TYP's decision to reject this site seems reasonable and I'm pleased that they'll conduct the public forum anyway. Maybe we CAN expect improved transparency in this process?

I'd like to attend (from across town) and listen in, myself.

"Soil Issues". Housing the homeless in West Knoxville.
Ha.

Here is a radical idea:
The time has come for the citizens of Knox County to demand MPC create a specific zoning classification for homeless services. Treat the zoning for the housing of chronically homeless the same as zoning an industrial activity.

The Western heights housing projects are mostly vacant, and Rule High school is decaying at the top of the hill. Move all the services there.
Provide a van service to relevant appointments, etc.
It's convenient to the interstate and will not stop commercial development along the Broadway Corridor. It is already near the warehouses and various industrial land uses.

Plus Lonsdale is geographically in West Knoxville and central to most of Knox County.

This could have surely been done at much lower cost than the Fifth Avenue Hotel Renovation. It is insane to spend so much money on so few housing units at that site. The construction costs are in line with market rate condos downtown.

In fact I will go as far as saying the Minvilla projects is unethical, immoral, and fiscally irresponsible. All those involved in the Minvilla debacle, and the concentration of homeless services along the Broadway corridor should be ashamed and have trouble sleeping at night. They should be concerned with helping the most people possible, not building flagship buildings.

just to generate ideas...

What about something like a "civilian conservation corps" - with housing?

Applicants (referred through the TYP model) could qualify for housing as long as they meet some treatment quidelines. They would work, to the extent they are able, in community projects like picking up litter, weeding, planting perennials...

Any testing or compliance issues would be for employment - which comes with housing. zoning "set asides" or incentives would be for a positive purpose, and would not be a fair housing issue...

Earth Threatens to Swallow Hopeless Politician Housing
Planet says placing hopeless politicians in west is "bad feng shui"

From APB reports. KNOXVILLE - Yesterday, the Earth itself threatened to swallow up any housing for chronically hopeless politicians in West Knoxville, effectively nixing a potential hopeless politician housing complex near West Town Mall and forcing officials with the 10-year Plan to Fund Chronic Political Hopelessness to rethink their housing strategy...

Okay Metulj, Edens. Let it rip. Let your inner eight year old run wild. Go South Park on us.

You see just like some animals are more equal than others, some places are more equal than others.

As reported by Frank Cagle in Metropulse today...

"Oops. The feces has hit the oscillating cooling device in Knoxville’s 37919 area code.

One of the sites being considered for up to 50 units of public housing for the chronically homeless is property at Lakeshore Park on Lyons View Pike.

Lyons View is a road between Kingston Pike and Northshore Drive, the site of million-dollar homes on a bluff overlooking the Tennessee River. It is the most prestigious address in Knoxville, with the possible exception of nearby Cherokee Boulevard. ..."

When the people of the Meadows Condos near Teaberry Lane hired an Attorney to defend them from structural damage to their homes due to sinkholes it was wrong? It was NIBYISM? But when local Attorney Tom McAdams along with Caesar Stair and former Mayor Victor Ashe defend the soccer and baseball parks built at Lakeshore from the scourge of Permanent Supportive Housing on the site of the former State Mental Hospital it is good?

How does that work? Edens? Metulj?

There should not be any more PSH sites selected until Lake Shore is vetted.

This site was set aside by the State of Tennessee in the 1860's to house the patients addressed by "Housing First". Lakeshore pre-dates Sequoyah Hills, Cherokee County Club, Bearden, and everything around it.

People who very much wanted to see the Debusk Lane and Teaberry Lane have a PSH site now object to Lake Shore? Quite curious. How does that work again?

But Lakeshore is a superior site to either Debusk Lane or Teaberry Lane. It has superior access to transportation and services compared to either of the other sites.

This has happened because this process was never vetted by the community. A small number of people inside the homeless industry "dialoged to consensus" this scattered "housing first" approach.(See page 54 of 75)

The only fair and equitable way to address this is a series of county wide public forums to let the other 99.9% of the public be part of the process.

Let the people be heard. Or scrap the Ten Year Plan and start over.

(link...)

"Haslam and Lawler may be the two most politically naïve public figures in Knoxville. Putting homeless people in permanent housing at Lakeshore is certainly consistent with their egalitarian beliefs and the ethos of their prayer group. But given the anger of some very powerful folks in 37919, the decision to include Lakeshore may put the entire plan to disperse the homeless into permanent housing at risk."

The best approach? To put people in a place where they are not wanted is the best approach? To put them far away from the services they need is the best approach? Can you explain that?

I can, but Clyde Edgerton does it better. Read Walking Across Egypt.

Fischbobber, thanks for an excellent, detailed post (at 9:59 pm).

Those are all perfectly relevant concerns and I'll split the list with you to see them answered at Thursday's meeting.

I do understand Rick's uncertainty about living so close by to chronically homeless who are, by definition, likely substance abusers or mentally ill.

Substance abusers often steal, and the mentally ill are altogether unpredictable, so I think his concern about how the PSH will safeguard other neighborhood residents is valid (although I'm heartened to hear about the lack of trouble where you are).

Actually, I think he does have to arrive at some sense that he will "volunteer." I think we all do.

My frustration is his seeming doggedness right now that someone else should.

For the most the "homeless" residents of Ft Dickerson have been good neighbors. This could be partly because of the benificial effects of living around greenery

(link...)

but I think it's in large part becaue because they know neighborhood complaints could get their homes cleared away.

Went by this morning to help my folks with their taxes and saw the Knoxville Focus story on the Ten Year Plan.

(link...)

The Ten Year Plan - Helping or Enabling?

My father is still upset that they had to hire an attorney to protect the Meadows Condos from having the sinkhole system being built on and threatening their homes. And he is really upset with the attitude of Jon Lawler. He wants to know how this plan got so far along without anyone thinking about the cost to city taxpayers. Dad asked me, 'do they think we are stupid'?

I don't think they plan to provide services. This is about getting them off the street downtown. If they did provide the services it would bankrupt the city. You really have to wonder how city council could approve this without any idea what it would cost. It is a blank check.

"With all due respect to Mr. Peabody and the Knoxville Focus, the piece contains a significant number of substantial factual errors, some of which we first heard at the recent public meeting at Arnstein Jewish Community Center."

Robert Finley, you knew about the sinkhole and did nothing to pull the Teaberry site. So don't talk to me about respect. You should have to pay for John Kings legal fees to defend the Meadows. You are quoted in the comments section at the Knoxville Sentinel as knowing about the sinkhole in February. One of our neighbors challenged you about it and you replied you knew there was a sinkhole but it wasn't a big deal. If my Dad and his neighbors had not hired John King you would have gotten Council approval for the Teaberry site. You have no credibility. Ron Peabody is a hero to everyone at the Meadows. We want to see the numbers Ron ask you for. Ron said at the Arnstein Center he didn't know the actual numbers he estimated. He ask you to provide them. We are coming to the City Council meeting and demand you provide the cost numbers for the services. You say there are factual errors. Then provide the numbers and prove it.

"I'll give you just one example here of what I'm talking about. At AJCC on March 18 Mr. Peabody pegged the cost of providing case management services to 1100 residents of PSH at $11,700,000 annually for 336 case managers with an average caseload of 10 clients (average salary/benefits $35,000/year per case manager). Our model calls for a 1:25 ratio of case managers to clients. That means that one case manager has a client load of 25 clients, not that every client is covered by on-duty case managers 24/7 at a ratio of 1:25, which is what Mr. Peabody seems to have assumed in his presentation, but at a 1:10 ratio."

Then why does your website have the 1:10 ratio? In fact your website has it as 10:1. Have you even read your own website?

(link...)

Page 58

"Client to service staffing ratio averaging 10:1, so formerly homeless individuals are able to stay in housing because support needs are being met."

At the Arnstein meeting Jon Lawler admitted your website had incorrect information and that the 1:10 ratio was incorrect and the correct number was a 1:25 ratio. It was a Ten Year Plan supporter that asked Lawler about the ratio. Did you attend the Arnstein meeting? You should know that.

Until the Ten Year Plan comes clean about what this costs this plan should be put on hold. You owe Ron Peabody an apology. Your website backs up his figures.

As stated in a KNS Article Titled:
Minvilla project to be re-bid Monday, April 3, 2009

Construction of the controversial $7 million Minvilla Manor project to house the chronically homeless will be re-bid Monday in order to comply with federal requirements that the job be publicly advertised, its developer said Thursday.
The project was not advertised before Wood Brothers Construction was selected as the low bidder in April 2008 from among four local contractors vying for the project…….
……..Wood Brothers was founded by brothers Jerry, Mike and Pat Wood. Pat Wood later co-founded Lawler-Wood with Jon Lawler's father, Rodney Lawler.
Jon Lawler said he has no business ties to Wood Brothers.
"My connection to Wood Brothers does not exist," said Lawler, who still holds an ownership interest in Lawler-Wood…….
………As far as other connections, though, the Southeastern Housing Foundation - the designated developer for 10-Year Plan housing projects - was created by Lawler-Wood as a nonprofit entity eligible for government grants and other subsidies, Jon Lawler explained.
Lawler-Wood is responsible for several publicly-subsidized housing projects throughout Knoxville. The Southeastern Housing Foundation's ownership eventually was transferred to the evangelical Christian nonprofit, Knoxville Leadership Foundation.
"But once Southeastern Housing left Lawler-Wood," said Lawler, "I didn't have any dealings with it."

So let me get this straight. Lawler-Wood Developers creates a Non-Profit entity called Southeastern Housing Foundation, so they could receive Government Grants to fund their Multi-Family Low Income Developments. Then the Ten Year Plan was developed by the City of Knoxville and Knox County and low and behold, Jon Lawler, then Vice-President of Lawler-Wood(Still part Owner), was hired as the Director of the plan, working directly for Mayor Haslem.
Southeastern Housing Foundation’s ownership was at some point, “Transferred” to The Christian Non-Profit Knoxville Leadership Foundation. David Arning, previous developer with the Holrob Group, was then hired as Southeastern Housing Foundations Vice President and Housing Coordinator. Mr. Arning then became the sole Housing Coordinator of the Ten Year Plan.

Meanwhile, the first Construction contract for Minvilla Manor, was given to Wood Bros. Construction Company, as in Lawler-Wood, but the contract was eventually rejected when it was discovered that it was essentially awarded as a No-Bid Contract to Wood Bros. Interestingly when the Bid went out again, Wood Bros. Construction was awarded the contract, again.

More recently, during the DeBusk Lane debacle, it was disclosed that after the County ponied up our Tax dollars for the property, the land would then be “given” to Southeastern Housing Foundation. Then the Construction would be paid for through some mysterious mix of Government Grants and Tax Credits and Home Loan Bank funding, with very little if any of the cost paid by Southeastern Housing Foundation. Oh, and I almost forgot, Southeastern Housing Foundation and David Arning would then own the properties, free and clear, and manage them, under Contract for the Ten Year Plan. Projected cost would have been $85,000 per 12’x 17’ SRO unit.

Should I even mention Teaberry Lane. Sinkholes, Daycare Centers, Assisted Living Facilities, Schools, Limited Bus Service, no Sidewalks, Alcohol and None of the needed services in the area were all issues with Teaberry Lane. Does this sound familiar?

Now Robert Finley has the audacity to say of Mr. Peabody-

“I'm not assuming anything about Mr. Peabody's motives here,”

With all due respect Mr. Finley, are you F*#@!*%$ kidding us. Motives, what are the real motives of the Ten Year Plan, Lawler-Wood, Wood Bros. and Southeastern Housing Foundation?

As the O ‘Jays said it so long ago,in their classic-
For The Love Of Money

Money money money money, MONEY
Money money money money, MONEY
Money money money money, MONEY
Money money money money, MONEY
Money money money money, MONEY
Money money money money, MONEY...

...For the love of money
People will lie, rob, they will cheat

For the love of money
People don't care who they hurt or beat...

...For a small piece of paper it carries a lot of weight
Oh, that mean, mean, mean, mean, mean green

Almighty Dollar!

Talkin' bout, talkin' bout – cash

WAKE UP KNOXVILLE, THE TEN YEAR PLAN IS SUPPOSE TO BE ABOUT HELPING THE HOMELESS, NOT MAKING PEOPLE RICH.

I'm pretty new to this site. I appreciate these folks providing a place where a citizen can speak without reproach from the "powers that be". It seems some of y'all know each other despite the "code names". Public discourse is what has made this country great; the give and take of ideas and understandings is what (used to) set us apart from the rest of the civilized world.

I have read the various posts in a few places on this topic - it seems to me that the Ten Year Plan folks have either not done their home work, assumed they could get over on the public or both. (probably)

Isn't the ten Year Plan well underway? 6-7 years or so? Is this why Mr. Lawler and Mr. Findley come at folks like pit bulls? I was offended by the arrogance Mr. Lawler showed at the AJCC meeting. He was rude at best.

I have gone and read the TYP site after the meeting at Arnstein Jewish Community Center. I've also read many other reports and studies as suggested by Mr. Peabody, in fact one can educate themselves quite well by reading many cited, scholarly works, NOT a single one was on Wikipedia I assure you!

These discussions seem to fall into a couple of basic categories from my perspective: Those who want their government to be accountable for the enormous amount of money proposed and those who just want to sift the governments money through their hands before passing it on. Is it any wonder there's a lack of trust? Guilty people and their friends often push hardest, but when the citizens in this discourse get shoved around, they have a right to shove back.

Mr. Lawler, probably via his employee, Mr. Finley has accused(veiled of course) Mr. Peabody of lying about his presentation of figures. I didn't think Mr. Peabody was trying to present facts so much as educated guesses as to the possible costs. From what I've read he's pretty much on the mark and I thought his figures were conservative. The HUD website has good information too.

I watched police cart a poor guy off from Starbucks near West Town mall last night. He was drinking something out of a Tropical Smoothie cup that the cop wanted. He didn't SMELL drunk but he was definitely off center shall I say? My point is this: How in the world can 1 (ONE) case worker handle 35 or more people like this and make a difference.

I think TYP is full of beans and Mr. Finley stating in the post above that they will keep incorrect information on their website amounts to intentional FRAUD.

Maybe the SAG should check out just why the TEN YEAR PLAN folks are comfortable advertising their fraudulent ways!

Be careful City Council members, you're known by the company you keep!

Meanwhile the homeless continue to be incorrigible, untreated and generally lost souls. God help us all, the liars the sincere, the homeless...

I have my own idea of what role each of the positions would play in PSH and who would pay them, but I would like some clarification from the TYP. Misunderstandings abound and take on a life of their own. Monsters live in the dark.

Case Manager
Site Manager
Therapist

The KNS counters the Knoxville Focus with:

(link...)

And then the KNS quickly hides the story when people comment on it. The story was pulled when a commenter listed the City Council members phone numbers. On April 6th in City Council the Flenniken site will come back to the trough for mo money.

It is stunning to see how far this Ten Year Plan has advanced without the crucial information. A therapist is not a case manager. But you wouldn't know that by reading the Ten Year Plan's website. In fact you can read every single document from the Ten Year Plan and still not know what therapeutic services are provided, who provides them, and what those services will cost the taxpayers. That is outrageous. And rather than answer the questions it looks like they will now attack Ron Peabody. Shoot the messenger. They could just provide the information that Peabody and his homeowners groups want. Will they?

This idea that the Ten Year Plan thinks they can have bad data on their website shows how confused they are. And they refuse to change it but at the same time they accuse people of "errors" when they site the bad data. Unbelievable.

The prior City Council wrote the Ten Year Plan a blank check. I am not so sure this City Council will do so. Odds are April 6th will be a well attended Council meeting.

The public knows very little about the details of the Ten Year Plan except that the real costs are hidden and the patients do not have to attend therapy or obtain sobriety. One Council member said recently that the homeless patients from Flenniken would get jobs. That shows how little Council understands this plan. That isn't what Permanent Supportive Housing is. Without sobriety there can be no jobs. There is no requirement in the Ten Year Plan for sobriety.

Plans like this are failing all over the United States. The long term success rates are pitiful. Without sobriety as a goal you are housing addicts for life with taxpayer dollars and enabling their addiction.

HUD is reconsidering the concept of Housing First. If the HUD money goes away, we will be stuck with a gigantic balloon note we cannot pay.

(link...)

Preface:

We cannot deny the realities of homeless people abusing substances. The great majority of them, when sheltered, are going to be living in multi-unit buildings in which their ongoing substance use will affect others. Persistent drug use, for example, will offer an ongoing temptation to others who are themselves at various phases of change or recovery. Even if homeless clients do not sell illegal substances themselves, their use ensures that they are caught up in the crime and violence that accompanies drug and alcohol abuse. For many people, substance abuse brings changes in behavior (belligerence, noise, bizarre behavior) that undermine social/therapeutic health. Moreover, ongoing use of alcohol and drugs leads to progressive debilitation and adversely affects the capacity of those so afflicted to make good decisions. Acquiescence in active substance use does have consequences. On the other hand, as this study documents, some Housing First programs can ameliorate some of the worst social effects of persistent drug abuse through close and proactive contact with the client and steady commitment on the part of an interdisciplinary team to meet the needs of landlords as well as clients. On the other hand, there are certainly not enough cases in this research effort to conclude persuasively that the staff-intensity evident in these examples is widely replicable.

To the extent that projects using low demand acknowledge these social realities, then low demand may well comprise a feature of a viable response to chronic homelessness. However, the Department cannot in the name of low demand condone or acquiescence in the continued, unabated use of harmful substances or accept the ultimate expendability of people who do not recover.

Mr. Finley,

You stated in a post earlier that:

"Because it's in the Ten-Year Plan, which is an almost-five-year-old document, and a lot has changed since October 2005 when it was adopted. I don't see us taking it down off of our website. I certainly don't think it would be right to redact it. In any event, the information Mr. Peabody's distributing contains abundant errors of fact beyond that one. We need to address them, and we will."

Since the TYP plan is almost 5 years old, and you want to start to address Mr. Peabody's information, why don't you start by addressing the: "Housing First for Homeless Persons with Active Addiction: Are We Overreaching?" article, and it's conclusion that:

"This article suggests that the current research data are not sufficient to identify an optimal housing and rehabilitation approach for an important homeless subgroup. The research regarding Housing First and linear approaches can be strengthened in several ways, and policymakers should be cautious about generalizing the results of available Housing First studies to persons with active addiction when they enter housing programs."

or this from page 8:

"Participants in Housing First programs also differ from the homeless population at large in that 50 to 80 percent receive government cash benefits (usually health insurance), versus approximately one-third of homeless single adults overall (Corporation for Supportive Housing 2008; Pearson et al. 2007; Tsemberis, Gulcur, and Nakae 2004). Because addiction alone does not qualify individuals for disability-related Social Security support (the most common cash benefit), Housing First programs draw heavily on a homeless population with both medical and nonaddictive mental conditions."

or this from page 27:

"Voucher program studies,
Rental vouchers result in greater time housed relative to case management.
Substance abuse predicts reduced housing tenure.
Overall costs appear to be higher for persons served with rental vouchers."

(link...)

Your thoughts?

This thread sure is an interesting read after the events of this week.