Knowing that readers of iBrattleboro readily offer their opinions, I am putting the following link out there and look forward to comments. The video takes about 1 hour to view in its entirety, so with the oncoming snow, plan accordingly. What implications stem from the video for public policy? Town policy?
CONVERSATIONS VERMONT
Homelessness: Myths, Gaps, Sucesses
January 8, 2015
Guests include Lisa Pitcher(Executive Director of Our Place), Pat Burke(Director of Family Services), and Josh Davis(Executive Director of Morningside Shelter). To order a copy of this program or request replay airtime on our TV station, please call Falls Area Community TV at (802) 463-1613.
http://www.fact8.com/mlplay.php?8986
Thanks Bob for posting this.
Thanks Bob for posting this. I hope many more people are taking the hour to listen to this conversation, as it was very important and very informative, not only to keep us aware of the dire situation that so many face (often due to no fault of their own !), and the challenges that these agencies are facing to keep up with the needs, but also in explaining the details about how the system itself creates and continues the problem, instead of shifting to methods that can work towards solving these problems, to provide basic needs and to provide a way out and up for those who are hurting.
Josh and the others laid out in perfectly rational terms how changes in the way we approach these issues would be far more economical (in a time when, unfortunately, pure economics is the decisive factor), not to mention more effective to meet these human needs. Why aren’t the ideas expressed here being used to develop these systemic changes?
Thank you Barry
Thank you Barry, for taking the time to view the video.
I wish I had a good answer for your question “Why aren’t the ideas expressed here being used to develop these systemic changes?”
As to the use of funds to stave off a crisis rather than react to it:
Perhaps because unless someone clearly crosses some objective Rubicon (e.g. eviction), the funding agency would have to give great deference to the discretion of the disbursing agency. Would this open up questions of personal bias?
As to the funding of hotel beds versus supportive shelters? I suppose an argument might be that to do the former does not “build capacity” that may not be needed indefinitely, or year round. On the other hand, it appears to have been done successfully in Shelburne: http://www.vtaffordablehousing.org/news/2013/12/seven-days-profiles-harbor-place-recent-homeless-family/
That said, the three agency heads, Lisa, Josh and Pat, are all really dedicated people and make persuasive arguments.
Crazy idea - give homeless homes
The Daily Show recently featured a city out west that got rid of homelessness entirely. They gave them homes!
Turns out it was cheaper to give people new homes (about a cost of $12,000 a year) and give them a base to find work and be productive than it was to pay for numerous support services and programs.
Plus, no homeless people on the street, need for shelters, etc.
Check out Utah….
What an extraordinary idea...
to end homelessness making sure everyone has a home.
What I do not understand is why that would cost $13,000. First, last, and security comes to a fraction of that sum. Is that the figure for getting someone into an existing rental unit, or does it include creating new housing?
In Brattleboro, a “side-effect” of building the “Transportation Center” (Parking Garage) was the demolition of the Bushnell Building, where there had been a large number of low rent single room occupancies, and and low-rent apartments. Where did the people living there go?
Did increased demand lead to higher rents in other, previously low-rent buildings? The lowest rent advertised for the Barber Building is $650 a month. When I came to Brattleboro 30 years ago, I think it was much more friendly to people with low and very low incomes. Today, where can a person trying to live on $800 a month disability reside?
I Know
It is crazy – homes for people without homes to get rid of homelessness. And giving poor people money, so they’d no longer be poor.
Next thing you know, we’ll be giving food to people to end hunger.
This could clearly get out of hand quickly. We might end most of the basic suffering of our friends, family and neighbors, leading them to feel more invested in society and living a more productive life.
That might lead to improvements in health, the economy, and better long term planning. It might reduce crime, and drug or alcohol abuse.
Which could lead to less strife and stress, reducing the need for pills.
….
It might be time to reflect that just six Walmart heirs’ net worth totaled $89.5 billion in 2010 – equal to the combined net worth of the bottom 33.2 million families.
Or this: “For the quarter, Apple posted revenue of $74.6 billion and net quarterly profit of $18 billion.” Quarterly means in the last three months.
The money is out there.
Another crazy idea? Tiny Houses?
The Tiny House idea appears to be a one that is endorsed by lots of folks:
http://revolution-news.com/tiny-homes-for-the-homeless-an-occupy-madison-project/
On this topic, I asked this question of the PlaceSense* folks: “There is a “tiny house” movement going on; would these regs accommodate that?” and received this message in reply:
The draft regulations do not have any provisions that are specific to tiny houses. Generally, a tiny house would be treated like any other dwelling under the regulations. Accessory dwellings are currently allowed under Brattleboro’s zoning and would continue to be allowed (see Section 116 of the draft). Section 352 of the draft regulations allows for cottage cluster housing and provides incentives in the form of increased density for what would have to be compact housing. Both of those sections could potentially be used to develop tiny houses.
* Cf: http://www.placesense.com/brattleboro
"Basic Needs Threshold Economy"
I started writing about advocating a Basic Needs Threshold ‘economy’ in 2002. Back then and now I saw the basic needs: food, clothing and shelter ,as one focused economy. Beyond that we can tack on any other ‘ ‘basic needs’ but a Basic Needs Threshold ‘economy’ has to start with those three – together.
The idea of shelters and food banks would become obsolete.
The capitalistic-profit economy (or whatever) can then be included – the economy where the Almighty Dollar takes over. When a citizen needs food, clothing and shelter in excess (prime steaks, furs, mansions, etc.) make them pay for it through the nose.
Not to worry, human excesses will not evaporate, and not everyone will strive for or remain in the basics. It will follow a continuum instead. There’ll be plenty of people willing to bust a cap and want more, oftentimes, much more…but make them pay dearly for it – and many people will.
I am familiar with the arguments against a Basic Needs Threshold ‘economy’ – nevertheless…
Minimum Guaranteed Income
We’ve also discussed the need for a minimum guaranteed salary on the site over the years.
We’d send every person about $2500 a month.
At the low end of things it would eliminated programs catering to the basic needs. In the middle range it would boost the economy. At the high end the wealthy could have a bit extra. Works for everyone.
What’s amazing to me is that anyone would be against this. But some are.
better solutions
I have long been interested in this problem of how best to serve people. As a social worker often stuck in systems that did not allow me to do what I knew to be more helpful, it was frustrating, and so often we got the blame for being jerks, or worse. We can only do what the system allows us to (though many of us try to be “creative” whenever possible).
If there are folks who would seriously like to discuss how to move this particular issue forward in a new direction, as Utah did, I would be thrilled to join in. I would even be willing to get us started. However, I know that with my disability I would not be able to sustain leading the effort.
I know we have kindred spirits in other parts of the state, and there are some folks trying to provide small programs here and there. As well, the people running the current programs might be very interested in supporting the effort, but they, too, cannot take the lead because they are trying to just get what they can to people in the current structure.
Do you want to meet once or twice to see if it makes sense to try to start a change effort in Vermont? If so, please contact me through this site. Thanks!
A meeting?
Andie wrote: “Do you want to meet once or twice to see if it makes sense to try to start a change effort in Vermont? If so, please contact me through this site.”
Some of those who are interested often congregate at Loaves & Fishes, which holds a meal twice a week, Tuesdays and Fridays in the basement of Centre Congregational Church, 193 Main St. We are usually there prepping/cooking from 8/9am-ish through to clean up at 1pm. (The meal is served from 11:30a to 12:30p.) You are welcome to drop by during some or all of that time and perhaps some of us might be free for a coffee afterwards.
http://www.commonsnews.org/site/site05/story.php?articleno=11539&page=1#.VMmmv9LF98E
thanks.
I was thinking more of an advertised to the community and beyond, formal meeting with an agenda, etc. to structure things to lead to a decision. Was hoping to include people who need housing, current service providers, those of us who are just interested at this point (I’m a former service provider), etc. I do have limited energy and have to be very careful what I choose to attend, and unfortunately have very little time for in person, informal conversations. I can see a good reason to start at that level, but it is not something that works for me at this point in my life. Perhaps you and I could talk by phone as a second choice for a first step? If that doesn’t hit the spot for you, I understand, and will just go forward if it makes sense to pursue the bigger view, and as I have the ability. In any event, good to know there are people currently talking about new solutions, and doing what is possible to help folks who need housing.
property tax supports schools, so they should be used at night
You pay for property tax either in your rent, or directly.
The property tax you pay for your dwelling is then
used to pay for schools.
Therefore, all schools should be opened every night
for homeless people, with use of showers and bathrooms.
They can bring in their sleeping bags.
This is an immediately possible solution.
Schools already have surveillance systems.
Heat is already paid for.
Why not open all public schools every night
for the homeless?
The computers are already running, maybe
they could find solutions if they are allowed
to use them.
After all, when these people were housed, they were
paying for property tax which paid for the
schools.
education
The education property tax is used to support education.