Thursday, March 19, 2015
It's clear to anyone that's paying attention that DC mayor Muriel Bowser and her administration are Hell- (or shall I say “Heaven”???) bent on ending homelessness in the capital of the most poerful (though no longer the wealthiest) nation on Earth. I won't bother speculating (here and now, anyway) as to whether it's a “girl power” issue (which I'm not adverse to), a genuine concern for the homeless, a matter of bowing to public and media pressure or a matter of competing with the DC Council to deal with a clossal failure that has become the scourge of DC Government (with them having “tried” for over 10 years to end homelessness while it only increased). However, I will address my gravest concern and present a real solution.
“Homeless Czar(ina)” and ICH Director Kristy Greenwalt has gone on the record multiple times as realizing that there are systems that fall outside of the homeless services continuum and create homelessness. She realizes that her purview and those of some of her “sister” agencies are too narrow to end homelessness in and of themselves. She knows that we need affordable housing across the city – affordable housing that is not part of a government program. Yet she hasn't articulated just who is needed to make this happen – unless you consider that the mayor is the default person for this matter. Fact of the matter is that I personally have stood up in many Inter-agency Council on Homelessness meetings since June 2006 and said pretty much the same things that Kristy – who officially began her current post on April 28th, 2014 – is now saying.
Kristy is awesome and I have no beef with her. Nonetheless, It's appalling that anyone – a mayor, administrator or otherwise – would give greater credence to an idea when it comes from an administration official than they would when it comes from a directly-affected, homeless person. They should consider the idea on its own merits – not be so caught up on who it came from. In spite of me still loving her, I hold it against mayor Bowser that she seems to value the opinions of administration officials and non-profit personnel over the opinions of the unpaid homeless advocates – even when an advocate is intelligent and articulate and even though ending homelessness is her pet project.
On Wednesday, March 18th, 2015 there was a meeting about the mayor's five-year plan to end homelessness. Presenters of the plan and administration officials who fielded questions included Kristy Greenwalt, Ms Kelly Sweeney-McShane, Laura Zeilinger, Polly Donaldson and a woman from the DC Housing Authority. Girl Power. (Maybe the mayor is concerned that people will assume that she's focused on ending homelessness in order to appease my wrath and/or that she won't be seen as that “woman apart” that she so longs to be seen as if people think that she's being fed ideas by – of all people – a homeless man. Oh well.) Dozens of attendees were divided into eight groups with each having a facilitator. Due to the tight 90-minute schedule, only the presenters, administrators and facilitators addressed the entire room. Others spoke only within their small groups. Unfortunately, the facilitator at my table – a woman (which I believe all facilitators were, if memory serves) – failed to mention my “half, half & half idea. But before I explain it here, I'll mention what I think is the gravest concern when it comes to ending DC homelessness.
A failure to do conceptual planning that considers the reasons for past failures will be the downfall of my beloved Bowser administration. This is the only other thing that I hold against her. I recently spoke with a man I know who serves as a homeless advocate in San Jose, California. He told me of a public official in Cali who had a good heart and wanted to end homelessness in her jurisdiction but failed to look at why a previous plan failed. She failed again. As he gave this account, it sounded as though my alter ego were on the other end of the line talking to me. Here in DC it will be, “Same song, Different verse, A little bit louder, A little bit worse” if we aren't careful.
When I say that the plan must be conceptual, I mean that we can't decide what ideas to use based on what people are willing to do or feel good about. We must consider matters of principle such as the fact that past administrations have been willing to assist the most vulnerable due to them being helpless (Fenty) or ostracized able-bodied homeless parents by presenting them as lazy moochers (Gray) and we must tease out these thoughts instead of merely dancing around them. I also mean that we should categorize the types of things that need to be done to set able-bodied people back on their feet rather than blaming them for their condition, as the latter is a zero-sum statement that does nothing to solve the problem. We must recognize that our effort to do this will set up a major fight with employers, landlords and developers; but, we must start and win this fight.
We must also ensure that we aren't falsely defining the homeless problem as a disabled persons' issue in order to justify steering city contracts to the non-profits and funding relevant government agencies for yet another year. After all, many non-profits are funded to assist the disabled – regardless of how well or poorly they do this – and must draw a picture of continuous need in order to justify the continued existence and funding of the non-profit. We must also ensure that government reports such as the one that was issued in response to the disappearance and death of 8-year old Relisha Rudd from a homeless shelter are not written in defense of government agencies but are truly designed to solve and prevent systemic problems. Though Mayor Bowser inherited a terribly flawed system, she now needs to fix the aforementioned issues and incorporate these conceptual solutions.
That leads nicely into my half, half & half idea. Simply put, if the mayor wants to cut homelessness in half in one fell swoop, she needs to connect the approximate half of DC's 9,000 homeless people who are currently working to housing that they can currently afford by taking some or all of the $10,000 that the city spends annually sheltering each individual and using it to subsidize their rent. If a homeless person has been working for at least half a year on the same job and can pay at least half of the average $1,500/month rent, then the city should house them and subsidize their rent. This would cut the homeless population in half. Thus the name, “Half, Half & Half”.
When I mentioned the idea to Kristy after the March 18th meeting, she said that about 10,000 people use DC homeless services each year. This means that about 1,000 people pass through city shelters and move on. It also means that, a bed that's been vacated by a working homeless person who got housed may still be needed by someone else. Then again, if the mayor's recent conversation with Montgomery and Prince George County officials leads to these counties creating homeless services that are equally good to those of DC, that would reduce the influx from these other jurisdictions and might completely eliminate Kristy's argument.
Another variation of the idea is that homeless people who are working be encouraged to co-habitate. If each person has worked on the same job for at least half a year, can pay at least half of the rent and can get along with another homeless person of their choosing who meets the same requirements, then they can be placed in the same unit with continued city support for up to a year.
My fellow homeless advocates would not be happy about me offering an idea that might enable the city to justify the reduction of shelter space. So, let's be clear: I'm offering solutions to homelessness, irrespective of what happens to the vacated beds. Even so, I can support the elimination of one bed for every two people who move into housing, so long as the city has suitable methods in place for increasing shelter space on demand. That said, I'm glad the mayor wants to “do one thing and do it well”, as we used to say. (Of course she has to do a lot more than one thing; but, ending homelessness is her pet project, much to my elation.) FULL STOP.
Saturday, March 14, 2015
DC Mayor Muriel Bowser's Career Academy Idea
Once again the administration of DC Mayor Muriel Elizabeth Bowser has impressed me. My fear is that, if they continue along their current trajectory of doing what poor and homeless DC residents need done in order to rejoin the work force and obtain housing, I might lose my touch when it comes to being confrontational with government officials. For eight and a half years (June 2006 thru December 2014) I found myself knocking heads with city officials from three administrations and with two mayors (having never met Tony Williams when he was mayor -- January 1999 to January 2007).
I'm left to wonder if "Mayor M.E." is somehow on the receiving end of a telepathic connection between her and myself, with me unwittingly feeding her my thoughts. Make no mistake: I've spoken and written to her on a few occasions. However, her administration is doing more of what I hoped for than I've even articulated to this latest turnover of government bureaucrats. Another possibility is that other advocates are coincidentally feeding "Mayor M.E."'s administration with ideas that I support.
I was recently told by Department Of Employment Services (DOES) Director Deborah Carroll that the mayor is conceiving a plan to create a DC Career Academy that will train DC residents for jobs in the different departments of DC Government -- everything from the Department of Public Works to the Department of General Services (maintaining government buildings) to the many city jobs that require a CDL license.
But I'll make no bones about the fact that Deborah Carroll wasn't always on the list of my 10 favorite DC Government employees or appointees. I've been appalled in the past by her inability and/or unwillingness to give straight answers to DC councilpersons while testifying at hearings about the functioning of the Department of Human Services (DHS) where she has twice served as interim director. That much about her seems to have changed, as has my opinion of her. but, as we say here in Washington, DC, "We have no permanent friends and no permanent enemies -- just permanent interests". It seems as though Deborah Carroll will serve my interests in the short term; so, we are developing a more cordial relationship now. It has also been said that those who remain friends for at least seven years will likely remain friends for life. I've reached that point with Dept. of Human Services Director Laura Zeilinger whom I've known since July 23rd 2007. There's hope for Deborah Carroll too, though things never got rocky between Laura and I.
Advocates and activists from various sectors of the social justice movement have demanded affordable housing and living-wage jobs for as long as I can remember. Then DC Government began in the fall of 2008 to use federal funds to house the disabled homeless, while allowing able-bodied homeless people with employment challenges to rot in shelter until they grow old and/or acquire a disability. Then the homeless advocates (who've traditionally done very little in tandem with those fighting to make or keep housing affordable for the not-yet-homeless) became even more splintered -- with some becoming gung-ho about funding for Permanent Supportive Housing for the disabled while others (like ME) maintain that we should split our attention and funding between the disabled and the A-bods. Then there was the December 2014 meeting of the DC Inter-agency Council on Homelessness (DC ICH) which was preceded by a discussion on homeless employment challenges. I got the sense that government giving us ear was no longer pro forma or a façade of caring, but rather a genuine interest in what the advocates in general and myself in particular have to say. When I found out around Christmas 2014 that Laura Zeilinger (who, unlike anyone else, used to make it a point to get back to the homeless with progress reports on comments they'd made at the previous ICH meeting) was appointed as director of DHS, I decided that I would make a comment at the February ICH meeting in which I ask her to revisit the comments made about homeless employment in December and to restart the practice of giving progress reports on what the homeless have asked for. Then the meeting got moved to March, as we went from bi-monthly meetings in 2014 to quarterly meetings in 2015. (ICH Director Kristy Greenwalt -- April 28th, 2014 to present -- places more faith and effort in the sub-committees than she does in the committee of the whole.) At any rate, things that my colleagues and I have said for approximately 10 years are finally being acted upon and even the things that we didn't think of or demand are now aligning in our favor. This is especially true about homeless employment, which brings me back to my friend Deborah Carroll.
When I heard that she was appointed as DOES director, it immediately occurred to me that she could become a valuable asset insomuch as she is now a human services/ employment hybrid. I wondered which qualities of hers would carry over into her new post; but, in keeping with my long-time manner, decided that I would inundate this cabinet member with my demands. It paid off.
With Ms. Carroll having been appointed several weeks after Mayor M.E. took office, I sent her the following e-mail on February 5th:
I told you in December that we could discuss your vision if you were retained by Mayor Bowser. Though you are no longer with DHS, my promise still holds true. With you now leading DOES, our paths will still cross; as I'm pretty heavy on the homeless employment piece. I believe that the District doesn't really want to enable homeless or low-income people to remain in DC or to find affordable housing. The gov and biz structure is set up to push poor folk out of the city.I also believe that the homeless employment issue is a big can of worms and that anyone who devotes themselves to addressing it will suffer many headaches as they follow its many tentacles into areas like discrimination, workers' rights, job-training issues etc. Nonetheless, I'll keep pushing the ticket until someone in the administration takes on this headache. I'll BE the headache until you commit yourself to taking on the headache of homeless employment. Would you like to meet and discuss homeless employment?????
She took up my offer to meet, though it wasn't the tense one-on-one that I initially thought it would be. As we arranged the meeting, we decided to bring other homelessness and employment stakeholders to the table. That meeting took place on Friday, March 13th, 2015.
I arrived at 1:28 for a 1:30 meeting, found that there were about 15 people at the conference table conducting a meeting that I was given the wrong time for and began to wonder if the "bum" steer was intentional. The conversation was about employment issues faced by homeless parents
whose average age range is 18 to 24 years old. Then, at 1:45 Ms. Carroll said, "Let's transition". She told me that I indeed had not been given a bum steer but that I walked in on the tail end of a different meeting
that ran past the scheduled end time. Cynicism reversed.
The 15-ish of us talked from 1:45 to approximately 2:20 about my concerns around homeless employment. The group gave me the lion's share of the time so that I could say what I had to say. In stark contrast to her council hearing mannerisms, Deborah Carroll interrupted me several times to say, "I can answer that". She then proceeded to give me straight, unambiguous and detailed answers. Surprise. Surprise.
At one point I told this room full of DC Government employees, "I like to think backwards; so, I should apply for a job with DC Government". After we all got a really good laugh, I explained that we should start our thinking with the goal of connecting people to both housing and jobs and think backwards to what needs to happen to get us there. We discussed other ideas pertaining to homeless employment which I'll
address in another blog post, this one having already obtained quite the ungodly length. FULL STOP.