|
To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian
followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html. Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.  My comments posted on it: 1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in #S2HC 2/n. 3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX, @PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3 Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story. --
Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least.
David Groff Interfaith Alliance on Poverty
On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote:
To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian
followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html. Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.  My comments posted on it: 1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in #S2HC 2/n. 3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX, @PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3 Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story. --
Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding.
This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go.
Thanks for all the advocacy!
Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least.
David Groff Interfaith Alliance on Poverty
On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick < tmccormick@...> wrote:
To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian
followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html. Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units. My comments posted on it: 1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in #S2HC 2/n. 3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX, @PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3 Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story. --
Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined.
From: pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io> On Behalf Of Barb Rainish Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 4:01 PM To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Oregonian article followup on Shelter to Housing at City Council meeting Weds I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
|
|
|
How about hosting a call asking all applicants to share their proposals and see what the community can do to come together around this important work
Proposals Received:
Event Number RFPQ-76-2021
Event Name: Alternative Shelter (Reissue)
ALL GOOD NORTHWEST
BEACON VILLAGE
Bridges to Change, Inc.
CASCADIA CLUSTERS
CATHOLIC CHARITIES
CITY REPAIR PROJECT
Courtesy inn motel
Cultivate Initiatives
Dignity Village, Inc.
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON
EQUITABLE GIVING CIRCLE
FAMILY PROMISE OF METRO EAST
GRAVES CHERYL
GREATER GOOD NORTHWEST
HELPING HANDS REENTRY OUTREACH
CENTERS
Holistic Healing Behavioral Healthcare
LEE KYLE
Matthew Suplee LLC
MISHEEL LLC
N/A (Hazelnut Grove)
Operation Nightwatch
Oregon Trail of Hope
Pause for the Cause Creating Change
POD the People
Portland New Generations Rotary Club
RIGHT 2 DREAM TOO
RISING PHOENIX HOMES LLC
SELF ENHANCEMENT, INC.
STRAIGHTWAY SERVICES
SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TULBERG JOSHUA
Volunteers of America Oregon, Inc. |
|
|
On Mar 26, 2021, at 1:32 PM, Stanley Penkin <stanleypenkin@...> wrote:
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. From: pdxshelterforum@groups.io <pdxshelterforum@groups.io> On Behalf Of Barb Rainish
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2021 4:01 PM
To: pdxshelterforum@groups.io
Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Oregonian article followup on Shelter to Housing at City Council meeting Weds I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
|
|
|
great idea Andy, and thanks so much for pulling that list of RFPQ respondents. I didn't realize this was possible from the procurement site, I was waiting for more from procurement analyst, Kathi Braeme-Burr.
we've been discussing ways to gather and cross-support proposers (and new collaborators) since before the last forum, this good movement forward.
Here's an open doc for this on the PDX Shelter Forum site (an unfolding experiment in open, collaborative, decentralized 'site' form using GDocs / Google Drive, by the way): I've added to it the list of proposers from Andy.
If anyone here knows more about the proposals, or whom/how to contact the proposers, please share or add to document. We should be able to get a project listing, whats-needed, how-can-i-help, and discussion going here! thanks, Tim.
How about hosting a call asking all applicants to share their proposals and see what the community can do to come together around this important work
Proposals Received:
Event Number RFPQ-76-2021
Event Name: Alternative Shelter (Reissue)
ALL GOOD NORTHWEST
BEACON VILLAGE
Bridges to Change, Inc.
CASCADIA CLUSTERS
CATHOLIC CHARITIES
CITY REPAIR PROJECT
Courtesy inn motel
Cultivate Initiatives
Dignity Village, Inc.
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON
EQUITABLE GIVING CIRCLE
FAMILY PROMISE OF METRO EAST
GRAVES CHERYL
GREATER GOOD NORTHWEST
HELPING HANDS REENTRY OUTREACH
CENTERS
Holistic Healing Behavioral Healthcare
LEE KYLE
Matthew Suplee LLC
MISHEEL LLC
N/A (Hazelnut Grove)
Operation Nightwatch
Oregon Trail of Hope
Pause for the Cause Creating Change
POD the People
Portland New Generations Rotary Club
RIGHT 2 DREAM TOO
RISING PHOENIX HOMES LLC
SELF ENHANCEMENT, INC.
STRAIGHTWAY SERVICES
SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TULBERG JOSHUA
Volunteers of America Oregon, Inc. |
|
|
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
![]()
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
-- -- Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
I've been arguing, "why not parks?" with my neighbors, asking them if they really want to prioritize grass over people - recreation over safe shelter.
I must have missed the discussion here about why people are not advocating to use park land for sheltering. Is it just politics and neighbor sentiment? We can rehab grass fields pretty easily once people have better options available and recreation areas like that should be a low priority compared to sheltering people.
-Joe Joseph Purkey, Principal Convergence Architecture 7302 N Richmond Ave | Portland, OR 97203 tel. 503.308.1028, ext. 102 | cell 503.752.8349 jpurkey@...
great idea Andy, and thanks so much for pulling that list of RFPQ respondents. I didn't realize this was possible from the procurement site, I was waiting for more from procurement analyst, Kathi Braeme-Burr.
we've been discussing ways to gather and cross-support proposers (and new collaborators) since before the last forum, this good movement forward.
Here's an open doc for this on the PDX Shelter Forum site (an unfolding experiment in open, collaborative, decentralized 'site' form using GDocs / Google Drive, by the way): I've added to it the list of proposers from Andy.
If anyone here knows more about the proposals, or whom/how to contact the proposers, please share or add to document. We should be able to get a project listing, whats-needed, how-can-i-help, and discussion going here! thanks, Tim.
How about hosting a call asking all applicants to share their proposals and see what the community can do to come together around this important work
Proposals Received:
Event Number RFPQ-76-2021
Event Name: Alternative Shelter (Reissue)
ALL GOOD NORTHWEST
BEACON VILLAGE
Bridges to Change, Inc.
CASCADIA CLUSTERS
CATHOLIC CHARITIES
CITY REPAIR PROJECT
Courtesy inn motel
Cultivate Initiatives
Dignity Village, Inc.
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON
EQUITABLE GIVING CIRCLE
FAMILY PROMISE OF METRO EAST
GRAVES CHERYL
GREATER GOOD NORTHWEST
HELPING HANDS REENTRY OUTREACH
CENTERS
Holistic Healing Behavioral Healthcare
LEE KYLE
Matthew Suplee LLC
MISHEEL LLC
N/A (Hazelnut Grove)
Operation Nightwatch
Oregon Trail of Hope
Pause for the Cause Creating Change
POD the People
Portland New Generations Rotary Club
RIGHT 2 DREAM TOO
RISING PHOENIX HOMES LLC
SELF ENHANCEMENT, INC.
STRAIGHTWAY SERVICES
SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TULBERG JOSHUA
Volunteers of America Oregon, Inc. |
|
|
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
![]()
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
-- Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
David Groff, I too live in Woodstock and have been having conversations with my neighbors about how this movement would look in real time- the use of outdoor spaces that are underused, especially so in post-covid days. Parks don’t fall into that category in Portland. We definitely need better press around how temporary shelters would look and the beautiful possibilities that exist. Though they are prohibitive, the recently created small village living spaces in L.A. may whet the creative minds of some naysayers.
Amalie Roberts amalie@... You have the right to breathe and remain Imagine that Rosamond S. King Amalie Roberts
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
|
|
|
wondered if you would send me the link to the small village living spaces in l.a.
also wanted to send you this from a village outside seattle.
On Sat, Mar 27, 2021 at 10:10 AM Amalie Roberts < amalie@...> wrote: David Groff, I too live in Woodstock and have been having conversations with my neighbors about how this movement would look in real time- the use of outdoor spaces that are underused, especially so in post-covid days. Parks don’t fall into that category in Portland. We definitely need better press around how temporary shelters would look and the beautiful possibilities that exist. Though they are prohibitive, the recently created small village living spaces in L.A. may whet the creative minds of some naysayers.
Amalie Roberts amalie@... You have the right to breathe and remain Imagine that Rosamond S. King Amalie Roberts
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
![]()
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
-- At the moment of commitment the entire universe conspires to assist you. Whatever you can do or dream you can do begin it now. Boldness has genius, magic and power in it. Goethe “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.” Buckminster Fuller
Charlotte 001 787-366-9344, 541 579 8607
|
|
|
Andy's idea of hosting an alternate space for the group proposals sounds like a great idea.
Which of the groups on the list do you need contact info for?
Some of the names seem like ones for which PDX Shelter Forum would already have connections.
If you have a shortlist of those for which you'd need contact info that would be a good starting point.
Elise
great idea Andy, and thanks so much for pulling that list of RFPQ respondents. I didn't realize this was possible from the procurement site, I was waiting for more from procurement analyst, Kathi Braeme-Burr.
we've been discussing ways to gather and cross-support proposers (and new collaborators) since before the last forum, this good movement forward.
Here's an open doc for this on the PDX Shelter Forum site (an unfolding experiment in open, collaborative, decentralized 'site' form using GDocs / Google Drive, by the way): I've added to it the list of proposers from Andy.
If anyone here knows more about the proposals, or whom/how to contact the proposers, please share or add to document. We should be able to get a project listing, whats-needed, how-can-i-help, and discussion going here! thanks, Tim.
How about hosting a call asking all applicants to share their proposals and see what the community can do to come together around this important work
Proposals Received:
Event Number RFPQ-76-2021
Event Name: Alternative Shelter (Reissue)
ALL GOOD NORTHWEST
BEACON VILLAGE
Bridges to Change, Inc.
CASCADIA CLUSTERS
CATHOLIC CHARITIES
CITY REPAIR PROJECT
Courtesy inn motel
Cultivate Initiatives
Dignity Village, Inc.
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON
EQUITABLE GIVING CIRCLE
FAMILY PROMISE OF METRO EAST
GRAVES CHERYL
GREATER GOOD NORTHWEST
HELPING HANDS REENTRY OUTREACH
CENTERS
Holistic Healing Behavioral Healthcare
LEE KYLE
Matthew Suplee LLC
MISHEEL LLC
N/A (Hazelnut Grove)
Operation Nightwatch
Oregon Trail of Hope
Pause for the Cause Creating Change
POD the People
Portland New Generations Rotary Club
RIGHT 2 DREAM TOO
RISING PHOENIX HOMES LLC
SELF ENHANCEMENT, INC.
STRAIGHTWAY SERVICES
SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TULBERG JOSHUA
Volunteers of America Oregon, Inc. |
|
|
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
![]()
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
-- Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Sunday's Oregonian has much better, dare I say inspiring, coverage of this topic!
Mary
To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian
followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html. Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.  My comments posted on it: 1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in #S2HC 2/n. 3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX, @PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3 Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story. --
Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Hi all,
I am part of the team that submitted proposals from the Sunnyside Neighborhood Association and Beacon Village and would be happy to participate in this discussion.
On Mar 27, 2021, at 11:10 PM, Elise Aymer <elise@...> wrote:
Andy's idea of hosting an alternate space for the group proposals sounds like a great idea.
Which of the groups on the list do you need contact info for?
Some of the names seem like ones for which PDX Shelter Forum would already have connections.
If you have a shortlist of those for which you'd need contact info that would be a good starting point.
Elise great idea Andy, and thanks so much for pulling that list of RFPQ respondents. I didn't realize this was possible from the procurement site, I was waiting for more from procurement analyst, Kathi Braeme-Burr.
we've been discussing ways to gather and cross-support proposers (and new collaborators) since before the last forum, this good movement forward.
Here's an open doc for this on the PDX Shelter Forum site (an unfolding experiment in open, collaborative, decentralized 'site' form using GDocs / Google Drive, by the way): I've added to it the list of proposers from Andy.
If anyone here knows more about the proposals, or whom/how to contact the proposers, please share or add to document. We should be able to get a project listing, whats-needed, how-can-i-help, and discussion going here! thanks, Tim.
How about hosting a call asking all applicants to share their proposals and see what the community can do to come together around this important work
Proposals Received:
Event Number RFPQ-76-2021
Event Name: Alternative Shelter (Reissue)
ALL GOOD NORTHWEST
BEACON VILLAGE
Bridges to Change, Inc.
CASCADIA CLUSTERS
CATHOLIC CHARITIES
CITY REPAIR PROJECT
Courtesy inn motel
Cultivate Initiatives
Dignity Village, Inc.
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON
EQUITABLE GIVING CIRCLE
FAMILY PROMISE OF METRO EAST
GRAVES CHERYL
GREATER GOOD NORTHWEST
HELPING HANDS REENTRY OUTREACH
CENTERS
Holistic Healing Behavioral Healthcare
LEE KYLE
Matthew Suplee LLC
MISHEEL LLC
N/A (Hazelnut Grove)
Operation Nightwatch
Oregon Trail of Hope
Pause for the Cause Creating Change
POD the People
Portland New Generations Rotary Club
RIGHT 2 DREAM TOO
RISING PHOENIX HOMES LLC
SELF ENHANCEMENT, INC.
STRAIGHTWAY SERVICES
SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TULBERG JOSHUA
Volunteers of America Oregon, Inc. |
|
|
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
![]()
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
-- Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Re the Sunnyside Neighborhood Association and Beacon Village proposal - thanks Matt. Elise
Hi all,
I am part of the team that submitted proposals from the Sunnyside Neighborhood Association and Beacon Village and would be happy to participate in this discussion.
-Matt Lembo On Mar 27, 2021, at 11:10 PM, Elise Aymer <elise@...> wrote:
Andy's idea of hosting an alternate space for the group proposals sounds like a great idea.
Which of the groups on the list do you need contact info for?
Some of the names seem like ones for which PDX Shelter Forum would already have connections.
If you have a shortlist of those for which you'd need contact info that would be a good starting point.
Elise great idea Andy, and thanks so much for pulling that list of RFPQ respondents. I didn't realize this was possible from the procurement site, I was waiting for more from procurement analyst, Kathi Braeme-Burr.
we've been discussing ways to gather and cross-support proposers (and new collaborators) since before the last forum, this good movement forward.
Here's an open doc for this on the PDX Shelter Forum site (an unfolding experiment in open, collaborative, decentralized 'site' form using GDocs / Google Drive, by the way): I've added to it the list of proposers from Andy.
If anyone here knows more about the proposals, or whom/how to contact the proposers, please share or add to document. We should be able to get a project listing, whats-needed, how-can-i-help, and discussion going here! thanks, Tim.
How about hosting a call asking all applicants to share their proposals and see what the community can do to come together around this important work
Proposals Received:
Event Number RFPQ-76-2021
Event Name: Alternative Shelter (Reissue)
ALL GOOD NORTHWEST
BEACON VILLAGE
Bridges to Change, Inc.
CASCADIA CLUSTERS
CATHOLIC CHARITIES
CITY REPAIR PROJECT
Courtesy inn motel
Cultivate Initiatives
Dignity Village, Inc.
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON
EQUITABLE GIVING CIRCLE
FAMILY PROMISE OF METRO EAST
GRAVES CHERYL
GREATER GOOD NORTHWEST
HELPING HANDS REENTRY OUTREACH
CENTERS
Holistic Healing Behavioral Healthcare
LEE KYLE
Matthew Suplee LLC
MISHEEL LLC
N/A (Hazelnut Grove)
Operation Nightwatch
Oregon Trail of Hope
Pause for the Cause Creating Change
POD the People
Portland New Generations Rotary Club
RIGHT 2 DREAM TOO
RISING PHOENIX HOMES LLC
SELF ENHANCEMENT, INC.
STRAIGHTWAY SERVICES
SUNNYSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION
TULBERG JOSHUA
Volunteers of America Oregon, Inc. |
|
|
I also received negative knee jerk reactions from people who only saw the word parks, but I do think the initial narrative could have been better defined. I wish people would educate themselves and watch the city council meetings to get a better understanding. This is frustrating because neighbors don't understand that the willy nilly camping they see and complain about can't be stopped unless there are acceptable and available (sanctioned) for them to go. Thanks for all the advocacy! Earlier this week I posted on Nextdoor Woodstock the OPB article on S2HC and almost immediately received a bunch of negative replies. My neighbors who posted, with one or two exceptions, are all convinced that the central idea is to put camps in parks. I argued with them to no avail, which was discouraging to say the least. Interfaith Alliance on Poverty On Friday, March 26, 2021, 03:33:52 PM PDT, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote: To: PDX Shelter Forum Bcc: Nicole Hayden, reporter, The Oregonian Laura Gunderson, public editor, The Oregonian followup article after Weds City Council meeting on Shelter to Housing Continuum: "Portland City Council assures residents that homeless quarters will not be allowed in parks" https://www.oregonlive.com/news/2021/03/portland-city-council-assures-residents-that-homeless-quarters-will-not-be-allowed-in-parks.html.
Accompanied, like our Op-ed, by one of the most dismal-looking pictures I have ever seen of a permitted camp for the unhoused. It's also completely out of date, taken in November before these tents and pallets were fully replaced by Pallet Shelter units.
![]()
My comments posted on it:
1. the headline, opening, and tweet are misleading to inaccurate. Council is upholding use of parks Community Centers, parking lots, paved areas, this is not "not allowed in parks." 1/n
2. the reporter has repeatedly characterized proposals as for "semi-permanent structures". But tiny houses on wheels are permanent structures, also the @PDXshelterforum coalition in testimony over past year & Op-ed yesterday has called for allowing permanent structures & housing in
#S2HC 2/n.
3. the reporter say "a handful of residents" opposed RV hookup reqs. But that opposition includes the Planning & Sustainability Commission & very wide community support including @PNWelcome, @catoregon, @SunrisePDX,
@PDXshelterforum etc. Why are *only* officials/staff's views presented? 3/3
Once again, as has been generally true of local news coverage of S2HC and related issues organized community/citizen advocacy has been largely erased from the story.
-- Tim McCormick Portland, Oregon
-- Elise Aymer
Co-founder, Critical Diversity Solutions Pronouns: She/her
Thanks for your message!
You can expect a response from our team within two business days.
|
|
|
