Response Re: Homeless Assistance Funding

The response below is to an email from a concerned ENA resident concerning funding of the Low Barrier Shelter vs. rapid rehousing:

Hi, nice to hear from you! The HOME Bd did not vote to ‘defund’ rapid re-housing agencies, instead we gave rapid rehousing money to two providers with a good history of providing the intensive case management required not just to get people into housing quickly, but to provide the extensive wrap-around services these clients need in order to successfully stay housed.

We voted to give Sidewalk $150,000, which is $50,000 more than we gave them last year, and we gave the Family Support Center $100,000, which is less than we gave them last year, because we intend to give both of these providers more money from the consolidated homeless grant later this year.

I’ve provided The Olympian a response to their editorial from last Thursday morning’s issue, in which they make a number of errors –principally, that it’s not rapid rehousing OR shelter, it’s rapid rehousing AND shelter (which is why Interfaith Works submitted both the Sidewalk AND The Peoples House proposals). I believe my response will run some time this week. It essentially says that the HOME Bd made funding recommendations that we felt struck a fair balance between capital projects (such as Habitat homes, a veterans shelter at Drexel House, facility improvements at the Yelm homeless shelter, the Peoples House, etc), and services (such as operations at Quixote Village, rapid rehousing at Sidewalk and the Family Support Center, emergency apartments for clients of the Housing Authority, and operations of both Rosie’s Place and Haven House at CYS). It also points out that we had nearly $5M in requests for only $2.1M, so of course, not everyone got what they were asking for.

I understand your neighborhood is concerned about the proposed location of The Peoples House. That’s a different matter, however, than whether or not we need a shelter. We definitely do. We’ll all have to work together on where.

Thanks for your interest in the issue of homelessness in our community. Solving it will require a lot more transitional housing, affordable housing and permanent supportive housing than we currently have. In the meanwhile, to get the homeless out of the woods and off the streets requires shelters. It’s not ideal, and it’s not the permanent solution, but it’s a humane step along the way to a more permanent solution. I’m grateful we have providers like Interfaith Works willing to step up for all of us.

Karen Messmer

The People’s House (Low-Barrier Shelter) Email Lists

From Meg Martin at the People’s House – please contact her if you did not receive the email below but want to be on one or both of her email lists.
th********************@***il.com

—

Hi everyone! I wanted to let you know that you have been entered into our email group. Thanks so much for signing up. I made a separate list from our regular mailing list for those of you that are not interested in general updates. Please respond and let me know if you would like to be added to the general update list.

Otherwise, I will keep your emails separate and provide updates only about upcoming meetings, forums, public notices or process and send out the responses (that we are working diligently to get out to you ASAP) to the concerns raised at last Monday’s forum. I want to reiterate that we will not move forward with the permit application until we respond to your questions and concerns. Nothing is happening yet.

On another note, I entered everyone’s email as accurately as I could from the sheets but some of the handwriting was hard to read and I may have gotten some addresses wrong. If you hear of a neighbor that signed up and did not get this email, please have them email us here so that we can get them on the list. It only means that I entered it wrong or could not read the address.

I know it must have been frustrating for many of you to leave without answers last Monday. Please know that we are doing our best and without funding (not yet distributed) we all have other jobs, significant responsibilities and are volunteering much of our time to getting this program off the ground for the better of our community. Thanks so much for your patience and please know that we are listening.

Meg Martin

August 19 Public Forum re: Low-Barrier Shelter Minutes

On Monday August 19 a Public Forum was held at St. Michael’s Church regarding the low-barrier shelter proposed for 1011 10th Ave.

Meeting started at 7:00 pm.

A brief overview of the process that would be used to elicit feedback from the forum attendees was provided by the 3rd party facilitator.

Concerned Eastside Neighbors expressed issues regarding the project and the lack of communication around it, and distributed a handout A Message from Concerned Eastside Neighbors.

A 10-minute presentation was provided by Interfaith Works and several handouts were distributed, The Peoples House FAQ’s, People’s House Timeline, Sexual Violence Stats and Registered Offender Map 8.19.13.

Forum attendees were asked to work in small groups to answer two questions:

1. What are your concerns about the project?

2. What are your hopes for the project?

Following the small group work, groups presented their concerns and hopes, which was followed by a short Q & A session. Interfaith Works stated that due to time constraints they would respond in writing to the concerns and hopes and the Q & A questions in “one or two weeks.” When a response is received it will be posted to the ENA website.

Below is a list of the concerns and hopes that were expressed:

Concerns

Location
Schools were not part of the criteria
If there is a large neighbourhood opposition, would you find another site?
How close sex offenders can be to schools
Concern about staffing levels
Limits on length of stays
Timeline for this process
Cost of supervision of kids at recess, specifically schools
Decrease in property values of Eastside residents
Too many services in this neighbourhood
Lack of public process
St. mike’s having a public process
Anyone can access this with all the kids
A lot of times sex offenders don’t even register
Empty beds at other shelters
$400,000 taken away from rapid rehousing, which helps children and families
Olympia is bearing a big load
Historically our neighbourhood has felt disenfranchised, this would continue that
Concern about centralization of services
What additional police resources will be available to the shelter
Increase crime
Research about placing LBS in neighborhoods
Concern about it being 24 hour access
Policies and procedures will be developed later…that should be done now
Number and kind of trained staff
Shelter becoming a dumping ground for those rejected from other shelters
How will those high risk groups interact with each other
Sex offenders self reporting
Offenders near schools
Who is on the board for interfaith that lives within four blocks of this shelter
Funding after this year
Process is moving to fast – disorganized, short-sighted, need to slow down/step back and look at overal county/city plan to address homelessness
Poor planning by city/county- they need to take responsibility to address homelessness

Hopes

We hope it’s not located here
Maybe people will have a place to go
Not near or in residential neighborhoods
People can be successful finding a place to stay
People will have a place to stay come winter
Public restrooms
We see ourselves as part of the solution
Already are sex offenders and that they would have resources
Safety for all is paramount
Have this kind of turn out to work with the shelter!
Make sure they follow through
Professional support
City/county will address homelessness holistically, with all stakeholders involved
The community at large could be a resource in helping resolve these issues, with City/County leading the charge
Meeting adjourned 8:30 pm