209 supporters, listed in alphabetical order.

I'm sure TYP Choice will now release a similar list. :)

Isn't their's just a "Ron and Don tag team?"

(Or maybe only those of us who've lived around here for 40+ years will catch that allusion...)

The front page of TYPChoice.com website has info that a television debate is being offered for the Ten Year Plan and the Knox citizens for the Ten Year Plan.Gene Patterson will moderate.

TYPChoice has also gotten the KNS to hold a newspaper roundtable discussion.

Looks to me like the TYP Choice group is bringing it,think the ten year plan folks or the new anti-choice group will show,if you ask me, its easy to see who has the real courage.

Did I miss the announcement of this meeting on Knoxviews?

From the TYP Web Site:

The TYP will dialog with residents of the neighborhoods close to the Flenniken School about safety on Thursday, July 29 at the South Knoxville Community Center.

The last time we met was on June 21. At that meeting we discussed establishing a regular meeting concerning Flenniken Housing. Attendees agreed that a monthly meeting on Monday* evening would be appropriate, and that the meeting should continue to take place at the South Knoxville Community Center. Attendees also generated a list of potential topics for those meetings. It became apparent at that time that the most significant concerns shared by Flenniken’s neighbors are related to the over-arching issue of safety, and that is what the meeting on the 29th will be about.

*Please note that this meeting had previously been scheduled for Monday, July 19. It was changed to Thursday, July 29 at the request of a City Councilmember whose schedule did not permit attendance on the previously-scheduled date.

Again, we encourage you to attend this meeting and to invite others to join you. Safety for residents of permanent supportive housing, as well as for their neighbors, is of vital concern no matter where it’s built.

The meeting is scheduled to start at 6:00 PM at the South Knox Community Center, 522 Old Maryville Pike.

I got a copy of this and I cannot believe what Robert Finley says. First he says, "We're committed to fully involving the community in this discussion."

Then Finley explains, "We do not feel a debate is in order at this time."

Which is it? Is this what $100,000 of PR buys? These TYP people will only appear where they select the location and control the discussion. They haven't honestly answered questions our public has asked and they refuse to allow an open honest debate.

Is the Ten Year Plan hiding something?

FROM: Robert Finley

TO: Chris
Woodhull ; Finbarr Saunders ; Nick Della Volpe ; Bob Becker ; Nick Pavlis ; David Rausch ; Joe Bailey ; Jon Lawler ; Marilyn Roddy ; Michael Brown ; Dan Smith ; Daniel Brown ; J. Laurens Tullock ; Frank Rothermel ; Brenda Palmer ; Amy Broyles ; Duane Grieve ; Burt Rosen ; Alvin Nance ; Barbara Kelly ; Brad Anders ; Bud Armstrong ; Knox County Commission ; Craig Leuthold ; Dave Wright ; Ed Shouse ; Greg Lambert ; Ivan Harmon ; John Gill ; Mark Harmon ; Mike Hammond ; Paul Pinkston ; R. Larry Smith ; Richard Briggs ; Sam McKenzie ; Thomas Strickland ; Tony Norman ; Mintha Roach ; Andy Black ; Ellen Robinson ; Roger Nooe ; Bo Shafer ; Don Vick ; Ginny Weatherstone ; Diana Conn ; Ragan Schriver ; Michelle Carringer SENT: Wednesday,

July 28, 2010 1:50 PM SUBJECT: Ten-Year Plan: a meeting tomorrow night; a suggested debate

Dear City Councilmembers, County Commissioners, and Advisory Board members,

I want to mention a couple of things to you in this email.

First, a reminder that Tomorrow night, Thursday, July 29, we will meet at the South Knoxville Community Center at 6pm with residents of the neighborhoods around the Flenniken School. This is latest of our scheduled monthly meetings to talk about specific issues. Last month it was parking, and as you may recall, because of what we heard from the neighbors the developer modified his plans and will build more parking spaces.

This month we will focus on safety as it relates to a proposed permanent supportive housing development at Flenniken. While the meeting is about a specific issue and not about the plan overall,
you are still both welcome and encouraged to attend.

Second, Ron Peabody of TYPChoice has suggested a televised three-way debate between TYPChoice, a recently-launched advocacy group called Citizens for the Ten Year Plan, and the Ten-Year Plan office. As you are aware, the Ten-Year Plan has greatly increased the volume of its contact with the community.

Last week's meeting at the Cansler YMCA was the fourth in an ongoing series of monthly public conversations about elements of the TYP. Tomorrow night's meeting in South Knoxville (see above) is another example of the growing community discussion. In the last month or so we've had three public meetings and more are planned in the weeks ahead.

We're committed to fully involving the community in this discussion.

We do not feel a debate is in order at this time.

If TYPChoice is successful in getting their initiative on the ballot,
that would be the proper time to consider a debate.

Sincerely,
Robert Finley

Mayors' Office of the Ten Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness 400 Main Street Knoxville TN 37902

(link...)
865-215-3071

Its not a three way debate, it would be two groups representing one side against the opposing group.

A waste of time would be to continue having the so-called, "public conversations" that are not lead by Ten Year Plan officials, like the last Cansler YMCA meeting. These are just PR Smokescreens.

The format suggested by TYP Choice seems to me to be pretty good. Gene Patterson moderate's, and reads questions submitted by the audience. How can a debate like this, possibly be a waste of time, for anyone?

What is the TYP afraid of by not agreeing to a debate? Maybe they DO have something to hide.

BTW, pretty sure most candidate debates, before Primary's are more than two people. And I think at the college level, many times, Debates are with multiple Teams, not just two.

According to Wiki. there seems to by many types of debates.
Such as:

Contents

* 1 Competitive debate
* 2 Forms of debate
o 2.1 Parliamentary (Parli) debate
o 2.2 Mace Debate
o 2.3 Jes Debate
o 2.4 Public Debate
o 2.5 Australasia debate
o 2.6 World Universities Peace Invitational Debate
o 2.7 Asian Universities Debating Championship
o 2.8 Policy debate
o 2.9 Classical debate
o 2.10 Extemporaneous debate
o 2.11 Lincoln-Douglas debate
o 2.12 Karl Popper debate
o 2.13 Simulated legislature
o 2.14 Impromptu debate
o 2.15 Moot court and mock trial
o 2.16 Public Forum (Po Fo) Debate
o 2.17 Paris Style Debating
* 3 Other forms of debate
o 3.1 Online debating
o 3.2 U.S. presidential debates
o 3.3 Comedy debate
* 4 Debate Strategies
o 4.1 Moral High Ground
o 4.2 Model Construction / Destruction

Please note number 2.8, The Policy Debate

Policy Debate is a style of debating where two teams of two debaters advocate or oppose a plan derived from a resolution that usually calls for a change in policy by a government. Teams normally alternate, and compete in rounds as either "affirmative" or "negative". In most forms of the activity, there is a fixed topic for an entire year or another set period. In comparison to parliamentary debate, policy debate relies more on researched evidence and tends to have a larger sphere of what is considered legitimate argument, including counterplans, critical theory, and debate about the theoretical standards of the activity itself. While rhetoric is important and reflected in the "speaker points" given to each debater, each round is usually decided based on who has "won" the argument according to the evidence and logic presented. Additionally, in certain segments of the activity, debaters may "speed" (speak very rapidly), in order to present as much evidence and information as possible and counter the other side. People speed read in the attempt to "spread" the opponent out of a speech. In effect, the debater presents so much information, spread out over many topics, that the opponent does not have time to cover everything and must ignore arguments that the original team then focuses on.

Seems like this might be what TYP Choice is going after. Guess there might be something to Debate after all.

I don't think the choice groups policy is 'no",or "kill the TYP", I think they are doing everything they can to try to fix it and to bring more awareness to it.It s obvious by Finley's email why choice has resorted to a petition drive, because unless typ is forced to, they are not open to any modifications or discussions in meetings they don't control.
I don't see what a debate or discussion would hurt,especially in light of what a communication disaster the TYP has been thus far.Don't they have some obligation to continue public discussion about this highly controversial plan.What are they afraid of?What are they hiding?Or are they just above it all ?

The most interesting aspect of the meeting wed night was the revelation that TYP is now going to house homeless who are not considered to be "chronically homeless".This is a huge departure from what has been stated all along and should dramatically increase the number of potential units to be built.

I supported the TYP until recently. I am disappointed they have chosen the PR route instead of listening. The status quo people hear never say why they support the TYP. Only that they do not want change. Maybe Rachel and Metulj can explain why the TYP is still viable.

Here are some of the problems-

Expansion of the plan without Council or Commission authorization
Private, for profit ownership of Taxpayer paid for properties.
Unproven Scatter site design, in city of 180,000 population
No accounting of funds Raised and spent by City of Knoxville Officials office.
No accountability by a City of Knoxville office to City Council or the public.
No site selection criteria, or committee to facilitate location choices
No clear means to pay for support services.
No clear means to deliver those services.
No clear means to transport residents to the services.
No clear process as to where these services will be delivered, or by what agency.
No guarantee that once built, these facilities would be returned to public ownership if the Developer moves to market rate apartments. ( And before you say, it, this is possible, research the LIHTC program)
Public Relations firm paid for through the donation of a single individual, funneled through a local foundation.
Non-Profit entity, receiving Taxpayer funds for construction costs, then property transferring to For-Profit Entity for long term ownership.
Concept that Abstinence is bad, and that this proven method of addiction recovery “doesn’t work” .
Belief that only the plan as created, is the Only way to address Chronic Homelessness, knowing that in many other programs around the country, Abstinence is used as one of the tools for recovery.
Total deviation of the stated Goals of the original plan. ie, inappropriate site selection, vs, current Mulifamily housing rehabs, as stated in the original plan.
Doubling of original costs of Minvilla Manor re-hab, 3.4 million estimate, now at 7.2 million final cost est.

That’s a start.

And before you say it, go do the research yourself, its all out there.

This is exactly what my city did here in Florida ten years ago. Without any public notice or discussion they moved the homeless from their normal areas in the city to subsidized housing in the county. It was good for business in the city to have them gone but it did nothing to address the real problems these people had. The crime in the areas around where these people were placed shot up and after 10 years the communities where these housing projects were build have become rental houses. The developers of these projects became very rich.

The areas where the homeless normally stay are where the services are located. In most cities these areas have been established for years. The problem is that these areas where the services have been located are now surrounded by businesses and old neighborhoods around these areas are being repopulated by yuppie urbanites. The businesses and the hipsters want the homeless relocated away from their businesses and homes. Here in Miami there are new areas that are now populated by transient homeless drawn in with hand outs by people who think they are helping but in reality are enabling.

(link...)

The mission services in most cities have been in the same place for decades, usually close to train stations and/or bus stations.

I am Linda Rust, your neighbor in South Knoxville. Some of you may know me through my neighborhood advocacy or community development activities. I currently work for Knox County in the Office of Neighborhoods and Community Development. I represent the County Mayor on both the Knoxville homeless coalition, an eleven-county regional homeless coalition and the TYP Advisory Committee. I want to explain why I support the Knoxville/Knox County Ten Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness.

First, allow me to explain my credentials. I have a long history (20+ years) with working with the homeless in Knoxville. I’ve worked with homeless families and homeless single women, former offenders coming back into society, and homeless adults with mental illness. I’ve worked in an emergency shelter, two transitional housing programs, and was the first staff person for the Knoxville homeless coalition. I’ve participated in point-in-time counts and studies of the homeless population in Knoxville and eleven surrounding counties. I became involved in homelessness as an architecture student in the early ‘90s, researching affordable housing. I studied transitional housing for the homeless as my fifth-year architecture thesis project. More recently, I completed my master’s research on the geography of homelessness and permanent supportive housing.

I have worked directly with housing the chronically homeless. Just prior to my work with Knox County, I worked for the Helen Ross McNabb Center, Tennessee’s oldest community mental health center. My role at HRMC was to help case managers locate appropriate housing for the clients we served, adults with mental illness. I worked with people who had a broad range of housing needs, including those who were on the streets and in shelters. While many of our clients were capable of living completely independently in their own homes, some people were just not capable of living independently at all and needed the high level of support offered by a group home. We were fortunate to have housing resources at both ends of the spectrum. However, for those in between - people who could live independently IF they had some support - there were few options. The whole HRMC team – doctors, nurses, social workers, case managers, and administration were absolutely dedicated to helping people live at the highest level of independence they could manage and it was frustrating for all of us, not to mention our clients, that we had few options to offer. In my last two years at HRMC, we began to address the lack of supportive housing. We successfully developed permanent supportive housing units in the Fourth and Gill community. Over the years, HRMC has remained committed to developing permanent supportive housing as evidenced most recently by the opening of the new development at Cox Street. I am also pleased that their latest development on Baker Street, just a few blocks from my home, has begun.

The members of the homeless coalition, a diverse group with a vast amount of experience and knowledge about the homeless population and the Knoxville community, initiated the process for completing a Ten Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness (TYP). We joined with about 250 other communities across the US who were in varying stages of doing the same thing. While ending homelessness of any kind seemed like a far-fetched goal, we realized that setting shorter-term goals might help focus our efforts. We also had to acknowledge that the way we had been doing things, quite simply, wasn’t working. We followed a strategy developed by HUD for completing a TYP and learned more about the effects of chronic homelessness on resources (something I personally experienced at HRMC), why focusing on this particular population would help better address the needs of all the homeless, and what other communities were doing across the country to address it. We worked hard on our TYP process for well over a year, involved a lot of people across the community and developed a good plan to address some of the core issues - prevention of homelessness, strategies to shorten the time someone is homeless, coordination of services, developing housing solutions, etc. The homeless coalition continues to work on these issues in tandem with the TYP. While the TYP was technically “completed” in 2005, it remains a guide that continually changes as new data/information comes to light, as needs evolve and as our community sees fit to revise it.

I support the TYP and the priority of scattered site permanent supportive housing

· Because it works – the evidence is right here in Knoxville, as well as across the country.
· It was locally developed with input from people across our community.
· It respects the dignity of people by giving the supports necessary to allow them to live at their highest level of independence.
· It’s fiscally conservative – it is a lot less expensive than allowing people to live on the streets.
· It allows people to transcend labels and stigma and let’s them return to their rightful place in our community, with the rest of us, as neighbors.

If there is a better plan out there, a better solution that anyone has that begins to solve the problem of homelessness in both a humane and cost effective way, I’m all ears.

It sounds like "requiring abstinence is bad."

And I can totally understand that getting someone started in a supportive program is the priority. And this would be easier with a "come as you are" policy.

But I'm of the opinion that encouraging sobriety would go a long way towards helping people meet their life challenges. And one of the biggest barriers to sobriety is close contact with people who are using the substance one is trying to forgo. I don't get theimpression this has been adressed by the TYP.

When you say:

It was locally developed with input from people across our community.

How many people were involved in the creation of the plan?

Other than 4th & Gill, Old North Knoxville, Parkridge and North Knoxville, how many neighborhood representatives from across our community were involved n the creation of the plan?

I don't know of a single neighborhood association that had representation during the creation of the plan, that is west of I-640. Were there any?

Or North of I-640, or East of Parkridge, or South of the River, other than Island Home.

How many people were involved in the creation of the plan?

I'm sorry, but I do not have a number for you. If pressed, I'd guesstimate a few hundred. In the TYP document there is a listing of some folks and organizations who helped with the TYP process, but it doesn't represent everyone involved, no. I think we probably kept attendance sheets from meetings (the Community Concerns working group alone had at least 15 members) and there were three other, larger, committees dealing with housing, supportive services, etc. Committees invited speakers sometimes too to speak to specific issues. We also had numerous public meetings and meetings with the homeless themselves. Members of the homeless coalition, folks from the faith community, neighborhood representatives, the police, sheriff's dept., public defender's office, District Attorney (I'm rattling off now about members of the committee I staffed).

Other than 4th & Gill, Old North Knoxville, Parkridge and North Knoxville, how many neighborhood representatives from across our community were involved n the creation of the plan?

I'm thinking we also had COIN, CityPeople, Old Sevier, Fort Sanders - basically the neighborhoods that were being heavily impacted by the homeless population.

I don't know of a single neighborhood association that had representation during the creation of the plan, that is west of I-640. Were there any?

I'd say you are probably right. We just didn't get much interest from neighborhoods that weren't being affected by the homeless population. Although we did discuss in my committee at one point the impact of homeless camps and panhandling on on-ramps that happened outside the city center area.

Or North of I-640, or East of Parkridge, or South of the River, other than Island Home.

I don't want to quibble, but Old Sevier and South Haven were represented, but I do get your point. From what I can recall, it was only neighborhood associations that felt an impact from homelessness that were heavily involved.

At this point I would submit that it will be a series of plans.

Well, again I don't want to quibble, but we have a good plan. Any good plan evolves over time and based on new information and experience. What we're continually developing is the implementation.

I keep finding myself thinking about Baptist Hospital. I realize that it is not THE answer but I can't figure out why it is not part of the answer.

Two reasons - for one, it's extremely costly because it becomes like an institution. Secondly, I believe that this would be warehousing people based on a label society gives. Labels like homeless or chronically homeless, or mentally ill, or whatever, seem to negate that these folks are also fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, friends, employees, etc. It's also discriminatory, can you imagine if we housed all people who had diabetes or heart disease in one place?

I'm sorry, Vernon, but I did not say what you said I said. I don't know how to even begin to have a meaningful dialogue with you if we can't start from honestly trying to understand one another's position. Let's try again?

I suggest that you go back to 2004-2005, and review the KNS articles about the development of the plan. Then come back to this forum, and let us know how many publicly advertised meetings where held, looking for community involvement.

For those of us that pay attention to the media, especially during this time, IT DID NOT HAPPEN.

Actually, for the June 2010 Community Conversations meeting, I did this very thing. I went through the library archives and printed every article about the TYP during those early days of 2004-2005. I spray-mounted the articles on large posterboard and brought it to the meeting. There were many, many opportunities for involvement and feedback.

It was not shocking, nor even surprising, that neighborhood associations that did not experience a large impact from homelessness were not expressing interest or becoming involved in the issue.

More importantly, you're right - they are involved now. This is a very good thing. One of the tenets of the TYP is that homelessness is a community-wide issue and needs a community-wide solution.

Vernon wrote: The only neighborhood groups involved were in areas that have a high population of homeless.It projects a message like,"hey! we met and voted to move our problematic homeless people to your neighborhood,thanks,see ya later".

I realize that it appears that way in retrospect, but that certainly wasn't how it happened, Vernon. I'm sorry to repeat myself, but the TYP and the concept of permanent supportive housing was publicized over and over, it just didn't get much feedback, if any at all that I am aware of, from neighborhood associations that were not dealing with the problems of homelessness. People tend to filter out 'stuff' that they don't feel applies to them. For example, when I was helping to form the eleven county regional homeless coalition, there were several counties that said they just didn't have any homeless - they all went to Knoxville.

Should we have fast-forwarded to the future and asked how the neighborhoods far from the center city would respond to the idea of scattering the psh? Of course, I wish we had. What do they say about hindsight being 20/20? We did discuss the issue of how the entire community should take responsibility for the community-wide issue of homelessness.

Vernon wrote: There might have been a better reception of PSH if these recieving groups had been able to shape the plan and perhaps make it more appealing or helped in creating partnerships with accountable groups that would take on resposibilty for mentoring residents. That way communities don't have to place all their confidence in some 8-5 case worker at each facility.

Yes, we agree. For a lasting 'solution', we need involvement from the entire community to solve the community-wide problem of homelessness. The TYP has a provision for the mentoring you suggested (great idea), called "Circles of Support." Circles of Support happen in small, localized groups and create relationships to give support to a chronically homeless person in permanent supportive housing.

Donna wrote: It simply isn't true that there were, "many, many opportunities for involvement and feedback". I would like for you to list the links to those articles and post them here.

I found the KNS articles through the Knox County library archives. If you'll go to the KnoxCounty.org web page, choose the library from the drop down menu and sign in with your library card number, you can search the KNS newspaper archives. I typed in "Ten Year Plan" and "homelessness" into the search engine along with the time period (2004, 2005) and found a listing of all the articles. You can print the articles from there. I skimmed several dozen articles about the TYP, yet just printed those that dealt with permanent supportive housing. I would be more than happy to bring the posterboard I made to the next Community Conversations meeting, if you don't want to go through all that mess.

I am so glad you asked this question, Donna. I have ignored it in the past because it didn't make sense to me. But I've been doing a lot of thinking (and writing) this weekend and it's hit me different this time, when you asked it.

The purpose of the TYP has actually done the opposite of "hiding", it has uncovered an uncomfortable truth: that homelessness is a community-wide problem. It's not an inner city problem, it's not even a city problem. Homelessness can happen to any family anywhere because the causes of homelessness (alcoholism, mental illness, hard times) cross socioeconomic and geographic boundaries. This is what makes people so uncomfortable. Homelessness is not just "hidden" in the inner city anymore because that's where services have been traditionally located. Homelessness is brought uncomfortably close when we encounter the homeless on interstate highway ramps or hear about them in homeless camps near where we live or shop. It's even more frightening to grapple with the idea that 'they' could be living in our neighborhoods. The TYP has not hidden the problem of homelessness. In fact, it has done the exact opposite and that has what has made people so uncomfortable.

I always find that line of reasoning strange to tell you the truth, Donna. Why do media releases get published or stories get written if not to interest and involve people in the subject matter? I don't mean to sound argumentative, but I have never waited to be asked my opinion on something that I think affects me or my interests. Could we have done more to solicit input? In retrospect, or depending upon your perspective, sure we could have.

The past is the past. What we have is the present. Please get involved now and let's do what it takes to make it work. Your input is desired, your involvement crucial to our community solving the problem of homelessness.

I don't think we're communicating well on this forum, Donna. I feel like I keep repeating myself. Maybe we can talk face-to-face after the next Community Conversations meeting?

I find your comment:

The past is the past. What we have is the present.

Very interesting.

The current problems with the TYP are firmly based in the actions of the TYP going back over 5 years.

The TYP's actions are the problem, from the beginning to now. Kind of hard to put that behind us, when it is those very actions that has lead to this current disaster.

The current plan was created in a vacuum, with no real public support, sold to the Citizens as a way to save money, then turned out to be a boondoggle of epic proportions. 5 years, later, not a single TYP unit is open, the Leadership has deviated from the original plan substantially, they have not pursued rehabbing Multi-family units because there is not enough profit in it for the Developer, and there is no plan in place to sustainably provide the Support Services.

Say what you want, try to justify your actions, but try as you will, the facts are the facts, you can not hide behind the failure that is the Ten Year Plan.

The TYP is hardly a failure. Some 250 chronically homeless people have been housed, another 100 or so people have been prevented from being homeless by retaining their housing due to supportive services, services are being better coordinated than ever before, the faith community is more involved than ever before, Minvilla is set to open soon, Cox Street is already open, Flenniken is making progress, and we're engaged with the community in our Community Conversations series. HUD continues to support the TYP concept and research from permanent supportive housing developments across the country continue to show that it works. Both the city and county in their Consolidated Plans list permanent supportive housing as priorities over the next five years. Can we be more successful in engaging neighborhoods outside the center city? Absolutely. I'll be there to support that and hope to meet you sometime so we can talk outside of the blogosphere.

Courtney Piper said it today on Gene's show, "The Ten Year Plan is going to be central to the Mayor's and City Council's races next year".

I think Ron Peabody's TYPChoice group has accomplished what they set out to do. It might be better for them to suspend their petitions until next year. Agree?

(link...)

Allaya'll should own up to the truth: Them damn yuppies in Parkridge are the real power brokers in Knoxville.

Sorry to interrupt a good rant but this bugs me -

Hotel Monday was housing the homeless

or the News Sentinel headline - "Homeless residents"

Oxymoron, anyone?

Normally I'm the last one to nitpick on grammar, but I find it interesting how the word is thrown about so loosely.

Sometimes I wonder if my neighbors who live in the park should be considered homeless. There's a couple that are long term residents, we exchange chit-chat at the RR track, stuff like that. They have a home - it just looks different than yours or mine.

Sometimes I think people are unaware that there are a couple of large subsidized apartment complexes adjacent or near to Kingston woods.

I think we are referring to people who need some support to get by with their day to day living. Some people are lucky and get that support from family or friends. Some aren't so fortunate, and for a subset of these it is because their problems are so deep they have alienated family/friends that might otherwise help them. I assume it is this subset that scares neighbors.

Please don't fall into the rut of reading posts as being For or Against and no middle. Thats real common on this blog - posters tend to see it as us vs them when the answer may be in the middle. If you'll read Bob's posts you'll see he expresses some valid concerns about the residents - sidewalks, transportation and the like. You may see that as a smokescreen for simple NIMBYism but I don't.

Two points:

1. you said, "Some 250 chronically homeless people have been housed." Where? What locations? Over what time-frame? And has the "TYP" housed them, or are you counting chronic homeless that were already being served by existing programs at Helen Ross McNabb and other existing providers? It reminds me of how different economic development agencies used to call me to ask how many employees I had so that they could each count them as jobs they had created.

Some clarification of roles may help answer your question, Doug. The TYP is a document, it does not house anyone. The TYP office is made up of three people whose role is to implement the TYP. The housing and services that are part of the plan (TYP) are carried out by the agencies that both sponsored and implement the plan. So for an agency, such as VMC or HRMC, that has a role in implementing the TYP, counting someone as newly housed or retained in housing is a success both for the that agency that provided the service as well as being a part of the whole of implementing the TYP. The TYP, as the coordinating or reporting body, counts it as a success because one less person is on the street. With your example, while you as an employer hired the employee (and created a job), the economic development agency that was measuring such statistics counted that job as one created (the agency didn't create it, they just report it). Now, if there were more than one TYP office reporting the same numbers, there could be a problem like you suggest. But that's not the situation here.

Let me add that the member agencies of the homeless coalition have been providing services to this population for years - like I wrote earlier, HRMC was providing some permanent supportive housing long before the TYP.

I was actually a bit conservative on the numbers. More than 300 people have been housed since the TYP was put in place. What's important is that we not only consider the numbers of people placed in housing, but numbers of people who have stayed in the housing for at least a year. These 300+ have maintained their housing for one year. The bulk have been housed in KCDC properties and private apartments scattered around the community. Another important number is the number of evictions to the street in KCDC housing - before the TYP, there was an average of 67 people a year who were evicted to the streets, meaning they had no intervention to get them housed elsewhere. Since the TYP, agencies have been successful in intervening with evictions at KCDC and there are now 0 (zero) evictions to the street. Mind you, there are still evictions, but these folks are getting housing elsewhere in the community, not entering homelessness.

2. Failure or success is pure semantics. More specifically, will you please summarize whether Minvilla will serve as a model for future infrastructure development for the TYP, or whether there truly have been lessons learned re cost and development cycle? Isn't Flenniken following much the same path? If there have been lessons learned from Minvilla, what are they, and how will the TYP streamline future development?

Any homeless person moved off the streets and out out of shelters and into permanent housing is a success. Any person who can maintain their housing with community supports is a success. Any person prevented from becoming homeless is a success. These are not semantics, but measurable, demonstrated results.

I wouldn't be the right person to answer your questions about the specifics of Minvilla ar Flenniken. That would best be directed to David Arning or the TYP.

Thanks for the opportunity to clarify.

So during the five years of existence of the TYP, existing agencies have housed 250-300, continuing what they were doing before the TYP, right? How many chronic homeless were housed in the five years before the TYP by HRMC, VMC, and others? That would be a fair comparison, correct?

Please note the correction: the number is 300+. I conservatively estimated 250, but it's over 300.

Although some agencies (like HRMC and VMC) were providing some permanent supportive housing before, I don't think the numbers were very high. There wasn't a mechanism for counting the numbers of chronically homeless housed/served until the development of the Homelessness Management Information System (HMIS) - also developed from the TYP process. Agencies greatly increased their efforts after participating in the TYP process (obviously). Focus on the chronically homeless population lead to greater coordination between housing and supportive services. There are also new services that came about from the TYP process - like the case management provided at KCDC properties.

And during the five years of the TYP, exactly how many chronic homeless have been housed in NEW facilities that were (at least partially) funded by CDBG and NSP monies?

The only NEW facility I can think of is HRMC Cox Street. But I don't think CDBG was used. I don't know about NSP, but I don't think it was used either. Of course, Minvilla will be opening soon and it is using both sources, I believe.

sorry, I must have dozed off. What is this acronym?

Chris Martin, the CEO of Knoxville Leadership Foundation is the the Registered agent of SHF II Inc., located at the 901 Summit Hill address.

Again, this is not very "Independent".

So Helen Ross McNabb doesn't know how many it housed before the TYP? Didn't you say you worked there?

Doug, it isn't quite as easy a comparison to make. Number of units is one thing, but whether the person met the definition of chronically homeless is another. Whether the person maintained their housing for one year or longer is another point to consider when making comparisons. Please keep in mind, I worked there over 13 years ago.

Doug, you're asking some good questions. However, while I am trying to answer your questions as thoughtfully as I can, I'm starting to feel as if you're baiting me. I was clear that I had answered the question about the numbers housed since the TYP conservatively and I corrected myself once. You then responded by writing 250-300 when I had written "more than 300" and I even asked you to make note of that correction. You didn't and then are slamming me with being unclear. How can we engage in meaningful dialogue that leads to understanding and not a game of "gotcha?"