SOLVE for HOMELESSNESS where the most people possible thrive by (me!) ~topps
city council yields 1 to 2 minutes max for you to speak
letters to the editor, sometimes, 150 words
this crisis demands more thought, more words, more ideas..
it requires a new public panel, with many different people, knowledge bases, experiences represented
contributing to a comprehensive solution; where the most people possible can thrive
.png)
THE FOLLOWING IS STILL IN DRAFT/UNEDITED FORM/IN PROGRESS
-not sure when a window of time will open to edit/fix/rearrange, etc.
but lots to say on the topic.. -amen.
****
i am going to put aside suspicions that san jose city council members have political and/or financial agendas and motivations
and for the sake of real problem solving, give all members, the benefit of the doubt, and
work this through, with the understanding that they -really believe- caged tiny home sites are an actual solution to homelessness.
i want to point out, that my husband and i, have zero political aspirations, and nothing to gain financially from trying to problem solve in a more thorough way. our motivations are to protect our neighborhood, our schools, our sacred perc ponds -to help prevent caged tiny home sites from colonizing places/spaces which causes way more problems than it solves.
i must first refute the argument/suggestion that people who are against caged tiny homes sites, are also against the unhoused people they are placing inside said sites. Nothing could be further from the truth.
We need to look at resources/infrastructure and we need to look much closer at the cost of destroying for the all in a misguided effort to help the few.
-what we currently see, is caged tiny home sites [with very dense populations] next to homeless encampments; not replacing homeless encampments, but adding to:
i.e., monterey/bernal intersection in san jose. the densely populated, caged tiny home site is just across the street from a homeless encampment. -and in the same area, there is homeless living in their vehicle, and trash randomly along the road.
.jpeg)
.jpg)
It should come as no surprise, that our neighborhood is up in arms about having a caged dense population of 100 tiny home/400 bed homeless placed on our perc ponds park, a popular, beloved place for families/friends to safely hike, walk, enjoy all the wildlife (herons, hawks, egrets, mallards, cormorants, coots, frogs, turtles, fish..long list) It is also, a water supply facility, which demands extra protections for a myriad of obvious reasons. It is directly across the street from an elementary school and daycare and library.
Plopping in a caged dense population 100 beds/400 people, destroys the entire environment, puts the water supply facility at high risk, and attracts more homeless to the area; which results in less safety and more trash, on and on, etc. A caged dense population of tiny homes on this park property robs a wide spectrum of indigenous and migratory wildlife of their habitat, and robs the neighbors/families of their peaceful, safe, clean nature walks. The structure; the cage, the multiple buildings -robs from the neighborhood park the view, the space, the land; the overall feel and experience that make it the beautiful beloved park it is.
Now let's imagine, for the sake of argument, -the 100bed/400 people caged tiny home site is built on the park.. and a success story results for one or more people/families, who transition from the caged tiny home into subsidized housing.
I would urge everyone to take a closer look AT THE COST; if you have spent 20+ million, destroyed the local neighborhood park experience for hundreds of families who enjoyed and took care of it; attracted encampments to the outskirts, increased the need for policing; increased the amount of garbage outside the caged area; put the water supply facility in jeopardy -and in a time of drought?
that is not a real success story when you look at what expense.
Remember this micro example: you have a school, it is run by the most loving/compassionate people.. they want to help others in crisis.. -identify the tipping point: you only have so much space and so many resources.. as you let more and more people in.. the space becomes overcrowded and you tax all the resources. if you do not understand the tipping point, instead of helping a few; now everyone is in crisis.
If we fast forward a decade, -that is exactly what we see.. instead of helping a few; we have absolutely everyone in crisis. And after building these millions of dollars caged dense population sites throughout the city.. destroying neighborhoods and parks unnecessarily and irrevocably
, creating a tiny class; still nothing will have been done about the mentally ill, drug addicted, prematurely released inmates
This path: while the intentions may be good, causes way worse problems than it solves.
City Council wants to obliterate obstacles and fast track the building of caged tiny home sites. We are Praying for an injunction, so we can slow down and problem solve with more voices/experiences/knowledge/wisdom contributing to long term solutions.
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS
We all love a success story. but these success stories are not dependent on the creation of tiny homes sites. [unless... have we no success stories from the hundreds of services, over many years, that already exist?]
San Jose already has: -read it! "30 days free, 60 day max, bus passes, shelter, transitional housing, case management, employment and housing assistance, medical services.. workshops..
it goes on and on. Why can't we just fast-track the healthy unhoused straight into the subsidized housing they are destined for anyway. Why spend millions, destroy neighborhoods and parks, for a few months stay?
Our first vote and suggestion is to reassess all of San Jose's current offerings. Which are succeeding? Which need a revamping? I'm sure there are some success stories among all these organizations.. whatever we are currently doing that works.. let's do more of it!
Our next idea/thought.. If raising rent 5% sends up to 2000 people out on the street.. rent control and restrictions.. that makes more sense than having all these homeless, and then scrambling for what to do..
Our next idea/thought.. The City is in desperate need of clean-up.. and many of these unhoused are in desperate need of wages -why not employ and pay them to help clean up? this is a win/win.. they get a job, they get paid, they do well, they get subsidized housing/housing vouchers.. and san jose gets cleaned up,. They will be directly investing in the city that is helping them.
Our next idea/thought.. Crowd sourcing, and roommate screening: The same way people are currently assessed (vulnerability index) to qualify for a tiny home -and demonstrate they can work, will work, are able to work..
[not mentally ill, etc.] Continue the screening process, and then, provide a list of qualified candidates to potential room-for-renters
There are many people, who could benefit from the extra income, and/or the company. But they would only offer a room to rent from someone pre-screened.. and subsidize that..
Our next idea/thought: we have the group of unhoused due to financial crisis... but, the mentally ill.. they need a hospital. drug addicted: they need rehap prematurely released inmates: they need jail
We strongly believe a hospital would help more to actually remove homeless from our streets
We'd personally much rather see billions go toward a high rise hospital, than billions spent building/maintaining numerous densely populated caged tiny home sites, while ignoring the actual homeless population which would not qualify for a tiny home and are living in encampments throughout the city.
The 'equal distribution' goal only make sense if each district starts out equal when it comes to vacant land/buildings ratio. If one district has more vacant/appropriate space available -Appropriate is more important than equal. We need to look at the entire City of San Jose, not very unequal district boundaries. And we should be looking to build high rise hospitals.
In our effort to relocate (vs. eliminate, our first choice) a densely populated caged tiny home site from being built on the perc ponds park directly across the street from the elementary school, library, and day care.. why not the fairgrounds? why not.. my favorite suggestion (admittedly facetious), but, at the corner of St. James and First, kitty-corner from the Santa Clara Courthouse.. yes! then you could see everyday, up and close and personal, just how successful these densely populated tiny home gated communities are doing. And whether or not they attract any additional homeless encampments, garbage, vehicles in the outskirts of the gates. You have a big open lot... -perfect!
.jpeg)
UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
In part, this is a math problem but it involves so much more than mere numbers! -the human elements must be factored in: addictions, ptsd, depression, victim mentalities, manipulators, cons, abusers/abused, -you have greed.. you have enabling, dependence, co-dependence, -you have innocent ignorance; short-sightedness, political/financial ambitions/agendas/motivations.. -so the mind(s) that can solve this complicated of a problem
part math genius * part humanitarian * part phD in economics
you need master gardners, horticulturists for analogies/understanding: it is the leaf? the root? the soil?
you need nurses * therapists * artists * hardworking, devoted parents * students * teachers * police officers * business/land owners
i could go on.. but a much larger panel, all contributing their knowledge, experience -a very public brain-storming, sharing.. we need to stop this tiny homes train in its track; slow everything down, and think it through, -before the whole city goes to S%#*
we can see areas (within portland, within seattle, within san francisco, to name only a few..) we KNOW what it looks like when homelessness goes ignored. -we KNOW what giving up looks like
and giving up is not an option; but nor is, what we see happening in slow motion: the destruction of otherwise heathy neighborhoods, schools, parks, and the shameful creation of a caged tiny home class.
-Before we destroy in an irrevocable way, -Let's stop here.. gather a larger panel of voices/experiences to identify all of the factors and problem solve in a more comprehensive and cost effective way.
WE do have an opportunity to become a remarkable example to other cities and restore San Jose to it's former glory.
.png)
posted by SANDRA HARRISON KAY @ 7:08 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home