First of all, greetings from Salta, Argentina. I am literally stuck in a hotel for a 7-day quarantine. I have a balcony, and my hotel room is OK, but I am basically on house arrest. Argentina requires all people entering the country to quarantine, even if they are vaccinated. I suppose there are worse places to be locked away. Anyway, at least my view isn’t half bad.
When the Boise Shelter Better Task Force was first announced, I was mildly hopeful. I had envisioned a task force of independent experts who were qualified and fair.
However, when the task force members were announced, I was very discouraged. At the time, I seriously considered writing a post on how the task force wasn’t qualified and appeared to be stacked. I even went so far as to research the background and social media of all the members, but decided to hold off.
One of my personality traits, or perhaps flaws, is to be genuinely optimistic, despite having a skeptical analytic mind. I decided that the best thing to do would be to let the task force do its job, and hope for the best.
I am not naive. The proposed shelter location is a political nightmare for our City Council and our Mayor. Being portrayed as anti-homeless is not something that anyone wants, especially when most of our City Council are North End progressives. Then again, there is the real possibility that if the shelter goes into that location, and things go badly, that there will be real political backlash. Especially considering that in the future City Council districts will be geographical, so the North Ends political power will be negated.
The task force was meant to give the Mayor, and the city council cover--and it would have worked if the task force was truly independent as I had hoped. However it became quite clear that the task force was rigged. Pro-shelter neighborhood residents were pulled up to become neighborhood “leaders”, other positions were filled with those who work regularly with Interfaith Sanctuary. These pro-shelter types seriously outnumbers the three neighborhood association members who were trying to advocate for the local residents.
At this point, I want to add that I absolutely respect every person on the task force board. None of them are evil, and I believe all genuinely want good things. It’s just that this was meant to be an independent advisory task force, and instead it seemed like the Mayor hoped it would be a negotiation.
Despite the task force being rigged by relying on bad data, I even made a good faith effort to suggest a mitigation strategy for the shelter. On social media, my suggestion was attacked by both the anti and pro shelter participants. I even emailed the shelter task force with it asking for feedback-I didn’t get it.
Now, after all this, it appears the City and the Mayor have realized that the task force ploy was in vain, and has seriously reduced their mandate, if not outright removed it. Reading between the lines, it appears as the shelter location is a done deal in the minds of the city. Perhaps they are hoping that the task force will recommend some mitigation and perhaps some compromises, but I am skeptical.
Without some give and take on both sides, we are going to end up with a winner takes all solution, which will ironically result in everybody losing.
I think the problem is mainly on the pro-shelter side. There is reflexive response they have to ignore or downplay any of the objections or neighborhood concerns. While the neighborhood has set a not in my neighborhood position, they at least acknowledge the need for homeless services, and have suggested alternatives (even if some are unrealistic in the short term) like smaller shelters or other locations in non-residential areas.
I think they feel that if they acknowledge any potential drawbacks, they will just give ammunition to the no-shelter side.
For their part, the no-shelter side sees this, and it makes them harden their position.
I like to think of myself as a moderate. I am open to a shelter in the location, as long as actions are taken to mitigate the potential issues, and as long as their are set parameters and benchmarks.
As citizens, all we can do is to continue to be engaged in the process. Be educated, and be empathetic to other peoples positions.
Have a great day.
As neighborhoods we were " engaged in the process" and look where it got us. We were called names, labeled troublemakers and at one point told not to contact officials, chastized for being engaged! Discouraged doesn't begin to cover the feelings some of us have. Try disillusioned. Most of us had no idea the sale and subsequent green lighting of this project was happening. We had high, if cautious, hopes that if presented rationally the many cons of having a 200 + shelter on State St. and the VPN would prevail. But no, the project was a go from moment it was conceived- what transpired after a placating gesture, a slight of hand if you will, by City Planners and the Mayor to appease those of us against this move. Apparently, they believed that since this is the economiclly lowest part of Boise we are also ignorant. They must have been clapping themselves on the back for their creativity in their duplicitous ways. A building was bought for this endeavor without the proper channels, without the proper Zoning, without due diligence. Yet it will be the home of a 200+ shelter with the possibility of future growth such as a soup kitchen. State street was also due to be under the City's Urban Renewal plan. Millions have been spent on the roads. Around 2016 conceptual plans were introduced to the citizens of what the area would look like once completed. It was to be Northwest Boise's introduction to the city. But yet again, this area isn't the North End, nor Downtown. The plans fell through for only 2 intersections have been widened with further projects on hold, the money apparenetly going elsewhere (Riverside Urban Renewal where they ousted the shelter?). So as an introduction to Boise on the NW end of town we will have a homeless shelter front and center added to a Veterans home and other low income housing in the area. It's a little hard to get excited about being engaged in any process in this city when you see what has happened with the IFS move and the dropped Urban Renewal State Street project when you realize your end of town is only good enough as an after thought.