|
As someone who has been involved for many months in the drafting of Good Neighbor Agreements with the county/city for a safe rest village (SRV), I have scratched my head repeatedly at the county and Joint Office’s refusal to consider even the most low level screening/background checks (even self-attestation) for residents of the SRV. The opposition to resident screening is based on the traumatic effect it will have on those being screened. The question I keep asking myself is, “With the consistent message we hear from unhoused folks that they fear going to shelters, why are the county and the joint office not concerned with the traumatic impact on residents who might very well be housed right next to a sex offender or serious felon.”
As usual, there will be no indication that anyone who is paid to "work" at these internment camps will have proper qualifications to do so. At the Multnomah Safe Rest Village (MSRV), according to a 'case worker' I spoke to from there, neither she nor anyone in management there has qualifications to be case workers. She actually told me that she'd like me to tell what she should be doing because "I know more than she does" about how to help unhoused people. The case at hand for which I was in touch with her, had to do with a stalker at the MSRV who is endangering the well-being of a woman who also lives there whom I've known for years. Yes, Wheeler, Ryan, Adams, all of them at the city know about this because I've written to them about it. No one is helping my friend. One of the case workers at the MSRV told my friend that she should write a letter to her stalker telling him that if he gets thrown out for being a stalker, it wasn't her fault. Yes, this happened. What were that case worker's qualifications? He was once homeless. This is a big fucking problem. And again, the city knows and doesn't care. All Good Multnomah doesn't care. Do Good Multnomah doesn't care. (Did you know that the men of those two orgs were never vetted for sex abuse or domestic violence or other crimes and yet they work closely with women? )
Imagine what will happen to women at these internments camps. Rape. Stalking. Forced prostitution. And who the hell is going to do anything to prevent this? I don't see one dollar going towards anything remotely real in protecting women from many of the men at these camps. The MSRV has only 18 or so residents and it can't prevent it. The city knows and it WON'T prevent it. These camps will be hell for women. Does anyone care? Nope. This is going to be run by a bunch of men who have shown their complete disregard for the well-being and safety of women.
My friend, the one being stalked at the MSRV, has left the MSRV to choose to live on the streets because her camp on the street is safer for her than the MSRV. How's that for a statement? And it's the truth. By the way, if anyone reading this want to help me with this situation, please email me.
Do not for one second, believe the lies that Wheeler/Adams/Ryan/Mapps and the new fascist, Gonzales, are going to tell you. You can't throw money at the houseless situation. 27 million could house a lot of people. That's what it should be used for.
I am angry, furious, and scared to death for what will become of women at these camps, not to mention anyone and everyone in the BIPOC and LGBTQIA communities.
Let's talk.
Mimi
Wheeler proposes $27M for sanctioned camping sites for homeless
by KATU Staff Thursday, November 10th 2022 (KATU) PORTLAND, Ore. — Mayor Ted Wheeler has proposed a $27 million “down payment” from the city budget to help build six new designated camping sites. Last week the City Council approved policies to create six designated camping sites and phase-in a citywide ban on unsanctioned camping. The mayor’s proposal includes nearly $4.2 million for costs directly related to building three of the camps, $12.8 million to cover operational costs for one year, including provider staff salaries and benefits, and $3.5 million for a 50-person city-employee navigation team to connect with individuals experiencing homelessness. "It is no surprise that this work requires a considerable amount of funding," Wheeler said during a City Council meeting Thursday. "I will continue to ask our federal partners, our governor elect, our leaders within the Metro Regional Government, and the incoming Multnomah County chair to partner with us and to provide the services and resources needed to do the hard work ahead of us." The mayor said that the $27 million is about half of the total the city will need to accomplish its goals for the homeless population. Here’s the full breakdown of the mayor’s proposal as released by his office on Thursday:
- $150,000 to conduct a public land evaluation for affordable housing as well as an assessment of local regulations on housing costs and production.
- $3.5 million for fifty-person city-employee Navigation Team to increase connection with individuals experiencing homelessness and available services. Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $4,188,600 for capital costs for three designated camping sites as well as site preparation and construction costs.
- $12,845,750 for operational costs for three designated camping sites for one year, including provider staff salaries and benefits. Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $750,000 to secure private security contracts for surrounding neighborhoods and business districts of designated camping locations.
- $550,000 to maintain and enhance homeless related services.
- $1,500,000 to expand staff capacity for the City Incident Command team operational structure to systematize increased management, oversight, and strategy related to homeless services. Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $3,891,164 for the Impact Reduction Program to continue operating at their current level of service through the year.
-- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
Andy Harris <andyharrismd4@...>
I agree that resident screening/background checks are necessary for the safety and security of all shelter residents. Otherwise it will not be a safe environment, especially for vulnerable women and children. Similarly, large enclosed spaces and tent villages are inherently unsafe. Houseless persons deserve a space at least the size of a tiny house, where they can lock their belongings when they are away, and where they can feel safe as they and their family sleep. Adequate housing is not the full answer for people living on the street, just the first and most vital step forward when paired with wraparound services. Andy Harris
As someone who has been involved for many months in the drafting of Good Neighbor Agreements with the county/city for a safe rest village (SRV), I have scratched my head repeatedly at the county and Joint Office’s refusal to consider even the most low level screening/background checks (even self-attestation) for residents of the SRV. The opposition to resident screening is based on the traumatic effect it will have on those being screened. The question I keep asking myself is, “With the consistent message we hear from unhoused folks that they fear going to shelters, why are the county and the joint office not concerned with the traumatic impact on residents who might very well be housed right next to a sex offender or serious felon.”
As usual, there will be no indication that anyone who is paid to "work" at these internment camps will have proper qualifications to do so. At the Multnomah Safe Rest Village (MSRV), according to a 'case worker' I spoke to from there, neither she nor anyone in management there has qualifications to be case workers. She actually told me that she'd like me to tell what she should be doing because "I know more than she does" about how to help unhoused people. The case at hand for which I was in touch with her, had to do with a stalker at the MSRV who is endangering the well-being of a woman who also lives there whom I've known for years. Yes, Wheeler, Ryan, Adams, all of them at the city know about this because I've written to them about it. No one is helping my friend. One of the case workers at the MSRV told my friend that she should write a letter to her stalker telling him that if he gets thrown out for being a stalker, it wasn't her fault. Yes, this happened. What were that case worker's qualifications? He was once homeless. This is a big fucking problem. And again, the city knows and doesn't care. All Good Multnomah doesn't care. Do Good Multnomah doesn't care. (Did you know that the men of those two orgs were never vetted for sex abuse or domestic violence or other crimes and yet they work closely with women? )
Imagine what will happen to women at these internments camps. Rape. Stalking. Forced prostitution. And who the hell is going to do anything to prevent this? I don't see one dollar going towards anything remotely real in protecting women from many of the men at these camps. The MSRV has only 18 or so residents and it can't prevent it. The city knows and it WON'T prevent it. These camps will be hell for women. Does anyone care? Nope. This is going to be run by a bunch of men who have shown their complete disregard for the well-being and safety of women.
My friend, the one being stalked at the MSRV, has left the MSRV to choose to live on the streets because her camp on the street is safer for her than the MSRV. How's that for a statement? And it's the truth. By the way, if anyone reading this want to help me with this situation, please email me.
Do not for one second, believe the lies that Wheeler/Adams/Ryan/Mapps and the new fascist, Gonzales, are going to tell you. You can't throw money at the houseless situation. 27 million could house a lot of people. That's what it should be used for.
I am angry, furious, and scared to death for what will become of women at these camps, not to mention anyone and everyone in the BIPOC and LGBTQIA communities.
Let's talk.
Mimi
Wheeler proposes $27M for sanctioned camping sites for homeless
by KATU Staff Thursday, November 10th 2022 (KATU) PORTLAND, Ore. — Mayor Ted Wheeler has proposed a $27 million “down payment” from the city budget to help build six new designated camping sites. Last week the City Council approved policies to create six designated camping sites and phase-in a citywide ban on unsanctioned camping. The mayor’s proposal includes nearly $4.2 million for costs directly related to building three of the camps, $12.8 million to cover operational costs for one year, including provider staff salaries and benefits, and $3.5 million for a 50-person city-employee navigation team to connect with individuals experiencing homelessness. "It is no surprise that this work requires a considerable amount of funding," Wheeler said during a City Council meeting Thursday. "I will continue to ask our federal partners, our governor elect, our leaders within the Metro Regional Government, and the incoming Multnomah County chair to partner with us and to provide the services and resources needed to do the hard work ahead of us." The mayor said that the $27 million is about half of the total the city will need to accomplish its goals for the homeless population. Here’s the full breakdown of the mayor’s proposal as released by his office on Thursday:
- $150,000 to conduct a public land evaluation for affordable housing as well as an assessment of local regulations on housing costs and production.
- $3.5 million for fifty-person city-employee Navigation Team to increase connection with individuals experiencing homelessness and available services. Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $4,188,600 for capital costs for three designated camping sites as well as site preparation and construction costs.
- $12,845,750 for operational costs for three designated camping sites for one year, including provider staff salaries and benefits. Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $750,000 to secure private security contracts for surrounding neighborhoods and business districts of designated camping locations.
- $550,000 to maintain and enhance homeless related services.
- $1,500,000 to expand staff capacity for the City Incident Command team operational structure to systematize increased management, oversight, and strategy related to homeless services. Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $3,891,164 for the Impact Reduction Program to continue operating at their current level of service through the year.
-- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha
Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking about
petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt co
Ca.
Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability to
support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in school
as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker (person
in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the case in
common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working in
such villages.
However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down hill
from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home is
bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in ways
that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best in
each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up low
cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks,
Jayme
jayme@...
On 11/12/2022 9:35 AM, David Dickson
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
As someone who has been involved for many months in the drafting
of Good Neighbor Agreements with the county/city for a safe rest
village (SRV), I have scratched my head repeatedly at the county
and Joint Office’s refusal to consider even the most low level
screening/background checks (even self-attestation) for residents
of the SRV. The opposition to resident screening is based on the
traumatic effect it will have on those being screened. The
question I keep asking myself is, “With the consistent message we
hear from unhoused folks that they fear going to shelters, why are
the county and the joint office not concerned with the traumatic
impact on residents who might very well be housed right next to a
sex offender or serious felon.”
As usual, there will be no indication that
anyone who is paid to "work" at these internment camps
will have proper qualifications to do so. At the
Multnomah Safe Rest Village (MSRV), according to a
'case worker' I spoke to from there, neither she nor
anyone in management there has qualifications to be
case workers. She actually told me that she'd like me
to tell what she should be doing because "I know more
than she does" about how to help unhoused people. The
case at hand for which I was in touch with her, had to
do with a stalker at the MSRV who is endangering the
well-being of a woman who also lives there whom I've
known for years. Yes, Wheeler, Ryan, Adams, all of
them at the city know about this because I've written
to them about it. No one is helping my friend. One of
the case workers at the MSRV told my friend that she
should write a letter to her stalker telling him that
if he gets thrown out for being a stalker, it wasn't
her fault. Yes, this happened. What were that case
worker's qualifications? He was once homeless. This is
a big fucking problem. And again, the city knows and
doesn't care. All Good Multnomah doesn't care. Do Good
Multnomah doesn't care. (Did you know that the men of
those two orgs were never vetted for sex abuse or
domestic violence or other crimes and yet they work
closely with women? )
Imagine what will happen to women at these
internments camps. Rape. Stalking. Forced
prostitution. And who the hell is going to do anything
to prevent this? I don't see one dollar going towards
anything remotely real in protecting women from many
of the men at these camps. The MSRV has only 18 or so
residents and it can't prevent it. The city knows and
it WON'T prevent it. These camps will be hell for
women. Does anyone care? Nope. This is going to be run
by a bunch of men who have shown their complete
disregard for the well-being and safety of women.
My friend, the one being stalked at the
MSRV, has left the MSRV to choose to live on the
streets because her camp on the street is safer for
her than the MSRV. How's that for a statement? And
it's the truth. By the way, if anyone reading this
want to help me with this situation, please email me.
Do not for one second, believe the lies
that Wheeler/Adams/Ryan/Mapps and the new fascist,
Gonzales, are going to tell you. You can't throw money
at the houseless situation. 27 million could house a
lot of people. That's what it should be used for.
I am angry, furious, and scared to death
for what will become of women at these camps, not to
mention anyone and everyone in the BIPOC and LGBTQIA
communities.
Let's talk.
Mimi
Wheeler proposes $27M for sanctioned
camping sites for homeless
by KATU
Staff
Thursday, November 10th 2022
(KATU)
PORTLAND, Ore. — Mayor
Ted Wheeler has proposed a $27 million
“down payment” from the city budget to
help build six new designated camping
sites.
Last week the
City Council approved policies to
create six designated camping sites and
phase-in a citywide ban on unsanctioned
camping.
The mayor’s proposal includes
nearly $4.2 million for costs directly
related to building three of the camps,
$12.8 million to cover operational costs
for one year, including provider staff
salaries and benefits, and $3.5 million
for a 50-person city-employee navigation
team to connect with individuals
experiencing homelessness.
"It is no surprise that this work
requires a considerable amount of
funding," Wheeler said during a City
Council meeting Thursday. "I will continue
to ask our federal partners, our governor
elect, our leaders within the Metro
Regional Government, and the incoming
Multnomah County chair to partner with us
and to provide the services and resources
needed to do the hard work ahead of us."
The mayor said that the $27
million is about half of the total the
city will need to accomplish its goals for
the homeless population.
Here’s the full
breakdown of the mayor’s proposal as
released by his office on Thursday:
- $150,000 to conduct
a public land evaluation for affordable
housing as well as an assessment of
local regulations on housing costs and
production.
- $3.5 million for
fifty-person city-employee Navigation
Team to increase connection with
individuals experiencing homelessness
and available services. Funding for
remainder of fiscal year.
- $4,188,600 for
capital costs for three designated
camping sites as well as site
preparation and construction costs.
- $12,845,750 for
operational costs for three designated
camping sites for one year, including
provider staff salaries and benefits.
Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $750,000 to secure
private security contracts for
surrounding neighborhoods and business
districts of designated camping
locations.
- $550,000 to
maintain and enhance homeless related
services.
- $1,500,000 to
expand staff capacity for the City
Incident Command team operational
structure to systematize increased
management, oversight, and strategy
related to homeless services. Funding
for remainder of fiscal year.
- $3,891,164 for the
Impact Reduction Program to continue
operating at their current level of
service through the year.
--
--
Tim
McCormick
Housing
Alternatives
Network
+1
503.334.1894.
|
|
|
On 11/12/2022 11:49 AM, Jayme Delson
wrote:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha
Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking
about petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt
co Ca.
Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability
to support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in
school as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker
(person in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the
case in common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working
in such villages.
However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down
hill from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home
is bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in
ways that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best
in each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up
low cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks,
Jayme
jayme@...
On 11/12/2022 9:35 AM, David Dickson
wrote:
As someone who has been involved for many months in the drafting
of Good Neighbor Agreements with the county/city for a safe rest
village (SRV), I have scratched my head repeatedly at the county
and Joint Office’s refusal to consider even the most low level
screening/background checks (even self-attestation) for
residents of the SRV. The opposition to resident screening is
based on the traumatic effect it will have on those being
screened. The question I keep asking myself is, “With the
consistent message we hear from unhoused folks that they fear
going to shelters, why are the county and the joint office not
concerned with the traumatic impact on residents who might very
well be housed right next to a sex offender or serious felon.”
As usual, there will be no indication
that anyone who is paid to "work" at these
internment camps will have proper qualifications to
do so. At the Multnomah Safe Rest Village (MSRV),
according to a 'case worker' I spoke to from there,
neither she nor anyone in management there has
qualifications to be case workers. She actually told
me that she'd like me to tell what she should be
doing because "I know more than she does" about how
to help unhoused people. The case at hand for which
I was in touch with her, had to do with a stalker at
the MSRV who is endangering the well-being of a
woman who also lives there whom I've known for
years. Yes, Wheeler, Ryan, Adams, all of them at the
city know about this because I've written to them
about it. No one is helping my friend. One of the
case workers at the MSRV told my friend that she
should write a letter to her stalker telling him
that if he gets thrown out for being a stalker, it
wasn't her fault. Yes, this happened. What were that
case worker's qualifications? He was once homeless.
This is a big fucking problem. And again, the city
knows and doesn't care. All Good Multnomah doesn't
care. Do Good Multnomah doesn't care. (Did you know
that the men of those two orgs were never vetted for
sex abuse or domestic violence or other crimes and
yet they work closely with women? )
Imagine what will happen to women at
these internments camps. Rape. Stalking. Forced
prostitution. And who the hell is going to do
anything to prevent this? I don't see one dollar
going towards anything remotely real in protecting
women from many of the men at these camps. The MSRV
has only 18 or so residents and it can't prevent it.
The city knows and it WON'T prevent it. These camps
will be hell for women. Does anyone care? Nope. This
is going to be run by a bunch of men who have shown
their complete disregard for the well-being and
safety of women.
My friend, the one being stalked at the
MSRV, has left the MSRV to choose to live on the
streets because her camp on the street is safer for
her than the MSRV. How's that for a statement? And
it's the truth. By the way, if anyone reading this
want to help me with this situation, please email
me.
Do not for one second, believe the lies
that Wheeler/Adams/Ryan/Mapps and the new fascist,
Gonzales, are going to tell you. You can't throw
money at the houseless situation. 27 million could
house a lot of people. That's what it should be used
for.
I am angry, furious, and scared to death
for what will become of women at these camps, not to
mention anyone and everyone in the BIPOC and LGBTQIA
communities.
Let's talk.
Mimi
Wheeler proposes $27M for sanctioned
camping sites for homeless
by KATU Staff
Thursday, November 10th 2022
(KATU)
PORTLAND, Ore. — Mayor
Ted Wheeler has proposed a $27 million
“down payment” from the city budget to
help build six new designated camping
sites.
Last week the
City Council approved policies to
create six designated camping sites and
phase-in a citywide ban on unsanctioned
camping.
The mayor’s proposal includes
nearly $4.2 million for costs directly
related to building three of the camps,
$12.8 million to cover operational costs
for one year, including provider staff
salaries and benefits, and $3.5 million
for a 50-person city-employee navigation
team to connect with individuals
experiencing homelessness.
"It is no surprise that this
work requires a considerable amount of
funding," Wheeler said during a City
Council meeting Thursday. "I will
continue to ask our federal partners,
our governor elect, our leaders within
the Metro Regional Government, and the
incoming Multnomah County chair to
partner with us and to provide the
services and resources needed to do the
hard work ahead of us."
The mayor said that the $27
million is about half of the total the
city will need to accomplish its goals
for the homeless population.
Here’s the full
breakdown of the mayor’s proposal as
released by his office on Thursday:
- $150,000 to
conduct a public land evaluation for
affordable housing as well as an
assessment of local regulations on
housing costs and production.
- $3.5 million for
fifty-person city-employee Navigation
Team to increase connection with
individuals experiencing homelessness
and available services. Funding for
remainder of fiscal year.
- $4,188,600 for
capital costs for three designated
camping sites as well as site
preparation and construction costs.
- $12,845,750 for
operational costs for three designated
camping sites for one year, including
provider staff salaries and benefits.
Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $750,000 to
secure private security contracts for
surrounding neighborhoods and business
districts of designated camping
locations.
- $550,000 to
maintain and enhance homeless related
services.
- $1,500,000 to
expand staff capacity for the City
Incident Command team operational
structure to systematize increased
management, oversight, and strategy
related to homeless services. Funding
for remainder of fiscal year.
- $3,891,164 for
the Impact Reduction Program to
continue operating at their current
level of service through the year.
--
--
Tim
McCormick
Housing
Alternatives
Network
+1
503.334.1894.
|
|
|
Hi Jayme. Thanks for letting me know you could see my response.
I agree with you regarding not all social workers are necessarily 'good' social workers. In the case of the MSRV, apparently there are no social workers and the result in this instance, is horrifying and potentially, deadly. But DV issues should never be in the hands of the inexperienced. In this case, just because someone was previously unhoused, he clearly had no clue whatsoever regarding how my friend should respond or not respond to her abuser. There's a part of me that is furious that my friend is now unable to receive even the potential of help from the MSRV, or how the MSRV claims to help regarding future housing. Once again, she's no longer on a list for housing. The pie in the sky list has now been ripped out from beneath her once again.
And screening...yes. I agree and recognize how many unhoused people are kept from housing due to past "criminal" violations, no matter how unwarranted the violations are, in particular, the violation of trespass especially for the unhoused. I've seen how unhoused people are penalized from housing from a past violation that occurred decades ago. What I'm talking about, however, with the contractors who 'win' these multimillion dollar city/county contracts, is specific to sex assaults and DV violations.
One of the myriad issues surrounding these huge encampments is that once again, they are not the answer. Shelters were never the answer. Houseless people have told us that. Repeatedly. Housing is the answer. And you're right. These camps don't house people. They are not even set up to do that, other than be part of a PR scam that proclaims that with the encampment, eventually comes housing. Bullshit. It's never been the case and never will be the case. This city can't even get a handle on humanity for 18 people at the MSRV, let alone the desire to penalize thousands in 3 encampments.
I'm glad to hear you're working on things in CA. I'm sure you'll hear how things go here.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 11:53 AM Jayme Delson < jayme@...> wrote:
On 11/12/2022 11:49 AM, Jayme Delson
wrote:
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha
Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking
about petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt
co Ca.
Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability
to support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in
school as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker
(person in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the
case in common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working
in such villages.
However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down
hill from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home
is bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in
ways that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best
in each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up
low cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks,
Jayme
jayme@...
On 11/12/2022 9:35 AM, David Dickson
wrote:
As someone who has been involved for many months in the drafting
of Good Neighbor Agreements with the county/city for a safe rest
village (SRV), I have scratched my head repeatedly at the county
and Joint Office’s refusal to consider even the most low level
screening/background checks (even self-attestation) for
residents of the SRV. The opposition to resident screening is
based on the traumatic effect it will have on those being
screened. The question I keep asking myself is, “With the
consistent message we hear from unhoused folks that they fear
going to shelters, why are the county and the joint office not
concerned with the traumatic impact on residents who might very
well be housed right next to a sex offender or serious felon.”
As usual, there will be no indication
that anyone who is paid to "work" at these
internment camps will have proper qualifications to
do so. At the Multnomah Safe Rest Village (MSRV),
according to a 'case worker' I spoke to from there,
neither she nor anyone in management there has
qualifications to be case workers. She actually told
me that she'd like me to tell what she should be
doing because "I know more than she does" about how
to help unhoused people. The case at hand for which
I was in touch with her, had to do with a stalker at
the MSRV who is endangering the well-being of a
woman who also lives there whom I've known for
years. Yes, Wheeler, Ryan, Adams, all of them at the
city know about this because I've written to them
about it. No one is helping my friend. One of the
case workers at the MSRV told my friend that she
should write a letter to her stalker telling him
that if he gets thrown out for being a stalker, it
wasn't her fault. Yes, this happened. What were that
case worker's qualifications? He was once homeless.
This is a big fucking problem. And again, the city
knows and doesn't care. All Good Multnomah doesn't
care. Do Good Multnomah doesn't care. (Did you know
that the men of those two orgs were never vetted for
sex abuse or domestic violence or other crimes and
yet they work closely with women? )
Imagine what will happen to women at
these internments camps. Rape. Stalking. Forced
prostitution. And who the hell is going to do
anything to prevent this? I don't see one dollar
going towards anything remotely real in protecting
women from many of the men at these camps. The MSRV
has only 18 or so residents and it can't prevent it.
The city knows and it WON'T prevent it. These camps
will be hell for women. Does anyone care? Nope. This
is going to be run by a bunch of men who have shown
their complete disregard for the well-being and
safety of women.
My friend, the one being stalked at the
MSRV, has left the MSRV to choose to live on the
streets because her camp on the street is safer for
her than the MSRV. How's that for a statement? And
it's the truth. By the way, if anyone reading this
want to help me with this situation, please email
me.
Do not for one second, believe the lies
that Wheeler/Adams/Ryan/Mapps and the new fascist,
Gonzales, are going to tell you. You can't throw
money at the houseless situation. 27 million could
house a lot of people. That's what it should be used
for.
I am angry, furious, and scared to death
for what will become of women at these camps, not to
mention anyone and everyone in the BIPOC and LGBTQIA
communities.
Let's talk.
Mimi
Wheeler proposes $27M for sanctioned
camping sites for homeless
by KATU Staff
Thursday, November 10th 2022
(KATU)
PORTLAND, Ore. — Mayor
Ted Wheeler has proposed a $27 million
“down payment” from the city budget to
help build six new designated camping
sites.
Last week the
City Council approved policies to
create six designated camping sites and
phase-in a citywide ban on unsanctioned
camping.
The mayor’s proposal includes
nearly $4.2 million for costs directly
related to building three of the camps,
$12.8 million to cover operational costs
for one year, including provider staff
salaries and benefits, and $3.5 million
for a 50-person city-employee navigation
team to connect with individuals
experiencing homelessness.
"It is no surprise that this
work requires a considerable amount of
funding," Wheeler said during a City
Council meeting Thursday. "I will
continue to ask our federal partners,
our governor elect, our leaders within
the Metro Regional Government, and the
incoming Multnomah County chair to
partner with us and to provide the
services and resources needed to do the
hard work ahead of us."
The mayor said that the $27
million is about half of the total the
city will need to accomplish its goals
for the homeless population.
Here’s the full
breakdown of the mayor’s proposal as
released by his office on Thursday:
- $150,000 to
conduct a public land evaluation for
affordable housing as well as an
assessment of local regulations on
housing costs and production.
- $3.5 million for
fifty-person city-employee Navigation
Team to increase connection with
individuals experiencing homelessness
and available services. Funding for
remainder of fiscal year.
- $4,188,600 for
capital costs for three designated
camping sites as well as site
preparation and construction costs.
- $12,845,750 for
operational costs for three designated
camping sites for one year, including
provider staff salaries and benefits.
Funding for remainder of fiscal year.
- $750,000 to
secure private security contracts for
surrounding neighborhoods and business
districts of designated camping
locations.
- $550,000 to
maintain and enhance homeless related
services.
- $1,500,000 to
expand staff capacity for the City
Incident Command team operational
structure to systematize increased
management, oversight, and strategy
related to homeless services. Funding
for remainder of fiscal year.
- $3,891,164 for
the Impact Reduction Program to
continue operating at their current
level of service through the year.
--
--
Tim
McCormick
Housing
Alternatives
Network
+1
503.334.1894.
|
|
|
Here's a Twitter thread from a bit earlier today about this, me responding to Catie Gould, who works on parking & transport issues for Sightline Institute:
Catie Gould @Citizen_Cate Back of the envelope here... The direct costs of setting up and operating these mass camping sites for one year ~$17M ….could give the same 1,500 people $980/month for actual housing.
Quote Tweet: 
Portland Mercury @portlandmercury 23h The $27 million in start-up costs for the homeless ban/sanctioned campsite proposal will cover construction, staffing, private security costs, among other things: https://portlandmercury.com/news/2022/11/11/46187174/mayor-proposes-first-round-of-funding-to-run-sanctioned-homeless-encampments… 7:43 PM · Nov 11, 2022
If you’re wondering what a better alternative would be, take it from @StreetRoots. There are existing programs that are successful into getting people into actual housing. They could use *shocker* more funding. 
streetroots.org Kaia Sand | Camping bans, mass camps will worsen Portland’s problems
Catie Gould @Citizen_Cate To be clear, I’m not an expert on homelessness. Just a gal paying $1200 a month for a clean, dry home with electricity, running water, heat, a full kitchen, private bathroom, and a door there hat locks.
It’s cruel to spend nearly the same amount to keep people in tents outside.
Tim McCormick @tmccormick@... @tmccormick Replying to @Citizen_Cate:
counterpoints: placing people into apts involves big % of admin overhead, mostly displaces others from those homes, doesn't address fundamental problem of housing scarcity, isn't suited to/preferred by everyone, & may put put people into unsustainable or dependent situations. 1/
also, expenses for proposed camping areas are largely for support staff. If people were alternately put in apts, wouldn't there still be those support staffing needs, & quite possibly at higher cost because done across many more locations and places without common facilities? 2/ 
Commissioner Dan Ryan and Sharon Meieran
#campingsites' or rest areas need not be just tents. Generally they host cabins, trailers, RVs, permanent tiny houses, etc, & could here. We could let diverse housing be sited, even resident-designed & built there, to fill gaps in our housing, for those it fits. 3/ 
I'm not saying don't use existing apartmnts, just that it has downsides, competes for scarce housing, may not be scalable or sustainable, & doesn't suit all needs/prefs. The alternatives needn't be just tents & unsanctioned camping, we have big need & oppty to open up new ways 4/
there's huge need, oppty for #alternativeshelter & #housingalternatives to help fill glaring gaps in system. Why & how, I suggested in PDX Council 10/26 hearing on #homelessnessPDX resolutions (clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUeISGAA3M4), & will at 11/17 funding (BMP) hearing, all welcome to join: https://www.portland.gov/council/agenda/2022/11/16 5/5
12:36 PM · Nov 12, 2022
Hi Jayme. Thanks for letting me know you could see my response.
I agree with you regarding not all social workers are necessarily 'good' social workers. In the case of the MSRV, apparently there are no social workers and the result in this instance, is horrifying and potentially, deadly. But DV issues should never be in the hands of the inexperienced. In this case, just because someone was previously unhoused, he clearly had no clue whatsoever regarding how my friend should respond or not respond to her abuser. There's a part of me that is furious that my friend is now unable to receive even the potential of help from the MSRV, or how the MSRV claims to help regarding future housing. Once again, she's no longer on a list for housing. The pie in the sky list has now been ripped out from beneath her once again.
And screening...yes. I agree and recognize how many unhoused people are kept from housing due to past "criminal" violations, no matter how unwarranted the violations are, in particular, the violation of trespass especially for the unhoused. I've seen how unhoused people are penalized from housing from a past violation that occurred decades ago. What I'm talking about, however, with the contractors who 'win' these multimillion dollar city/county contracts, is specific to sex assaults and DV violations.
One of the myriad issues surrounding these huge encampments is that once again, they are not the answer. Shelters were never the answer. Houseless people have told us that. Repeatedly. Housing is the answer. And you're right. These camps don't house people. They are not even set up to do that, other than be part of a PR scam that proclaims that with the encampment, eventually comes housing. Bullshit. It's never been the case and never will be the case. This city can't even get a handle on humanity for 18 people at the MSRV, let alone the desire to penalize thousands in 3 encampments.
I'm glad to hear you're working on things in CA. I'm sure you'll hear how things go here.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 11:53 AM Jayme Delson < jayme@...> wrote:
On 11/12/2022 11:49 AM, Jayme Delson
wrote:
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha
Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking
about petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt
co Ca.
Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability
to support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in
school as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker
(person in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the
case in common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working
in such villages.
However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down
hill from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home
is bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in
ways that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best
in each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up
low cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks,
Jayme
jayme@...
-- -- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
looks like images didn't come through on that last post, which for some of the tweets were key to the point.
Here's the thread in images, so you can see it in full illuminated form:
Here's a Twitter thread from a bit earlier today about this, me responding to Catie Gould, who works on parking & transport issues for Sightline Institute:
![QC-rBJMk_x96.jpg]()
Catie Gould @Citizen_Cate Back of the envelope here... The direct costs of setting up and operating these mass camping sites for one year ~$17M ….could give the same 1,500 people $980/month for actual housing.
Quote Tweet: ![yX4zCzQN_normal.jpg]()
Portland Mercury @portlandmercury 23h The $27 million in start-up costs for the homeless ban/sanctioned campsite proposal will cover construction, staffing, private security costs, among other things: https://portlandmercury.com/news/2022/11/11/46187174/mayor-proposes-first-round-of-funding-to-run-sanctioned-homeless-encampments… 7:43 PM · Nov 11, 2022
If you’re wondering what a better alternative would be, take it from @StreetRoots. There are existing programs that are successful into getting people into actual housing. They could use *shocker* more funding. ![fQTmeVWI.jpg]()
streetroots.org Kaia Sand | Camping bans, mass camps will worsen Portland’s problems
Catie Gould @Citizen_Cate To be clear, I’m not an expert on homelessness. Just a gal paying $1200 a month for a clean, dry home with electricity, running water, heat, a full kitchen, private bathroom, and a door there hat locks.
It’s cruel to spend nearly the same amount to keep people in tents outside.
![H5ODPO9K_x96.jpg]()
Tim McCormick @tmccormick@... @tmccormick Replying to @Citizen_Cate:
counterpoints: placing people into apts involves big % of admin overhead, mostly displaces others from those homes, doesn't address fundamental problem of housing scarcity, isn't suited to/preferred by everyone, & may put put people into unsustainable or dependent situations. 1/
also, expenses for proposed camping areas are largely for support staff. If people were alternately put in apts, wouldn't there still be those support staffing needs, & quite possibly at higher cost because done across many more locations and places without common facilities? 2/ ![FhYqlv8UoAM0pp5.jpg]()
Commissioner Dan Ryan and Sharon Meieran
#campingsites' or rest areas need not be just tents. Generally they host cabins, trailers, RVs, permanent tiny houses, etc, & could here. We could let diverse housing be sited, even resident-designed & built there, to fill gaps in our housing, for those it fits. 3/ ![FhYwghtUAAEOhy1.jpg]()
![FhYwgh3VUAAuEUU.jpg]()
I'm not saying don't use existing apartmnts, just that it has downsides, competes for scarce housing, may not be scalable or sustainable, & doesn't suit all needs/prefs. The alternatives needn't be just tents & unsanctioned camping, we have big need & oppty to open up new ways 4/
there's huge need, oppty for #alternativeshelter & #housingalternatives to help fill glaring gaps in system. Why & how, I suggested in PDX Council 10/26 hearing on #homelessnessPDX resolutions (clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUeISGAA3M4), & will at 11/17 funding (BMP) hearing, all welcome to join: https://www.portland.gov/council/agenda/2022/11/16 5/5
![EsbBPqR6TG6hCUsf.jpg]()
12:36 PM · Nov 12, 2022
Hi Jayme. Thanks for letting me know you could see my response.
I agree with you regarding not all social workers are necessarily 'good' social workers. In the case of the MSRV, apparently there are no social workers and the result in this instance, is horrifying and potentially, deadly. But DV issues should never be in the hands of the inexperienced. In this case, just because someone was previously unhoused, he clearly had no clue whatsoever regarding how my friend should respond or not respond to her abuser. There's a part of me that is furious that my friend is now unable to receive even the potential of help from the MSRV, or how the MSRV claims to help regarding future housing. Once again, she's no longer on a list for housing. The pie in the sky list has now been ripped out from beneath her once again.
And screening...yes. I agree and recognize how many unhoused people are kept from housing due to past "criminal" violations, no matter how unwarranted the violations are, in particular, the violation of trespass especially for the unhoused. I've seen how unhoused people are penalized from housing from a past violation that occurred decades ago. What I'm talking about, however, with the contractors who 'win' these multimillion dollar city/county contracts, is specific to sex assaults and DV violations.
One of the myriad issues surrounding these huge encampments is that once again, they are not the answer. Shelters were never the answer. Houseless people have told us that. Repeatedly. Housing is the answer. And you're right. These camps don't house people. They are not even set up to do that, other than be part of a PR scam that proclaims that with the encampment, eventually comes housing. Bullshit. It's never been the case and never will be the case. This city can't even get a handle on humanity for 18 people at the MSRV, let alone the desire to penalize thousands in 3 encampments.
I'm glad to hear you're working on things in CA. I'm sure you'll hear how things go here.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 11:53 AM Jayme Delson < jayme@...> wrote:
On 11/12/2022 11:49 AM, Jayme Delson
wrote:
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha
Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking
about petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt
co Ca.
Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability
to support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in
school as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker
(person in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the
case in common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working
in such villages.
However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down
hill from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home
is bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in
ways that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best
in each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up
low cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks,
Jayme
jayme@...
-- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
-- -- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
Lindsey Leason <lindsey.leason@...>
Can I be removed from this email listserv
On Nov 12, 2022, at 1:42 PM, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote:
looks like images didn't come through on that last post, which for some of the tweets were key to the point.
Here's the thread in images, so you can see it in full illuminated form:
Here's a Twitter thread from a bit earlier today about this, me responding to Catie Gould, who works on parking & transport issues for Sightline Institute:
![QC-rBJMk_x96.jpg]()
Catie Gould @Citizen_Cate Back of the envelope here... The direct costs of setting up and operating these mass camping sites for one year ~$17M ….could give the same 1,500 people $980/month for actual housing.
Quote Tweet: ![yX4zCzQN_normal.jpg]()
Portland Mercury @portlandmercury 23h The $27 million in start-up costs for the homeless ban/sanctioned campsite proposal will cover construction, staffing, private security costs, among other things: https://portlandmercury.com/news/2022/11/11/46187174/mayor-proposes-first-round-of-funding-to-run-sanctioned-homeless-encampments… 7:43 PM · Nov 11, 2022
If you’re wondering what a better alternative would be, take it from @StreetRoots. There are existing programs that are successful into getting people into actual housing. They could use *shocker* more funding. ![fQTmeVWI.jpg]()
streetroots.org Kaia Sand | Camping bans, mass camps will worsen Portland’s problems
Catie Gould @Citizen_Cate To be clear, I’m not an expert on homelessness. Just a gal paying $1200 a month for a clean, dry home with electricity, running water, heat, a full kitchen, private bathroom, and a door there hat locks.
It’s cruel to spend nearly the same amount to keep people in tents outside.
![H5ODPO9K_x96.jpg]()
Tim McCormick @tmccormick@... @tmccormick Replying to @Citizen_Cate:
counterpoints: placing people into apts involves big % of admin overhead, mostly displaces others from those homes, doesn't address fundamental problem of housing scarcity, isn't suited to/preferred by everyone, & may put put people into unsustainable or dependent situations. 1/
also, expenses for proposed camping areas are largely for support staff. If people were alternately put in apts, wouldn't there still be those support staffing needs, & quite possibly at higher cost because done across many more locations and places without common facilities? 2/ ![FhYqlv8UoAM0pp5.jpg]()
Commissioner Dan Ryan and Sharon Meieran
#campingsites' or rest areas need not be just tents. Generally they host cabins, trailers, RVs, permanent tiny houses, etc, & could here. We could let diverse housing be sited, even resident-designed & built there, to fill gaps in our housing, for those it fits. 3/ ![FhYwghtUAAEOhy1.jpg]()
![FhYwgh3VUAAuEUU.jpg]()
I'm not saying don't use existing apartmnts, just that it has downsides, competes for scarce housing, may not be scalable or sustainable, & doesn't suit all needs/prefs. The alternatives needn't be just tents & unsanctioned camping, we have big need & oppty to open up new ways 4/
there's huge need, oppty for #alternativeshelter & #housingalternatives to help fill glaring gaps in system. Why & how, I suggested in PDX Council 10/26 hearing on #homelessnessPDX resolutions (clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUeISGAA3M4), & will at 11/17 funding (BMP) hearing, all welcome to join: https://www.portland.gov/council/agenda/2022/11/16 5/5
![EsbBPqR6TG6hCUsf.jpg]()
12:36 PM · Nov 12, 2022
Hi Jayme. Thanks for letting me know you could see my response.
I agree with you regarding not all social workers are necessarily 'good' social workers. In the case of the MSRV, apparently there are no social workers and the result in this instance, is horrifying and potentially, deadly. But DV issues should never be in the hands of the inexperienced. In this case, just because someone was previously unhoused, he clearly had no clue whatsoever regarding how my friend should respond or not respond to her abuser. There's a part of me that is furious that my friend is now unable to receive even the potential of help from the MSRV, or how the MSRV claims to help regarding future housing. Once again, she's no longer on a list for housing. The pie in the sky list has now been ripped out from beneath her once again.
And screening...yes. I agree and recognize how many unhoused people are kept from housing due to past "criminal" violations, no matter how unwarranted the violations are, in particular, the violation of trespass especially for the unhoused. I've seen how unhoused people are penalized from housing from a past violation that occurred decades ago. What I'm talking about, however, with the contractors who 'win' these multimillion dollar city/county contracts, is specific to sex assaults and DV violations.
One of the myriad issues surrounding these huge encampments is that once again, they are not the answer. Shelters were never the answer. Houseless people have told us that. Repeatedly. Housing is the answer. And you're right. These camps don't house people. They are not even set up to do that, other than be part of a PR scam that proclaims that with the encampment, eventually comes housing. Bullshit. It's never been the case and never will be the case. This city can't even get a handle on humanity for 18 people at the MSRV, let alone the desire to penalize thousands in 3 encampments.
I'm glad to hear you're working on things in CA. I'm sure you'll hear how things go here.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 11:53 AM Jayme Delson < jayme@...> wrote:
On 11/12/2022 11:49 AM, Jayme Delson
wrote:
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha
Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking
about petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt
co Ca.
Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability
to support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in
school as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker
(person in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the
case in common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working
in such villages.
However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down
hill from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home
is bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in
ways that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best
in each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up
low cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks,
Jayme
jayme@...
-- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
-- -- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Nov 12, 2022, at 1:42 PM, Tim McCormick <tmccormick@...> wrote:
looks like images didn't come through on that last post, which for some of the tweets were key to the point.
Here's the thread in images, so you can see it in full illuminated form:
<IMG_0100.jpeg>
<IMG_0102.jpeg> <IMG_0103.jpeg>
Here's a Twitter thread from a bit earlier today about this, me responding to Catie Gould, who works on parking & transport issues for Sightline Institute: ![QC-rBJMk_x96.jpg]()
Back of the envelope here... The direct costs of setting up and operating these mass camping sites for one year ~$17M ….could give the same 1,500 people $980/month for actual housing.
Quote Tweet: ![yX4zCzQN_normal.jpg]()
Portland Mercury @portlandmercury 23h The $27 million in start-up costs for the homeless ban/sanctioned campsite proposal will cover construction, staffing, private security costs, among other things:
If you’re wondering what a better alternative would be, take it from @StreetRoots. There are existing programs that are successful into getting people into actual housing. They could use *shocker* more funding. ![fQTmeVWI.jpg]()
To be clear, I’m not an expert on homelessness. Just a gal paying $1200 a month for a clean, dry home with electricity, running water, heat, a full kitchen, private bathroom, and a door there hat locks.
It’s cruel to spend nearly the same amount to keep people in tents outside. ![H5ODPO9K_x96.jpg]()
counterpoints: placing people into apts involves big % of admin overhead, mostly displaces others from those homes, doesn't address fundamental problem of housing scarcity, isn't suited to/preferred by everyone, & may put put people into unsustainable or dependent situations. 1/
also, expenses for proposed camping areas are largely for support staff. If people were alternately put in apts, wouldn't there still be those support staffing needs, & quite possibly at higher cost because done across many more locations and places without common facilities? 2/ ![FhYqlv8UoAM0pp5.jpg]()
#campingsites' or rest areas need not be just tents. Generally they host cabins, trailers, RVs, permanent tiny houses, etc, & could here. We could let diverse housing be sited, even resident-designed & built there, to fill gaps in our housing, for those it fits. 3/ ![FhYwghtUAAEOhy1.jpg]()
![FhYwgh3VUAAuEUU.jpg]()
I'm not saying don't use existing apartmnts, just that it has downsides, competes for scarce housing, may not be scalable or sustainable, & doesn't suit all needs/prefs. The alternatives needn't be just tents & unsanctioned camping, we have big need & oppty to open up new ways 4/
![EsbBPqR6TG6hCUsf.jpg]()
Hi Jayme. Thanks for letting me know you could see my response.
I agree with you regarding not all social workers are necessarily 'good' social workers. In the case of the MSRV, apparently there are no social workers and the result in this instance, is horrifying and potentially, deadly. But DV issues should never be in the hands of the inexperienced. In this case, just because someone was previously unhoused, he clearly had no clue whatsoever regarding how my friend should respond or not respond to her abuser. There's a part of me that is furious that my friend is now unable to receive even the potential of help from the MSRV, or how the MSRV claims to help regarding future housing. Once again, she's no longer on a list for housing. The pie in the sky list has now been ripped out from beneath her once again.
And screening...yes. I agree and recognize how many unhoused people are kept from housing due to past "criminal" violations, no matter how unwarranted the violations are, in particular, the violation of trespass especially for the unhoused. I've seen how unhoused people are penalized from housing from a past violation that occurred decades ago. What I'm talking about, however, with the contractors who 'win' these multimillion dollar city/county contracts, is specific to sex assaults and DV violations.
One of the myriad issues surrounding these huge encampments is that once again, they are not the answer. Shelters were never the answer. Houseless people have told us that. Repeatedly. Housing is the answer. And you're right. These camps don't house people. They are not even set up to do that, other than be part of a PR scam that proclaims that with the encampment, eventually comes housing. Bullshit. It's never been the case and never will be the case. This city can't even get a handle on humanity for 18 people at the MSRV, let alone the desire to penalize thousands in 3 encampments.
I'm glad to hear you're working on things in CA. I'm sure you'll hear how things go here.
On Sat, Nov 12, 2022 at 11:53 AM Jayme Delson < jayme@...> wrote:
On 11/12/2022 11:49 AM, Jayme Delson
wrote:
Hi Mimi, Jason, David and Aisha Mimi i see you response to Jason regarding your not talking
about petty crime.
Thanks for your thoughts, i share and agree with your concerns.
I/we are working to establish pilot projects for people with no
home, people on the edge, and others here in Southern Humboldt
co Ca. Reading about the MSRV reminds me of wild west stories, i am so
sorry for especially the victims, but also for the perpetrators
and the messed up system as a whole.
A screening process is a bit of an invasion, if done without
care. No screening process within today's world is just
dangerous, and fails to take advantage of a great opportunity to
discover how we can help each other, and who may stay but are
needing special attention, and who are just outside our ability
to support safely.
What we are currently exploring is first the best scope of
screening. And second, it is common for someone trained in
school as a social worker of any sort, to be a good case worker
(person in need advocate) however this has proven to not be the
case in common practice.
Perhaps we need to start a training course for people working
in such villages. However i presume the MSRV is a transitional housing
village, where most people know that there is no place to
transition to? People take this bridge to nowhere, only so many
times before the joy is beaten out of them, and it goes down
hill from there.
This bridge to no where model of treating people with no home
is bad and should be ended. Permanent villages can function in
ways that are inspiring to people, and often brings out the best
in each other if done with a collaborative focus.
if this is indeed the early days of a long term, high priced
economic depression, we will be needing to improve and ramp up
low cost, sustainable, uplifting solutions for most all of us!
The only way i know to stop the MSRV destructive approach is to
deploy better ways that render the boarder style camps obsolete,
otherwise i suspect we will be seeing way more of this border
style camps in the years to come.
Thanks, Jayme
jayme@...
-- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
-- -- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
To: Alternative Shelter Network, PDX Shelter Forum
this is link to recording & transcript of City of Portland meeting last Weds about the proposed Designated Camping Areas; hosted by Sam Adams, Director of Strategic Initiatives at the Mayor's Office: "Mayor's Office Community Stakeholder Meeting #1 - adopted resolutions"
At the end, Sam says he will email out the Powerpoint presentation, and info for NEXT MEETING TODAY, WEDS NOV 16 -- CAN ANYONE SHARE INFO / LINK TO THIS?
thanks, Tim.
Housing Alternatives Network
---------- Forwarded message ---- From: Andrew Olshin <Andrew.Olshin@...>Date: Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [pdxshelterforum] Wheeler proposes $27M for sanctioned camping sites for homeless To: Shelter Forum < pdxshelterforum@groups.io>
-- -- Tim McCormick
Housing Alternatives Network +1 503.334.1894.
|
|
|
