[Peace-discuss] NG article today on Safe Haven

Mon Jul 20 00:14:43 CDT 2009

Dream on.  Rules may be  in effect for all sorts of places; but usually – with a few legally defined special cases – they have limited applicability and jurisdiction (i.e., are restricted to the workplace, the school or church property, or some defined location that the organizational entity or private property holder controls).

You tell me how the Tent City would know when and if one of their members used alcohol or drugs for example in a location in Rantoul or Urbana unless they got caught do so.  How do you propose that the Tent City community police their members when they are not on or very near the location that the Tent City can control, which would be the location their city occupies and the immediate surrounding neighborhood, where the members and their neighbors stand a chance of keeping an eye on the behaviors of the Tent City members similar to a neighborhood watch program.  Would you have them act on accusations and gossip by persons who claim to have seen the alleged offender commit a violation of the rules while is some location across town or in another community or another state?  How would you suggest they verify such accusations of these violations to determine their veracity and to afford the accused a fair hearing and due process?

Making rules and having sanctions are very different form having the ability to police members and enforce the rules or policies. 

And again, yes the Tent community could have sanctions such as denying residency to proven violators; but they would first have to have knowledge of the violation and some way of conducting a fair hearing before being such sanctions to bear.  To restrict themselves to the Tent City proper and the surrounding neighborhood of one block is probably more feasible and practical than to expand the coverage to beyond that.

You also seem to ignore the fact that if the tent community formally accepts responsibility for the behavior of their residents and members beyond the tent city and its one block neighborhood perimeter will open the tent community to assuming liability and blame for the actions of residents and members when they are out in the community at large beyond the area that the tent community controls or can possibly police.  It would put the tent city community in the position where members of the public can hold the tent community responsible for all the actions of people associated with it in the same way that the neighbors are now blaming them for the actions of transients who hang around but are nto resedinets of the tent city community.

From: Jenifer Cartwright [mailto:jencart13 at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 11:26 PM
To: LAURIE SOLOMON
Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] NG article today on Safe Haven

Y're kidding, right? Rules of many kinds -- including those involving the use of drugs and alcohol anytime -- are in effect at many different kinds of places, including but not limited to private residences, communes, dormitories, religious communities, nunneries, halfway houses. The Tent Community could indeed make that a stipulation for residency if it wished to do so, and enforce it as well. 

 --Jenifer

--- On Sun, 7/19/09, LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET> wrote:

From: LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] NG article today on Safe Haven
To: "'Jenifer Cartwright'" <jencart13 at yahoo.com>, "'Peace-discuss List'" <Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>, "'Karen Medina'" <kmedina67 at gmail..com>
Date: Sunday, July 19, 2009, 5:01 PM

Aside from infringements on peoples civil rights, a policy of no alcohol or drug use anywhere at any time would be unrealistic and unenforceable.  It would also open the Tent City up to liabilities (not necessarily legal but certainly social and political) for the behavior of individual members outside of the confines of an area that they can control or regulate and foist an unreasonable burden of responsibility on the Tent City as an organization.  It would be like holding schools responsible for the behavior of students anywhere they may be at anytime or the city government responsible for acts committed by its residents in locations other than the city.

From: peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net] On Behalf Of Jenifer Cartwright
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2009 2:44 PM
To: Peace-discuss List; Karen Medina
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] NG article today on Safe Haven

Neighbors' complaints of drug and alcohol use by Tent Community members were denied by those at last week's CCC meeting.. However, one thing that struck me as a negative was the no drinking and drugging w/in a one-block radius policy of the Tent Community. A more reassuring policy would be no drug or alcohol use while living in the TC, period. The current policy suggests that alcohol or drug use is okay so long as it's kept at least one block away from the TC. 

Just a tho't.

 --Jenifer 

--- On Sun, 7/19/09, Karen Medina <kmedina67 at gmail.com> wrote:

From: Karen Medina <kmedina67 at gmail.com>
Subject: [Peace-discuss] NG article today on Safe Haven
To: "Peace-discuss List" Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
Date: Sunday, July 19, 2009, 1:15 PM

I know several people in AWARE don't take the NG. But are interested
in the Safe Haven situation...

News-Gazette article this morning:
Tent city's organizers confident they'll find a new home
By Mike Monson
Sunday July 19, 2009

CHAMPAIGN – They haven't found a new home yet, but the organizers
behind the Safe Haven Tent Community still have big future plans that
go way beyond pitching several tents in a backyard.

The several-week-old tent community for the homeless was established
several weeks ago in the back yard of the Catholic Worker House, 317
S. Randolph St., C. The city of Champaign says the encampment of eight
to 10 homeless people is in violation of the city's zoning ordinance.
And the Catholic Worker House, which shuts down for the month of
August, has informed the residents that they must be out by July 31.

But Abby Harmon, one of the organizers behind the tent community, says
she is confident they'll find a new home.

"We've sent out letters to 150 churches in Champaign, Urbana and
Rantoul requesting refuge while we work with the city," she said.

Harmon and fellow organizers Michael Parkinson and Jesse Masengale
have a vision for Safe Haven that they're now planning to lay out to
skeptical city officials.

They've asked the city to lease an unspecified vacant city lot to Safe
Haven to allow the homeless community to relocate at a more suitable
site.

If they can get a city lot and the city council agrees to revise its
zoning ordinance, Safe Haven organizers say they will work to:

– Eventually ditch the tents and install semi-permanent housing with
heat to help homeless residents survive the winter.

– Expand Safe Haven's capacity up to 25 people.

– Create communal bathroom and kitchen facilities with electricity,
and even add gardens where homeless people can grow their own food.

"The idea of a tent city seems very radical at first blush, but when
you begin to dig into the ideas, you understand it's just a different
model for providing services to the homeless," said Harmon, a graduate
student in landscape architecture at the University of Illinois.

"It's a model that is consumer-driven, cost-effective and successful
at transitioning people off the streets and into permanent housing,"
she said.

Harmon said she and former Urbana alderwoman Danielle Chynoweth will
meet Saturday with council members Deborah Frank Feinen and Karen
Foster to explain the group's vision. She said paperwork is being
prepared to create a not-for-profit organization, to be called Safe
Haven Inc., that would act as a service provider to the people living
in the community.

Safe Haven would likely be governed by a village council made up of
residents and organizers, Harmon said.

But Foster and Feinen remain skeptical.

Foster said she thinks Champaign officials need to check with cities
that have hosted tent communities.

"I think we're just getting one side," she said.

Feinen said she's reluctant to comment before the meeting, but she
noted that "there are lots of social service needs in the city."

"Prioritizing those needs and affording them, after we cut our budget
by $6 million, is something the city council will have to struggle
with," she said.

Semi-permanent housing for the homeless has been tried, and worked, in
a number of cities, according to Harmon.

A former homeless community in Los Angeles, called Dome Village, used
small domes, with 314 square feet of living space, to house residents.
Each dome housed two unrelated adults or small families. Dome Village
had about 20 domes on one and one-third acres, before it closed in
October 2006 after 13 years.

Another possibility for semi-permanent housing is a "tiny house"
developed by the Emily Carr Design College in Vancouver, Canada, that
provides 64 square feet of living space and costs about $1,500, Harmon
said.

Parkinson, also a Safe Haven organizer, said he thinks the concept
will work. He's a 2009 UI graduate with a bachelor's degree in urban
and regional planning.

"Everything we're working on seems very feasible both in the short and
long term," he said. "There's nothing too pie in the sky to this idea.
It's worked before and it's worked well."

A Safe Haven village would differ significantly from the TIMES Center,
a transitional living facility for homeless adult men located at 70 E.
Washington St., C, according to Harmon.

The TIMES Center has 70 beds for homeless single men and currently has
about 10 vacant beds, according to TIMES Center Supervisor Jason
Greenly.

"The TIMES Center is a transitional living center; you have to come
into a program," Harmon said. "It's very structured and that sort of
structure doesn't work for everybody."

Four current residents of Safe Haven have been banned from the TIMES
Center for periods varying from 90 days to one year due to rules
violations, she said. Safe Haven would rely more on "a peer support
network" instead of case management to transition residents into
permanent housing.

The TIMES Center's Greenly said his facility does develop a service
plan with goals for each resident, with "all our goals focusing on not
being homeless."

"It's fair to say people may not want to work within the shelter
system," he said. "You've got to play ball."

Safe Haven organizers also say they want the community to be based in
Champaign, despite the fact that Urbana, with a more liberal city
council and mayor, might be more politically receptive.

"The people living in the tent community have resided in Champaign,"
Harmon said. "They call Champaign home, and we'd like for them to
continue to call Champaign home."
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
 <http://us.mc449.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
 <http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20090720/3185b180/attachment-0001.html