I’ve have been staying largely quiet during the last month or two to enable the Boise Shelter Better Task Force to do their work, and to observe to see what direction they would take.
However, after five weeks, I have decided to add one specific suggestion that perhaps the Task Force could consider.
One of the Task Force members asked a question on Facebook about under what conditions someone would support the shelter.
I have an answer.
I propose that if the Interfaith Sanctuary Shelter goes into the location on State Street, that they adopt the following policy.
Proposed Policy:
Any illegal use of alcohol within 2500 feet (1/2 a mile) by a guest of Interfaith Sanctuary Shelter would be result in the following actions:
1st incident - warning and counseling
2nd incident - mandatory enrollment and participation in a substance recovery program to continue to get shelter services
3rd incident - 7-day ban from shelter services
4rd incident - 1 month ban from shelter services
5th incident - lifetime ban
Clarifications:
This would not include if someone was drinking a beer with at the beer garden at the Lyft across the street. Or if someone was drinking a beer with a neighbor in their front yard. (both legal)
Yes, they could go to one of the bars that are nearby. (legal)
No, they would not be able to drink in Willow Park, because I also propose that it becomes a dry park.
This would only cover specific behaviors which are already illegal. (Drinking on the sidewalk or someone else’s property without permission is already illegal)
I chose 2500 feet because it covers to Veterans Park Highway, Willow Park, Collister Library, and the Elementary School.
If they were cited downtown, then that wouldn’t count. If they were caught doing illegal drugs in Coopers Court, it wouldn’t count. Only in the immediate vicinity.
If they were drinking in the parking lot of the Albertsons or at Veterans Park… not applicable because its outside the 2500 foot limit.
Benefits and Reasoning:
Drug and alcohol use in public and the associated behaviors that come with it are the main concerns of the neighborhood. Especially if there is a concentration of it. This policy would still allow the Shelter to serve people with addiction problems, but at the same time discouraging the addictive behaviors from concentrating in a neighborhood that has schools, businesses, restaurants and residents.
Additionally, keeping the actual substance use away from the many guests in various stages of recovery that Interfaith Sanctuary serves, could only help improve the odds for the people who are overcoming their own addiction issues.
I even propose that the individuals be able to appeal the rulings with a committee that involves IFS personnel and neighborhood representatives, to ensure that someone would have a chance if they entered an addiction program.
Given that IFS has already made assurances that they intend to police the area around the shelter, this rule shouldn’t even be controversial. IFS will want the neighborhood support, and this policy would help them prevent any issues which chronically paints themselves in a bad light.
Please give me feedback, or if you think its a good idea, feel free to let your elected officials know as well as members of the task force.
Open container laws unfairly impact people without homes. Next time you pick up a six pack or bottle of wine ponder where you would imbibe?
One of the barriers to housing becomes the open container ticket, your only option for getting out of the elements becomes a shelter but you are now banned because you were targeted for open container. So you sleep “rough”.
Do we really want more people sleeping out or in shelters?
Do we really want more barriers to housing?
Honest questions would you want to live with the same rules?
I do not support a low barrier shelter in a residential neighborhood no matter what conditions are specified. I have zero respect or trust in the leadership of Interfaith Sanctuary. I do not believe that they have the best interest of people experiencing homelessness in mind. All you have to do is look at the length of stay for their clients to know they are not assisting them in bettering their lives.
No to a shelter on State Street and No to Interfaith Sanctuary.