...>
Subject: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City Property: How To Get Approval? Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@... Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.) 
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot). Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf 
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft) 
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below. 
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC That's very well said Candee. Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process. Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332 On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote: The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use. WW article: https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745. 
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Money and resources
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message -------- From: Linda Witt <linda.witt@...> Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00) To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io, draymusa@... Cc: 'Sean Green' <green@...>, 'janice Yaden' <janiceyaden@...> Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need? From: pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io> On Behalf Of Will Denecke
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 2:16 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io; draymusa@...
Cc: 'Will Denecke' <willdenecke@...>; 'Sean Green' <green@...>; 'janice Yaden' <janiceyaden@...>
Subject: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City Property: How To Get Approval? Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@... Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.)
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot). Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC That's very well said Candee. Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process. Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332 On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote: The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use. WW article: https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Darlene:
The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
From: pdxshelterforum@groups.io
[mailto:pdxshelterforum@groups.io] On Behalf Of Darlene Urban Garrett
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 8:52 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City
Property: How To Get Approval?
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
-------- Original message --------
From: Linda Witt <linda.witt@...>
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io, draymusa@...
Cc: 'Sean Green' <green@...>, 'janice Yaden'
<janiceyaden@...>
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
From:
pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io> On Behalf Of Will
Denecke
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 2:16 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io; draymusa@...
Cc: 'Will Denecke' <willdenecke@...>; 'Sean Green'
<green@...>; 'janice Yaden' <janiceyaden@...>
Subject: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City
Property: How To Get Approval?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what
doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.)
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third
&Division
Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
I know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said
Candee.
Is there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined,
as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it
imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland
neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Great question, Linda!!! The timing is right.
And…we need a consensus on vision and policy on how to address homelessness today as we work toward the long term goal of a home for everyone. The good news is that neighborhood associations (and others too) are working hard to build a consensus across the city on that vision and policy. And Commissioner Meieran seems very supportive. Several of our city commissioner candidates would be eager to listen prior to the election. With broad policy support, programs like Maddie’s Cart will get far more prompt attention. And larger scale programs, like Bybee Lakes Hope Center, which use a completely different approach to address the same goal, will move much quicker through the city’s planning process.
So it’s all hands on deck.. both at the policy level and at the project level. The hope is that good policy will provide a nurturing climate for the many great projects that the good people of Portland are wanting badly to get off the ground…correct that, on the ground!
Money and resources
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message -------- Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00) Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need? Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@... Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.)
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot). Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC That's very well said Candee. Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process. Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332 On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote: The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use. WW article: https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Based on my limited, but diverse experience I agree with Will. The reason why folks including NECN, the Interfaith Alliance on Poverty, Maddie's Cart, and many others are advocating for alternative shelters and villages is because we do not have the resources to meet the unmet need through other strategies. The folks I have talked with have self-identified needs that include things like access to a bathroom, tents/blankets, and a place they can go where they won't be asked to leave and can build some community. The folks I have met who want to move off the streets of Old Town/Chinatown to some land with 10-20 people on the eastside are creative, self-reliant, sincere, thoughtful, and capable. The city and county spend millions and millions of dollars per year on services for those who are houseless. With the passage of the bond measure, we are going to have even more resources. However, everyone agrees that there will not be enough resources to provide traditional services to everyone in need. By only directing our limited resources to "traditional" and "expensive" solutions we are accepting that we will provide no or limited services to the folks living on the streets.
I would support reducing one traditional shelter bed if that meant we could provide hygiene services to a group of 20 people who have no/extremely limited access to hygiene services (e.g. a place to go to the bathroom). I would support not paying for one hotel room for someone experiencing houselelssess if that meant we could support a group of 100 people in the way R2DToo does. R2DToo costs $5,000 per month and supports 100 people. The Joint Office proposed a $40 million plan to pay for 495 hotel rooms for a little over 13 months. That is over $6,000 per room per month. These are the conversations we need to have.
There is no perfect solution. But for those who oppose alternative shelters and villages, what does that mean for those folks living on the street who are in such a vulnerable place? Are you comfortable with the on-the-ground reality of our policy decisions? Do you have a different idea to contribute that can help people NOW?
As a longtime advocate who often works within the neighborhood structure, normally it is neighborhood organizations or business associations that oppose "progressive" policies. Here is a situation where the community is saying we want to help be part of the solution and the government has and continues to stymie our efforts. As a community, what is our plan to help those who have the least and are also asking for so little?
If you want to do something small to support this effort, you can contact the Mayor's Office and your county commissioner and tell them you want the city/county to take this conversation seriously and collaborate to find a solution that improves the lives of those who are living in some of the most difficult circumstances that exist in society.
Darlene:
The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what
doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.)
![]()
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf
![Snapshot]()
![]()
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third
&Division
Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
![Snapshot]()
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
![]()
I know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said
Candee.
Is there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
![Screen Shot 2020-07-08 at 11.48.09 PM.png]()
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined,
as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it
imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland
neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Right on, Sean!!! I would encourage a couple pieces added to your thinking…to identify and pull out those whose mental health and addiction issues represent a huge problem for others. These folks need to be referred to programs that can address their more complex needs. Also, we need to acknowledge that the camps/shelters we are talking about are temporary. We need to build self governance and bring services to these camps; not only the medical and other support services but also job development services leading to self sufficiency. Until people achieve self esteem and self sufficiency, shelter alone will not solve the problem.
It’s great to hear your voice in this conversation.
On Jul 10, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Sean Green < green@...> wrote:
Based on my limited, but diverse experience I agree with Will. The reason why folks including NECN, the Interfaith Alliance on Poverty, Maddie's Cart, and many others are advocating for alternative shelters and villages is because we do not have the resources to meet the unmet need through other strategies. The folks I have talked with have self-identified needs that include things like access to a bathroom, tents/blankets, and a place they can go where they won't be asked to leave and can build some community. The folks I have met who want to move off the streets of Old Town/Chinatown to some land with 10-20 people on the eastside are creative, self-reliant, sincere, thoughtful, and capable. The city and county spend millions and millions of dollars per year on services for those who are houseless. With the passage of the bond measure, we are going to have even more resources. However, everyone agrees that there will not be enough resources to provide traditional services to everyone in need. By only directing our limited resources to "traditional" and "expensive" solutions we are accepting that we will provide no or limited services to the folks living on the streets.
I would support reducing one traditional shelter bed if that meant we could provide hygiene services to a group of 20 people who have no/extremely limited access to hygiene services (e.g. a place to go to the bathroom). I would support not paying for one hotel room for someone experiencing houselelssess if that meant we could support a group of 100 people in the way R2DToo does. R2DToo costs $5,000 per month and supports 100 people. The Joint Office proposed a $40 million plan to pay for 495 hotel rooms for a little over 13 months. That is over $6,000 per room per month. These are the conversations we need to have.
There is no perfect solution. But for those who oppose alternative shelters and villages, what does that mean for those folks living on the street who are in such a vulnerable place? Are you comfortable with the on-the-ground reality of our policy decisions? Do you have a different idea to contribute that can help people NOW?
As a longtime advocate who often works within the neighborhood structure, normally it is neighborhood organizations or business associations that oppose "progressive" policies. Here is a situation where the community is saying we want to help be part of the solution and the government has and continues to stymie our efforts. As a community, what is our plan to help those who have the least and are also asking for so little?
If you want to do something small to support this effort, you can contact the Mayor's Office and your county commissioner and tell them you want the city/county to take this conversation seriously and collaborate to find a solution that improves the lives of those who are living in some of the most difficult circumstances that exist in society.
Darlene: The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what
doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.) ![]()
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf ![Snapshot]()
![]()
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third
&Division Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft) ![Snapshot]()
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below. ![]()
I know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said
Candee.
Is there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
![Screen Shot 2020-07-08 at 11.48.09 PM.png]()
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined,
as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it
imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland
neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
--
|
|
|
Diane Rivera
Job development without reliable wifi and phone will be incredibly difficult, and might need to wait until the job seeker is stably housed, or close to stabilization.
We are heading into an employer's market, and job seekers that cannot be contacted immediately will lose out of opportunities, as each missed call or email is a burnt bridge in the labor market. Diane Rivera, Career Advisor Career Boost (for SNAP recipients) Direct phone number (503) 972-3243
Worksource Portland Metro - SE / SE Works www.seworks.org 
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
Right on, Sean!!! I would encourage a couple pieces added to your thinking…to identify and pull out those whose mental health and addiction issues represent a huge problem for others. These folks need to be referred to programs that can address their more complex needs. Also, we need to acknowledge that the camps/shelters we are talking about are temporary. We need to build self governance and bring services to these camps; not only the medical and other support services but also job development services leading to self sufficiency. Until people achieve self esteem and self sufficiency, shelter alone will not solve the problem.
It’s great to hear your voice in this conversation.
d On Jul 10, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Sean Green < green@...> wrote:
Based on my limited, but diverse experience I agree with Will. The reason why folks including NECN, the Interfaith Alliance on Poverty, Maddie's Cart, and many others are advocating for alternative shelters and villages is because we do not have the resources to meet the unmet need through other strategies. The folks I have talked with have self-identified needs that include things like access to a bathroom, tents/blankets, and a place they can go where they won't be asked to leave and can build some community. The folks I have met who want to move off the streets of Old Town/Chinatown to some land with 10-20 people on the eastside are creative, self-reliant, sincere, thoughtful, and capable. The city and county spend millions and millions of dollars per year on services for those who are houseless. With the passage of the bond measure, we are going to have even more resources. However, everyone agrees that there will not be enough resources to provide traditional services to everyone in need. By only directing our limited resources to "traditional" and "expensive" solutions we are accepting that we will provide no or limited services to the folks living on the streets.
I would support reducing one traditional shelter bed if that meant we could provide hygiene services to a group of 20 people who have no/extremely limited access to hygiene services (e.g. a place to go to the bathroom). I would support not paying for one hotel room for someone experiencing houselelssess if that meant we could support a group of 100 people in the way R2DToo does. R2DToo costs $5,000 per month and supports 100 people. The Joint Office proposed a $40 million plan to pay for 495 hotel rooms for a little over 13 months. That is over $6,000 per room per month. These are the conversations we need to have.
There is no perfect solution. But for those who oppose alternative shelters and villages, what does that mean for those folks living on the street who are in such a vulnerable place? Are you comfortable with the on-the-ground reality of our policy decisions? Do you have a different idea to contribute that can help people NOW?
As a longtime advocate who often works within the neighborhood structure, normally it is neighborhood organizations or business associations that oppose "progressive" policies. Here is a situation where the community is saying we want to help be part of the solution and the government has and continues to stymie our efforts. As a community, what is our plan to help those who have the least and are also asking for so little?
If you want to do something small to support this effort, you can contact the Mayor's Office and your county commissioner and tell them you want the city/county to take this conversation seriously and collaborate to find a solution that improves the lives of those who are living in some of the most difficult circumstances that exist in society.
Darlene: The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what
doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.) ![]()
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf ![Snapshot]()
![]()
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third
&Division Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft) ![Snapshot]()
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below. ![]()
I know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said
Candee.
Is there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
![Screen Shot 2020-07-08 at 11.48.09 PM.png]()
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined,
as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it
imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland
neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
--
|
|
|
Diane,
Point well taken. But consider... Central City Concern currently has 24 employment specialists who served 1200-1300 unhoused or formerly unhoused clients last year. They placed 850 people with 350 companies. The River District Navigation Center indicates that 40% of its clients are employed. I don’t disagree with you, Diane, that reliable wi-fi and phone and stable housing are very important for job seekers. But what can we do for people before they achieve stable housing? This entire conversation has been about strategies to address the current crisis for people who are unhoused today.
Another program...Work Systems Inc is having huge success providing interim housing while clients receive vocational training for $26 per hour trucking jobs. 60% of their placements are people of color. I cc’d Clay Cooper from CCC and Patrick Ghring from Work Systems Inc to get their thoughts.
On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:22 AM, Diane Rivera < drivera@...> wrote:
Job development without reliable wifi and phone will be incredibly difficult, and might need to wait until the job seeker is stably housed, or close to stabilization.
We are heading into an employer's market, and job seekers that cannot be contacted immediately will lose out of opportunities, as each missed call or email is a burnt bridge in the labor market. Diane Rivera, Career Advisor Career Boost (for SNAP recipients) Direct phone number (503) 972-3243
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
Right on, Sean!!! I would encourage a couple pieces added to your thinking…to identify and pull out those whose mental health and addiction issues represent a huge problem for others. These folks need to be referred to programs that can address their more complex needs. Also, we need to acknowledge that the camps/shelters we are talking about are temporary. We need to build self governance and bring services to these camps; not only the medical and other support services but also job development services leading to self sufficiency. Until people achieve self esteem and self sufficiency, shelter alone will not solve the problem.
It’s great to hear your voice in this conversation.
d On Jul 10, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Sean Green < green@...> wrote:
Based on my limited, but diverse experience I agree with Will. The reason why folks including NECN, the Interfaith Alliance on Poverty, Maddie's Cart, and many others are advocating for alternative shelters and villages is because we do not have the resources to meet the unmet need through other strategies. The folks I have talked with have self-identified needs that include things like access to a bathroom, tents/blankets, and a place they can go where they won't be asked to leave and can build some community. The folks I have met who want to move off the streets of Old Town/Chinatown to some land with 10-20 people on the eastside are creative, self-reliant, sincere, thoughtful, and capable. The city and county spend millions and millions of dollars per year on services for those who are houseless. With the passage of the bond measure, we are going to have even more resources. However, everyone agrees that there will not be enough resources to provide traditional services to everyone in need. By only directing our limited resources to "traditional" and "expensive" solutions we are accepting that we will provide no or limited services to the folks living on the streets.
I would support reducing one traditional shelter bed if that meant we could provide hygiene services to a group of 20 people who have no/extremely limited access to hygiene services (e.g. a place to go to the bathroom). I would support not paying for one hotel room for someone experiencing houselelssess if that meant we could support a group of 100 people in the way R2DToo does. R2DToo costs $5,000 per month and supports 100 people. The Joint Office proposed a $40 million plan to pay for 495 hotel rooms for a little over 13 months. That is over $6,000 per room per month. These are the conversations we need to have.
There is no perfect solution. But for those who oppose alternative shelters and villages, what does that mean for those folks living on the street who are in such a vulnerable place? Are you comfortable with the on-the-ground reality of our policy decisions? Do you have a different idea to contribute that can help people NOW?
As a longtime advocate who often works within the neighborhood structure, normally it is neighborhood organizations or business associations that oppose "progressive" policies. Here is a situation where the community is saying we want to help be part of the solution and the government has and continues to stymie our efforts. As a community, what is our plan to help those who have the least and are also asking for so little?
If you want to do something small to support this effort, you can contact the Mayor's Office and your county commissioner and tell them you want the city/county to take this conversation seriously and collaborate to find a solution that improves the lives of those who are living in some of the most difficult circumstances that exist in society.
Darlene: The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what
doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.) ![]()
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf ![Snapshot]()
![]()
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third
&Division Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft) ![Snapshot]()
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below. ![]()
I know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said
Candee.
Is there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
![Screen Shot 2020-07-08 at 11.48.09 PM.png]()
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined,
as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it
imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland
neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
--
|
|
|
Then, I suggest we try to
change that political will. The concept of Maddie's Cart is so
simple, it's genius. I have been advocating for something like
this for over three years now. Finally, the word in getting around
that we need an interim solution. This is perfect since it could
help mitigate the NIMBYism that is inherent in every neighborhood
when it comes to the homeless. Not that there wouldn't still be a
fight, but this concept is certainly much easier to sell.
And we need to sell it to city government -- and state and county.
If we can all get together behind this one simple concept, I
believe we could change minds. I would like us to build consensus
on one idea rather than diverging on multiple ones. That
accomplishes nothing and a year from now, five years from now, we
will still be sitting around talking about the same old thing. We
need to build a city-wide coalition and it's easier to do with one
simple idea. The city will turn a deaf ear to one person's
thought, but it can't turn a deaf ear to the entire city when it
speaks.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/10/2020 8:46 AM, Will Denecke
wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Darlene:
The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money
and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough
decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy
smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed
Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh,
the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart
site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it
taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX
Shelter Forum:
In response to
Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites†Maddie’s Cart/
Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed campingâ€; what we call a
“Micro Landing†for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our
proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has
been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping†on
authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with
Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March)
with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator).
We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that
would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it
is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in
concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure
out what works and what
doesn’t.
We welcome PDX
Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions
with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to
support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a
site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid
and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of
eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE
Lafayette St.)
City of Portland right of way
parcel (with Red
Dot). Total
Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE
parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right
of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad
right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road
tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is
reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock
base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty
Lot on SE Third
&Division
Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
Google “street view†of
empty PBOT lot below.
I
know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are
involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all
else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can
give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do
you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with
OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The
Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19
Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for
potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to
safer locations.
AYM
Education and
Consulting, LLC
That's
very well said
Candee.
Is
there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our
houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that
process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM
PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern
Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503
295 3777
Don't
know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one
hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other
hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the
city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place
a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are
forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed
to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have
set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't
bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be
swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state.
The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if
left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction
issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in
both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU
for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they
can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms
with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis
anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters,
we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially
resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those
with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with
reports of criminal behavior or
conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and
Finance, Homelessness and Urban
Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP),
posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally
used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say
'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly
well-defined,
as the city's current practices;
'sweeps' is less so -- for example,
does it
imply that campers are not offered
alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or
that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form
of, say, 'relocation' of campers that
is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing,
conflicted, and complex situation.
Please
give us, especially, considered
thoughts on this situation. If you are
opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us
what you might propose as alternative,
or
how else to address concerns of
officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you
think others don't, and how their
concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP,
representatives from Downtown and N.
Portland
neighborhood associations who've
particularly raised concerns on this,
and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX
coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum
the
other week. We particularly invite
comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this
discussion. Â
|
|
|
A WashPod could be an anchor of each Maddies Cart site. We would be honored to lease them to you for $1,000/month for a minimum of 6 months.
On Jul 10, 2020, at 12:03 PM, Candee Wilson <candee@...> wrote
Then, I suggest we try to
change that political will. The concept of Maddie's Cart is so
simple, it's genius. I have been advocating for something like
this for over three years now. Finally, the word in getting around
that we need an interim solution. This is perfect since it could
help mitigate the NIMBYism that is inherent in every neighborhood
when it comes to the homeless. Not that there wouldn't still be a
fight, but this concept is certainly much easier to sell.
And we need to sell it to city government -- and state and county.
If we can all get together behind this one simple concept, I
believe we could change minds. I would like us to build consensus
on one idea rather than diverging on multiple ones. That
accomplishes nothing and a year from now, five years from now, we
will still be sitting around talking about the same old thing. We
need to build a city-wide coalition and it's easier to do with one
simple idea. The city will turn a deaf ear to one person's
thought, but it can't turn a deaf ear to the entire city when it
speaks.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/10/2020 8:46 AM, Will Denecke
wrote:
Darlene:
The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money
and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough
decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy
smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed
Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh,
the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart
site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it
taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX
Shelter Forum:
In response to
Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites†Maddie’s Cart/
Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed campingâ€; what we call a
“Micro Landing†for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our
proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has
been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping†on
authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with
Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March)
with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator).
We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that
would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it
is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in
concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure
out what works and what
doesn’t.
We welcome PDX
Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions
with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to
support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a
site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid
and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of
eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE
Lafayette St.)
City of Portland right of way
parcel (with Red
Dot). Total
Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE
parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right
of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad
right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road
tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is
reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock
base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty
Lot on SE Third
&Division
Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
Google “street view†of
empty PBOT lot below.
I
know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are
involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all
else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can
give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do
you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with
OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The
Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19
Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for
potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to
safer locations.
AYM
Education and
Consulting, LLC
That's
very well said
Candee.
Is
there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our
houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that
process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM
PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern
Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503
295 3777
Don't
know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one
hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other
hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the
city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place
a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are
forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed
to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have
set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't
bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be
swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state.
The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if
left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction
issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in
both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU
for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they
can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms
with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis
anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters,
we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially
resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those
with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with
reports of criminal behavior or
conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and
Finance, Homelessness and Urban
Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP),
posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally
used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say
'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly
well-defined,
as the city's current practices;
'sweeps' is less so -- for example,
does it
imply that campers are not offered
alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or
that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form
of, say, 'relocation' of campers that
is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing,
conflicted, and complex situation.
Please
give us, especially, considered
thoughts on this situation. If you are
opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us
what you might propose as alternative,
or
how else to address concerns of
officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you
think others don't, and how their
concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP,
representatives from Downtown and N.
Portland
neighborhood associations who've
particularly raised concerns on this,
and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX
coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum
the
other week. We particularly invite
comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this
discussion. Â
|
|
|
Diane Rivera
I was part of that CDL grant, and look forward to hearing from CCC and WSI about what is available now for unhoused job seekers. A huge challenge discussed recently in another work group is the ongoing lack of phone charging locations, hot spots and other wi-fi spots.
Diane Rivera, Career Advisor Career Boost (for SNAP recipients) Direct phone number (503) 972-3243
Worksource Portland Metro - SE / SE Works www.seworks.org
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
Diane,
Point well taken. But consider... Central City Concern currently has 24 employment specialists who served 1200-1300 unhoused or formerly unhoused clients last year. They placed 850 people with 350 companies. The River District Navigation Center indicates that 40% of its clients are employed. I don’t disagree with you, Diane, that reliable wi-fi and phone and stable housing are very important for job seekers. But what can we do for people before they achieve stable housing? This entire conversation has been about strategies to address the current crisis for people who are unhoused today.
Another program...Work Systems Inc is having huge success providing interim housing while clients receive vocational training for $26 per hour trucking jobs. 60% of their placements are people of color. I cc’d Clay Cooper from CCC and Patrick Ghring from Work Systems Inc to get their thoughts.
david On Jul 10, 2020, at 11:22 AM, Diane Rivera < drivera@...> wrote:
Job development without reliable wifi and phone will be incredibly difficult, and might need to wait until the job seeker is stably housed, or close to stabilization.
We are heading into an employer's market, and job seekers that cannot be contacted immediately will lose out of opportunities, as each missed call or email is a burnt bridge in the labor market. Diane Rivera, Career Advisor Career Boost (for SNAP recipients) Direct phone number (503) 972-3243
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
Right on, Sean!!! I would encourage a couple pieces added to your thinking…to identify and pull out those whose mental health and addiction issues represent a huge problem for others. These folks need to be referred to programs that can address their more complex needs. Also, we need to acknowledge that the camps/shelters we are talking about are temporary. We need to build self governance and bring services to these camps; not only the medical and other support services but also job development services leading to self sufficiency. Until people achieve self esteem and self sufficiency, shelter alone will not solve the problem.
It’s great to hear your voice in this conversation.
d On Jul 10, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Sean Green < green@...> wrote:
Based on my limited, but diverse experience I agree with Will. The reason why folks including NECN, the Interfaith Alliance on Poverty, Maddie's Cart, and many others are advocating for alternative shelters and villages is because we do not have the resources to meet the unmet need through other strategies. The folks I have talked with have self-identified needs that include things like access to a bathroom, tents/blankets, and a place they can go where they won't be asked to leave and can build some community. The folks I have met who want to move off the streets of Old Town/Chinatown to some land with 10-20 people on the eastside are creative, self-reliant, sincere, thoughtful, and capable. The city and county spend millions and millions of dollars per year on services for those who are houseless. With the passage of the bond measure, we are going to have even more resources. However, everyone agrees that there will not be enough resources to provide traditional services to everyone in need. By only directing our limited resources to "traditional" and "expensive" solutions we are accepting that we will provide no or limited services to the folks living on the streets.
I would support reducing one traditional shelter bed if that meant we could provide hygiene services to a group of 20 people who have no/extremely limited access to hygiene services (e.g. a place to go to the bathroom). I would support not paying for one hotel room for someone experiencing houselelssess if that meant we could support a group of 100 people in the way R2DToo does. R2DToo costs $5,000 per month and supports 100 people. The Joint Office proposed a $40 million plan to pay for 495 hotel rooms for a little over 13 months. That is over $6,000 per room per month. These are the conversations we need to have.
There is no perfect solution. But for those who oppose alternative shelters and villages, what does that mean for those folks living on the street who are in such a vulnerable place? Are you comfortable with the on-the-ground reality of our policy decisions? Do you have a different idea to contribute that can help people NOW?
As a longtime advocate who often works within the neighborhood structure, normally it is neighborhood organizations or business associations that oppose "progressive" policies. Here is a situation where the community is saying we want to help be part of the solution and the government has and continues to stymie our efforts. As a community, what is our plan to help those who have the least and are also asking for so little?
If you want to do something small to support this effort, you can contact the Mayor's Office and your county commissioner and tell them you want the city/county to take this conversation seriously and collaborate to find a solution that improves the lives of those who are living in some of the most difficult circumstances that exist in society.
Darlene: The reason more
sanctioned camping is not available is not the lack of money and resources. It
is due to a lack of political will at the Mayor’s office. And to make tough decisions including a
homeless strategy that includes managed camping.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
Date: 7/9/20 8:23 PM (GMT-08:00)
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on
City Property: How To Get Approval?
Gosh, the
sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very
low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a
couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on
finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes
nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City
for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city
property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City
commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s
office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have
identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90
day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a
panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to
start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what
doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have
been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City.
We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City
prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s
decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures
not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.) ![]()
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red
Dot). Total Parcel area:
approximately 3,000 sf ![Snapshot]()
![]()
Note:
The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the
west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the
end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on
three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably
flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third
&Division Total
Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft) ![Snapshot]()
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below. ![]()
I know
that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the
Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If
you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know
which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate
knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old
Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a
group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and
ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM
Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said
Candee.
Is there any way we can
start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm
definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to
respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone
whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a
violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a
place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because
the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk
camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I
think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way,
inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an
alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping
spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating
communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course,
those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set
of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the
general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that
even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build
their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable
housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this
discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332
On
7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The
City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of
homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking
sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous
drug use.
WW
article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping
Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
![Screen Shot 2020-07-08 at 11.48.09 PM.png]()
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices,
while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined,
as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it
imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or
assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not
complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is
not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please
give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed
to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or
how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns
might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland
neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and
organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the
other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for
coming together in this discussion. Â
--
|
|
|
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire. There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need? Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum: In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at: https://maddiescart.org/shelter. Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter, it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t. We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines. (see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745) Will Denecke Summer Lake LLC willdenecke@... Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately 1800 SE Lafayette St.) 
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot). Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf 
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base. Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland) City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft) 
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below. 
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she can give you more information. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations. AYM Education and Consulting, LLC That's very well said Candee. Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process. Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS Peer Support Specialist Central City Concern Recovery Center P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson 411 NW Flanders St. #406 Portland, OR 97209 503-789-0332 On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote: The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use. WW article: https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745. 
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Actually Trena, the Grotto site was approved for a Kenton style village- but will require sewer
On Jul 10, 2020, at 4:23 PM, Trena Sutton via groups.io <thegirlsok@...> wrote:
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was
nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire.
There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City
had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple
of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless
shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at:
https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann
Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines.
(see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately
1800 SE Lafayette St.)
<image001.jpg>
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot).
Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
<image003.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
<image006.jpg>
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
<image007.jpg>
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she
can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said Candee.
Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can
safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent
in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities
and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank
the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use.
WW article:Â https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/07/07/portland-to-resume-homeless-camp-sweeps/.
Notice from Office of Management and Finance, Homelessness and Urban Camping Impact Reduction Program (HUCIRP), posted late last month:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not
offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns
of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly
invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Oh so the City caved on the creek issue? That’s great! I would have loved to know that. I kept asking Todd if this was moving along or was the City still trying to block it. Thanks Rick for eventually advising me. Father Rick st the Grotto first advised our group about the possibility but then he decided to retire.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:54 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
Actually Trena, the Grotto site was approved for a Kenton style village- but will require sewer
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was
nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire.
There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City
had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple
of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless
shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at:
https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann
Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines.
(see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately
1800 SE Lafayette St.)
<image001.jpg>
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot).
Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
<image003.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
<image006.jpg>
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
<image007.jpg>
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she
can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said Candee.
Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can
safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent
in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities
and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank
the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not
offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns
of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly
invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
We have tried for years to find funding for the Grotto Village- the plan was developed 2 years ago
On Jul 10, 2020, at 5:49 PM, Trena Sutton via groups.io <thegirlsok@...> wrote:
Oh so the City caved on the creek issue? That’s great! I would have loved to know that. I kept asking Todd if this was moving along or was the City still trying to block it. Thanks Rick for eventually advising me. Father Rick st the Grotto first
advised our group about the possibility but then he decided to retire.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:54 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
Actually Trena, the Grotto site was approved for a Kenton style village- but will require sewer
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was
nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire.
There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City
had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple
of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless
shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at:
https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann
Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines.
(see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately
1800 SE Lafayette St.)
<image001.jpg>
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot).
Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
<image003.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
<image006.jpg>
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
<image007.jpg>
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she
can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said Candee.
Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can
safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent
in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities
and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank
the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not
offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns
of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly
invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
How problematic would it be to put in a sewer and hook it up to the main sewer line? During these financially trying times the faith based community is hurting also but what about a coalition of many faiths to tackle this?
The bean counters need to crunch the numbers to see how much it’s costing the tax payers to keep people on the streets.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 7:14 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
We have tried for years to find funding for the Grotto Village- the plan was developed 2 years ago
Oh so the City caved on the creek issue? That’s great! I would have loved to know that. I kept asking Todd if this was moving along or was the City still trying to block it. Thanks Rick for eventually advising me. Father Rick st the Grotto first
advised our group about the possibility but then he decided to retire.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:54 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
Actually Trena, the Grotto site was approved for a Kenton style village- but will require sewer
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was
nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire.
There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City
had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple
of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary homeless
shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at:
https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann
Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines.
(see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately
1800 SE Lafayette St.)
<image001.jpg>
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot).
Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
<image003.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
<image006.jpg>
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
<image007.jpg>
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying, she
can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said Candee.
Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can
safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent
in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities
and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank
the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not
offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns
of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly
invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
All infrastructure including electric about 300k
From: pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io> on behalf of Trena Sutton via groups.io <thegirlsok@...>
Sent: Friday, July 10, 2020 7:37:41 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Managed Camping Pilot Project on City Property: How To Get Approval?
How problematic would it be to put in a sewer and hook it up to the main sewer line? During these financially trying times the faith based community is hurting also but what about a coalition of many faiths to tackle this?
The bean counters need to crunch the numbers to see how much it’s costing the tax payers to keep people on the streets.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 7:14 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
We have tried for years to find funding for the Grotto Village- the plan was developed 2 years ago
Oh so the City caved on the creek issue? That’s great! I would have loved to know that. I kept asking Todd if this was moving along or was the City still trying to block it. Thanks Rick for eventually advising me. Father Rick st the Grotto first
advised our group about the possibility but then he decided to retire.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:54 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
Actually Trena, the Grotto site was approved for a Kenton style village- but will require sewer
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was
nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire.
There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City
had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple
of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at:
https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann
Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines.
(see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately
1800 SE Lafayette St.)
<image001.jpg>
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot).
Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
<image003.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
<image006.jpg>
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
<image007.jpg>
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying,
she can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said Candee.
Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can
safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent
in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities
and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank
the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not
offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns
of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly
invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Is there any pushback from the housed peeps on the other side of the Cul De Sac? A neighborhood’s approval could go far
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 7:39 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
All infrastructure including electric about 300k
How problematic would it be to put in a sewer and hook it up to the main sewer line? During these financially trying times the faith based community is hurting also but what about a coalition of many faiths to tackle this?
The bean counters need to crunch the numbers to see how much it’s costing the tax payers to keep people on the streets.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 7:14 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
We have tried for years to find funding for the Grotto Village- the plan was developed 2 years ago
Oh so the City caved on the creek issue? That’s great! I would have loved to know that. I kept asking Todd if this was moving along or was the City still trying to block it. Thanks Rick for eventually advising me. Father Rick st the Grotto first
advised our group about the possibility but then he decided to retire.
On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 4:54 PM Rick Birkel < RBirkel@...> wrote:
Actually Trena, the Grotto site was approved for a Kenton style village- but will require sewer
The City has allowed Sanctioned camps or a variation before. Right to Dream Too it’s still up and running. There’s also a camp in North Portland that still going but has been problematic. The section to camp called forgotten realms which was
nothing but a haven for criminals. Drug dealing, stabbings, prostitution, shootings and domestic violence. The city provided ports potties but an explosion of a Coleman stove ended that as it set a home on fire.
There was a sanctioned camp on SE Reedway in which the City provided a porta potty and a dumpster. It was working until people began getting sick. As it turned out the land was found to be toxic (Lead and Cancer causing Hydrocarbons). The City
had a EPA study done a few years before the sanctioned camp that was commissioned by Nick Fish. The City knew the land was poison but allowed a Sanctioned camp on the land!
The Grotto has a very large amount of land behind the sanctuary. They were discussing having a camp on Church owned land but the City said a small creek on the land flowed onto public PBOT land and therefore blocked it.
The City is not enthusiastic about camps and I agree tent living is not conducive with a healthy life.
Sanctioned camps are not the way to go.
Gosh, the sanctioned camping as described on the Maddie’s Cart site seems like a very low-cost and humane solution, ready to test. Why is it taking so long to get a couple
of pilot sites approved, given the urgent need?
Aisha & PDX Shelter Forum:
In response to Aisha’s question on finding “sanctioned camping sites” Maddie’s Cart/ Madeleine School proposes nonprofit run “managed camping”; what we call a “Micro Landing” for temporary
homeless shelter. See Maddie’s Cart info and our proposal at:
https://maddiescart.org/shelter.
Maddie’s Cart has been pushing the City for 18 months to allow “sanctioned camping” on authorized city property. We discussed our proposal this week with Portland City commissioner Jo Ann
Hardesty and have talked (up to March) with the Mayor’s office and Seraphie Allen (homeless staff coordinator). We have identified two city owned parcels as shown below that would work for a pilot 90 day evaluation project. This is not long term shelter,
it is not a panacea for the homeless and our proposal is not cast in concrete. We need to start someplace with alternative shelter models and figure out what works and what doesn’t.
We welcome PDX Shelter support and have been working with Sean Green of the forum in discussions with the City. We need the Mayor’s office and Commissioner Eudaly to support a pilot project
at one of these identified city (PBOT) owned sites (or a site the City prefers). The need is particularly urgent now with Covid and the City’s decision to start sweeping unsanctioned camp sites of eight or more structures not following city hygiene guidelines.
(see: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/toolkit/article/756745)
Will Denecke
Summer Lake LLC
willdenecke@...
Option #1: Pilot Site:(approximately
1800 SE Lafayette St.)
<image001.jpg>
City of Portland right of way parcel (with Red Dot).
Total Parcel area: approximately 3,000 sf
<image003.jpg>
<image005.jpg>
Note: The above site abuts the UP railroad right of way and a PGE parcel is to the west. It is public property and is part of the public right of way at the end of SE Lafayette where it dead ends into the railroad right of way. The site
is just south of a pedestrian bridge across the rail road tracks, is fenced on three sides and three blocks from a light rail stop. It is reasonably flat with two thirds of the parcel paved or having a rock base.
Option #2: Pilot Site: (1988 SE 3RD AVE, Portland)
City of Portland (PBOT) Empty Lot on SE Third &Division
Total Parcel Area: 0.42 acres (18,334 sq ft)
<image006.jpg>
Google “street view” of empty PBOT lot below.
<image007.jpg>
I know that Kaia Sand and others from Street Roots are involved. I am not on the Sanctioned Camps workgroup, so I am not aware of who all else is involved. If you contact the OTCA board chair, Helen Ying,
she can give you more information.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
Do you happen to know which agencies and advocates are involved with OTCA's effort who have intimate knowledge and/or experience with these issues?
The Old Town Community Association (OTCA)'s Covid-19 Response Action Team (RAT) has a group working on sanctioned camps, looking for potential locations and ways to get people from the sidewalks to safer locations.
AYM Education and Consulting, LLC
That's very well said Candee.
Is there any way we can start pushing for legal camp spots for our houseless community? I'm definitely willing to be involved in that process.
Marissa Donovan, CRM PSS
Peer Support Specialist
Central City Concern Recovery Center
P:503-935-7200 F: 503 295 3777
Don't know if this is how to respond, but I don't know another way.
Sweeps are a double-edged sword. On one hand, they are disruptive to someone whose only home is a tent. On the other hand, tent camping on sidewalks is a violation of a city ordinance. Until the city/county/state begin providing a place where tent campers can
safely place a tent, sweeps will continue because the campers won't move unless they are forced to. I do not object to sidewalk camps being swept. They are not supposed to be there in the first place. I think it's wrong to sweep those that have set up a tent
in out-of-the-way, inconspicuous places where they aren't bothering anyone for lack of having an alternative place to go that wouldn't be swept. There should be legal camping spots throughout the city/county/state. The homeless have a way of creating communities
and policing themselves if left to their own devices. Of course, those with mental health and addiction issues present an entirely different set of problems. They tend to be outcasts in both the homeless community and the general community at large. Thank
the ACLU for giving them so many rights that even when people want to help them, they can't.
Until the city/county/state come to terms with the fact that they cannot build their way out of the homeless crisis anytime soon, either through affordable housing, supportive housing or shelters, we will continue to have this discussion.
Candee Wilson
411 NW Flanders St. #406
Portland, OR 97209
503-789-0332
On 7/9/2020 12:06 AM, Tim McCormick wrote:
The City of Portland is officially resuming 'sweeps', or 'cleanups,' of homeless camps, focusing on those with 8 or more structures, blocking sidewalks or entrances, or with reports of criminal behavior or conspicuous drug use.
Note, the term 'sweeps' is generally used by opponents of these practices, while officials in Portland say 'cleanups.' 'Cleanups' is fairly well-defined, as the city's current practices; 'sweeps' is less so -- for example, does it imply that campers are not
offered alternative acceptable shelter, or assistance in moving belongings? or that they would risk arrest for not complying? Could there be some form of, say, 'relocation' of campers that is not a sweep?
We realize this is a very polarizing, conflicted, and complex situation. Please give us, especially, considered thoughts on this situation. If you are opposed to 'sweeps' or 'cleanups,' tell us what you might propose as alternative, or how else to address concerns
of officials and people who support them.
If you support them, tell us why you think others don't, and how their concerns might be addressed.Â
Note, we had staffers from HUCIRP, representatives from Downtown and N. Portland neighborhood associations who've particularly raised concerns on this, and organizers from Stop the Sweeps PDX coalition, at the PDX Shelter Forum the other week. We particularly
invite comments from them, and thank them for coming together in this discussion. Â
|
|
|
Verna Dunlap
I’m sure Walmart and Home Depot are happy to pay for theses needs in each community let’s give thier or depts a call.
|
|
|
