Eric Sheptock on the ICH Committee: Good or Bad?????
In 1987 Ronald Reagan and the 100th
Congress were pressured by the aggressive tactics of the Mitch Snyder
Movement into passing the McKinney-Vento Homeless Services Act. This
act allows homeless service providers to obtain surplus federal real
estate through its Title V provision. It also mandates that school
districts be prepared to counsel and assist homeless students. In
response to the act's provisions, the U.S. Dept. of Labor (DOL)
performed the Job Training Homeless Demonstration Project beginning
in 1988 – an effort that ended with 25% of the homeless who took
advantage of the program being employed for at least 13 weeks. There
are other innumerable effects of the McKinney-Vento Act which are
still being felt by the homeless and their service providers today.
However, it's worth noting that, while Mitch Snyder and company
should be lauded for the progress they made by bringing the plight of
the homeless (some of whom were eating from trashcans near the White
House) to the attention of Reagan and Congress, we should have made
more progress than we have at this point in time.
Fast forward to May 20th,
2009 – the day that President Obama signed the HEARTH Act (Homeless
Emergency Assistance, Rapid Transition to Housing) into law. In the
almost seven years since, there have been congressional funding
shortfalls that have led to the HEARTH Act being implemented
piecemeal by the U.S. Dept. of Housing and urban Development (HUD).
On a positive note, the re authorization calls for all cities that
receive HUD funding to meet certain benchmarks for ending
homelessness. It also calls for each locale to have a “homeless
czar(ina)”, as DC Council Chair Phil Mendelson can be heard calling
Kristy Greenwalt during a 2015 hearing – someone who can make
quick, if not unilateral, decisions on HUD-related matters. (I felt
hope insomuch as I have a certain penchant for benevolent
dictatorship/autocracy with its ability to rise above the fray of
“congressional bickering” and get sustenance to the needy in a
timely fashion.)
With DC's Inter-agency Council on
Homelessness (ICH) having appointed up to five homeless or
formerly-homeless community representatives since shortly after its
inception and with me having attended the first meeting in June 2006
as a non-member, I was appointed as a community representative in
November 2015 following a nine-month application process. (The
process was altered by Ms. Greenwalt. She began her job on April
28th, 2014 and was retained by Mayor Bowser.) Long story
short, I'll get more chances to speak at meetings and DC Government
has slightly more leverage to “make me be nice” – this in spite
of the fact that I hear the same unresolved conversations that I
heard five or more years ago. With me euphemizing their words, some
have told me that the ICH meetings come off to them as “government
[handy work]: making themselves feel good”. The ICH has now gone
from having bi-monthly meetings with a 10-minute public comment
period at the beginning and end to now having quarterly meetings with
a comment period at the beginning – cutting the public comment from
120 minutes per year to 40 minutes. With me being at the table now, I
can speak at will during the 90-minute working meeting. And speak I
will.
I was in Florida visiting my 78-year
old mother and other family members on December 1st, 2015
– the day of the first full ICH meeting following my confirmation.
In March 2016 I'll sit at the table for the first time – if all
goes well. And that's a big “IF”. Being a straight-forward man (a
quality that many don't appreciate these days), I've made it clear
that I approach the ICH with an agenda and that I'll do more to bring
the concerns of the homeless to the ICH than I will to laud the ICH
before the homeless. That agenda is laid out in my November 4th,
2015 testimony before Council Chairman Mendelson: to promote
meaningful discussion about the future of the CCNV Shelter and effect
a transition from merely focusing on housing the most vulnerable
homeless singles and families with children to also connecting
able-bodied homeless single people to living-wage jobs and affordable
housing. Despite my many e-mails to that effect and my testimony
being on the public record, some people are still surprised. Even so,
my nearly 10 years of fighting for a greater investment in homeless
“A-bods” has moved to a new high (or low – maybe).
When I began advocating in June 2006
under the leadership of the late Mary Ann Luby, we were fighting to
keep Franklin School Shelter open. (It closed in September 2008.) One
of our arguments was that it was located near two subway stations and
many bus lines that afford the working homeless a convenient way to
their jobs. In conjunction with its September 2008 closure, at least
300 mentally and physically disable homeless men were housed. Fast
forward almost four and a half years through my many blog posts and
newspaper articles about homeless employment to January 2013 when I
filed a FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act) request with the feds and
obtained information about the property rights pertaining to the CCNV
Shelter. I e-mailed the 100 pages of information to city officials
and became somewhat of a catalyst in the then slow-moving
conversation around the shelter's future. Finally, factor in that DOL
sits across the road on the shelter's south side and a ginormous
$1.3B construction project which is slated for completion in 2023
sits across the road on the north side. As you can well imagine, many
of the homeless want help getting connected to employment across the
road. (The big machines are doing most of the work right now and
hundreds of laborers won't be needed for at least another six
months.) Even so, the geography of these several city blocks stands
as a testament to government's failure to adequately assist homeless
A-bods. I intend to raise this concern whether or not I'm on the ICH,
unless and until it is adequately addressed. The government saying
“We are (or plan on) working on it” doesn't count as adequate.
On a separate but related track, I'm
working with American University Professor Dan Kerr on a project that
highlights the challenges faced by homeless people who need
employment. In April 2015 we organized an event at Georgetown
university Law Center (for which the Property Group Partners
Development Corp catered $1,400-worth of food) and we gathered
interviews from dozens of homeless people about their work histories
and current employment challenges. This information will be presented
to about 200 homeless people on March 27th, 2016 at Asbury
UMC – in place of the health advice presentation that usually
precedes breakfast on the fourth Sunday of each month. They will be
given opportunities to add concerns that are not already on our list.
The full list will eventually be used to affect public policy around
homeless employment. Hopefully it will lead to DC Government
connecting more than 25% of its homeless A-bods to employment for
more than 25% of a year.
The “failing feds” and the fact
that DOL hasn't made a robust effort toward homeless employment in
the past 28 years lend themselves to the argument that the U.S.
Government may have given up on homeless employment. This offers DC
Government a prime opportunity to outdo their overbearing mother.
However, my “Marxist homeless advocate” intuitions tell me that
local officials who would rather “make themselves feel good” than
to “grow a pair” won't seize the moment. After all, when
tenuously-housed people see that the government is making it possible
for low-income workers to live in the city of their employment, there
might just be a public outcry for such initiatives to be expanded and
made available to all of the city's working poor. What mayor wants to
set him/herself up for that?????
From what I can tell, Mitch Snyder had
a nasty disposition but led hundreds of people whose work we continue
to benefit from today. When you juxtapose the slow progress of the
past 25 years with the fact that advocates have become nicer, it
would seem that one is the result of the other. It's also worth
noting that most video footage we have of Mitch Snyder is from 1984
onward, with him having begun to advocate in 1974. His movement's
greatest victories all came between 1984 and 1988, possibly as a
result of him having gotten mean enough to be effective after 10
years of advocacy. I'll have been advocating for 10 years as of June
2016. Unlike Mitch Snyder, I have been grafted into a government
agency. Whether that proves to be a positive of a negative remains to
be seen. In any instance, I'll treat it as a positive until proven
otherwise.
I knew during the application and
nomination process that I could be somewhat muzzled and made to tone
down my rhetoric if I was accepted onto the ICH board, even as the DC
Council and government should have known I was coming with both an
agenda and knowledge of government's failings since homelessness
became highly visible on the streets of America some 40 years ago. It
boils down to the fact that I might speak for a total of six minutes
at the table each quarter or for two minutes from the audience and
raises the question, “Do I really want to allow myself to be
“forced into kindness” in order to get four additional minutes of
air time per quarter?????”.
As it turns out, that may become a moot
issue. You see, I've also encouraged DC Government to visit the CCNV
Shelter and talk with residents about how we should interpret the
legislation that was brought forth as a result of the task force and
to weigh-in on other occurrences that have us wondering if the
shelter might be closed in the next three to seven years. I continue
to update shelter residents about my advocacy efforts. Many of those
residents will attend the March 27th breakfast at Asbury.
During my introduction, I have every intention to inform the homeless
about the level of commitment that DC Government has or hasn't shown
toward homeless employment, in my opinion; but, there will be more of
a focus on how these 200 people think we should proceed at creating
this paradigm shift.
If all goes well, this and similar
events being planned for the second quarter of 2016 will lead to us
formulating an agreed-upon list of “homeless employment demands”.
Once enough of the homeless A-bods are on the same page, revoking my
position would amount to political suicide insomuch as it would have
a “hydra effect”. Government would go from having one homeless
advocate raising concerns that challenge the local manifestations of
capitalism to having dozens of homeless people who now feel spited
raising their vices for both their employment and my reinstating.
This hydra effect would be deepened by the fact that government would
also go from having a spokesperson with knowledge of government
function and an ability to negotiate solutions to having advocacy
novices shouting them down with the demand for jobs. So, at the end
of the day, homeless A-bods and I win. You might even say that DC
Government “has created a monster”. In this case it's not
Frankenstein; but the hydra of Eric Sheptock at the table which, if
chopped off, will turn into dozens of unhappy homeless A-bods
shouting from the audience. Either way, DC Government will have to
address homeless single persons' employment in 2016 – a year of
JOB-ilee. Besides, Dan and I seek to build a movement. This may be
it.
Comments