|
REGULAR MEETING February 11, 2019
<br /> Samuel Brown, 222 East Navarre Street, South Bend, IN, stated, This is a very delicate and
<br /> sensitive situation. I like the idea of trying. It is very sensitive. I've been to Philadelphia and I've
<br /> been to Times Square. Right off of Times Square it is horrible. The City glamour and lights are
<br /> beautiful, but you need to go to the other end of Times Square where I've been. It's really tough
<br /> down in there with the homeless and it's the same way in Philadelphia. I don't have the answer
<br /> but anything we can do to try and curb the problem, we should do. I hope we knock it out of the
<br /> park. Thank you for listening.
<br /> Council President Tim Scott turned the floor back to the full Council for further comment or main
<br /> motion.
<br /> Councilmember Gavin Ferlic stated, Thank you to the sponsors for reengaging the discussion.
<br /> Thank you.
<br /> Councilmember John Voorde stated, Same thing, thank you Councilmember White and Davis for
<br /> raising the awareness of this situation.
<br /> Councilmember Jake Teshka stated,You guys have said it, and everybody else said it as well,this
<br /> is not a cure-all,but it is something that goes along with our world-class Homeless Center and our
<br /> talks of the Gateway Center. They are all pieces to the puzzle and thanks for bringing this up. I
<br /> think when dealing with these kinds of issues, we have to be innovative. So, thank you to
<br /> Councilmember Davis and White.
<br /> Councilmember Jo M. Broden stated, I just want to be clear on what I vote on. As long as this is a
<br /> study and it harkens back to our earlier motion that, in my opinion, and it's more than opinion
<br /> because it's in the record, but we strongly endorsed and recommended implementation of a pilot
<br /> employment program. It wasn't delivered on, ok? So, despite our approval and the Mayor's
<br /> approval. So my question is, and I think it's one (1) that needs to be answered, and quickly, and I
<br /> think this resolution will spur that discussion and accountability across all of us, and that is
<br /> inclusive of the community and inclusive of the folks who normally operate in these sectors,social
<br /> service agencies, etcetera, it has to be collaborative, or frankly it won't work, but I do think the
<br /> timeliness of this resolution,I can support it as long as words in it like actively explore and actively
<br /> look at are used. I am hesitant when we encroach into the area of funding. I would like to reserve
<br /> that vote of mine, relative to funding, within the context of the budget process. But, I do
<br /> acknowledge that we need to reengage in this and have a thoughtful discussion about employment
<br /> opportunities for individuals who are panhandling. I do recognize that we have few low-barrier
<br /> employment options available in our community. One (1) of the speakers mentioned that as well.
<br /> Not much has changed, really, in two (2) or three (3) years, frankly, during my tenure on the
<br /> Council with regard to creating more opportunities for low-barrier day-working opportunities. So,
<br /> I think that is important. But, in the discussion going forward,though, I want to make sure that we
<br /> keep our eye on what I consider some really key goals on this. That is the advocacy, first(1St) and
<br /> foremost, across our community for the whole concept of housing-first (1St). That is inclusive of
<br /> the permanent supportive housing and inclusive of the wrap-around services that would support
<br /> those individuals within those scattered housing locations. I also, first (1st) and foremost, want to
<br /> make sure that we are tracking and that we are on top of and pursing the Gateway and coordinated
<br /> entry concept. I'm not a huge fan of narrowing that to a Center but I do think the coordinated entry
<br /> and programming that goes with it is important. And then of course, always and continuing to
<br /> deliver in a timely manner on our Weather Amnesty program. So, to me, being able to hit our
<br /> capacity and keep driving those things forward is important. This as a piece in our portfolio of
<br /> things to consider, I have no problem with adding it given what I know of the state of the day-
<br /> labor opportunities etcetera. I do know it's awfully tough to show up at a job and to continue
<br /> showing up at that job if you don't have the housing supports that are there. So, I want to make
<br /> sure that as we pursue our strategies with regard to the homeless that we not lose sight of those
<br /> and we consider the capacity of local government to deliver those things or at least to coordinate
<br /> that strategy. So, I will vote in favor of this,but my vote is, again,wanting us to continue pursuing
<br /> what I consider some lead things. That is not to detract from what we thought was a good idea in
<br /> 2017 and what I think many of us think is a great idea to pursue tonight. It's just that we have an
<br /> opportunity to educate and an opportunity to point to some really specific strategies that are best
<br /> practices. I don't want to lose focus on that and I don't want to lose the funding potential on that
<br /> and I want to make sure we get our highest return in terms of the monies we are to allocate toward
<br /> 9
<br />
|