The city has, with me having only 30 minutes computer time, announced its proposed budget for next year [July 1, 2010 - June 30, 2011], in a 108 page document.
I don't really know what to look for, but the news is sort of that there's no news. It's like the Sherlock Holmes story of the dog that didn't bark, where something that isn't there is the clue.
I did a search for "steps forward" and "homeless" and "homelessness" and nothing like that is there. But a very quick perusal suggests that the budget just isn't that low level, giving the degree of detail -- even as long as it is -- to tell me if there are funds targetting the homeless.
Of course, it is THE COUNTY, and not THE CITY that has prime responsiblity for homeless issues.
So, sorry. False alarm. No news, here.
"Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute."
Friday, April 30, 2010
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Loaves & Fishes to be closed for NINE DAYS!
A nine-day close of the park, and other reductions of service, represent an unconsionable denial of essential services for the homeless people of Sacramento. Citizens and businesses in Sacramento donate at an average of over $10,000 per day to Loaves & Fishes.
The notice tells us that coffee will be served to homeless people in the cul-de-sac in front of the park on Monday and Friday, and that men's showers will be available only on those two days in the span of time running from Saturday, May 1, through Sunday, May 9.
Mid-day meals, which Loaves & Fishes has historically served every day except Thanksgiving, will be served every day during the closure period.
Loaves & Fishes executives often describe their organization as one providing "survival services." I think that's true. I think they could do more, and would do more, if they were truly in touch with the importance of the org's work and the shaken, precarious lives that many homeless people lead. But L&F, like many nonprofits I'm familiar with, doesn't really have to answer to anybody. Its Board of Directors is monolithic and silent, and those who donate to Loaves & Fishes give with too much faith that funds will be spent carefully, delivering maximum bang for the buck.
For L&F to suddenly close for NINE STRAIGHT DAYS, as is the intention, will have these unfortunate effects: Many homeless people who have precarious work will smell less good on-the-job and will be subject to losing their jobs, thanks to limited availability of showers and clothing exchanges. Homeless people won't have early-morning or late-afternoon access to lockers they pay plenty of rent for and could be without toiletries and vital medication. Day storage won't be available, so many homeless people won't be able to look for work or go to job interviews. In addition, loss of at-the-park services will screw up homeless people's days in ways they cannot have prepared for.
Also, it makes no sense. There is nothing that Loaves & Fishes can need to have done that requires a nine-day close of the Park and restriction of other services. There are many who volunteer their time to L&F who can best help out on the weekends — to paint, remove winter-season plastic & heaters, thoroughly clean some areas, lay sod, or provide plumbing services, etc.
Update: A joke [or, what was intended as a joke (I don't know of anyone who thought it was funny)] has been removed from the end of this blogpost, because some people were offended and I agree that it was stupid. And, the post has been retitled to better reflect how seriously I take the error of Loaves & Fishes' park closing for nine straight day. Another change or two has been made, as well. I endlessly tinker.
Monday, April 26, 2010
What 'Haven for Hope' is like for a homeless person
Following, is the conclusion to a a long article in My San Antonio News, titled "Haven for Hope: New home, life" by Melissa Fletcher Stoeltje and Brian Chasnoff. These last few paragraphs describe what passing through Haven for Hope, the new $100 million homeless-aid campus in San Antonio, Texas, is like for homeless people, themselves.
For most, the flow through Haven is marked in stages. First comes sleeping outdoors, then indoors next to Prospects Courtyard, then transitioning to “guest” status when moving onto the campus. When the homeless commit to a 40-hour work week of transformation, they become “members” Once earning income, they live in one-room apartments.An earlier blogpost to SacHo, today, describes Haven for Hope, generally, and the impossibility of something like it getting built and functioning in Sacramento.
Prospects Courtyard likely won’t be able to handle all those who want to get in, Haven officials said. The center is working with area churches that accommodate the homeless to handle the overflow. Salvation Army and a number of other shelters around town will still be functional.
A light-filled chapel offers nondenominational services.
“It’s a theology of hope, not hellfire and damnation,” [George] Block[, H4H’s vice president and chief operating officer] said. “These folks already feel damned.”
The heart of the campus is the Transformation Center, the 65,000-square-foot building where the real change takes place. In addition to mental health counseling and a slew of other services, the San Antonio Independent School District will provide GED and English as a Second Language classes; Alamo Colleges will offer a host of certificate training. There will be a ratio of one case manager to 40 residents. Eight partners will offer job training.
“In the first three months, we’ll have an average of 204 member hours of job training and about 775 hours a week of member classes,” said Ann Hutchinson Meyers, vice president of Transformational Services. Classrooms, including those with computers, will be filled night and day, she said.
Because, while hot meals and showers are the start, true transformation goes deep.
"Theses buildings are wonderful,” said Hutchinson Meyers, “but it’s what’s going on inside that truly matters. We don’t change the lives of the homeless; we just give them the tools. We set up the environment, and then they change themselves. We don’t change anybody.”
Is San Antonio's example in the treatment and help provided to its homeless something Sacramento should strive to follow?
 |
Logo of San Antonio's new $100 million campus where myriad services will be provided in a focused effort to transform the lives of homeless people. |
-- From the script of South Park, season 11, episode 1107, "Night of the Living Homeless" [video at IMDB]
Well. Maybe. The ever-green foliage in our City of Trees may well have been, and may be, a lure for a few rare homeless folk from south-central Texas ... and elsewhere ... to come here. But the tide might turn, now. Eastward, ho! Sac'to homeless folk may be headed to Texas.
San Antonio's new, massive [37 acres! 15 buildings! Cost a hundred million smackers!] central homeless-help facility is a ginormous achievement, and is all the more impressive — beyond mere 'beyond belief' — because its opening happened a few days ago in this wretched economy. Only, the wretched economy that those of us here in Sacramento are having ain't the economy in the thriving, better-governed state of Texas.
But HOW did they do it? And is Haven for Hope the cutting edge of homeless help as it should happen here and everywhere? And what is Haven for Hope going to do that is both inventive and productive at getting their homeless people inventive (at re-tooling their lives) and productive? And where might we stand to have that kind of mega-bucks fall out of the sky into our soiled, needy hands, to either (1) copy San Antonio's example or (2) pay out $35,714 to each of the 2800 of us such that we may retool our lives (or drink ourselves to death) without need of our local homeless-help industry!?
It is all a puzzlement. But first off, let us look at what Haven for Hope is.
What it is is this big big big central compound in San Antonio, created to pull local homeless people's lives together.
•Haven for Hope is the largest, most comprehensive Homeless Transformation Campus in the U.S.A.
•Haven for Hope conducted a best practice study reviewing the homeless services in 12 states and over 200 shelter operations.
•The Haven for Hope Campus is made up of 15 Buildings, on 37 Acres, with almost a half a million square feet of service space under roof.•Haven for Hope conducted a best practice study reviewing the homeless services in 12 states and over 200 shelter operations.
•Haven for Hope currently has a network of service provision with 78 non-profit and government Partner Agencies
•On any given night there will be roughly 1600 individuals residing on the Haven for Hope Campus.
All this should be of great interest to us, because ... The San Antonio metropolis is very very similar to the Sacramento metropolis. The county that San Antonio is in [it fills Bexar County] is very very similar to Sacramento County. The city of San Antonio is very similar to the city of Sacramento. Sacramento and San Antonio were tied for ninth place in a 2009 survey by the Pew Research Center of America's Favorite Cities.
Stats re the two similar metropoli:
Metropolis | Rank in US Pop. in 2009 | Pop in 2009 | Per capita income | |
| Growth rate last 9 yrs. | Homeless pop | # "chronically homeless" | ||
us | Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville, CA | 25 | 2,127,355 | $23,508 |
+18.39% | 2,8001 | 4681 | ||
them | San Antonio-New Braunfels, TX | 28 | 2,072,128 | $18,713 |
+21.06% | 2,2472 | 2182 | ||
| Source of metropolis population data, rankings & growth rates comes from Wikipedia's Table of United States Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Source of 'Per capita income' data comes from Wikipedia pages Sacramento metropolitan area and Greater San Antonio. 1 Jan. 2009 Street Count survey of Sacramento County. [source: the DHA Report on Street Count 2009; specifically the table at the bottom of page 2.] The County population was 1,374,724 (source) in 2006, roughly 2/3rds of that of the greater metropolis. 2 2007 "inventory" of homeless nighttime services in City of San Antonio. [source: Dec 19, 2008, article in newspaper Community Impact, titled "Homeless population moves north"] The City population in 2008 was 1,351,305 (source), roughly 2/3rds that of the greater metropolis it's in. | ||||
... and yet, while homeless help is in meltdown in Sacramento [metropolis, county & city] things are hummin' in San Antone!
How it happened: In 2006, then-San Antonio Mayor Phil Hardberger appointed William E. Greehey to head a committee to study the homelessness issue in San Antonio and recommend solutions to the problem. Greehey is a prominent Republican, chairman of NuStar Energy and former CEO and chairman of Valero Energy Corporation.
The committee intensively researched homelessness and sought the most-successful practices at combatting it and transforming poor people's lives.
Then, an ocean of money was raised from a wide variety of sources.
The one big difference between Sacramento and San Antonio is that Sacramento has, so far, missed out on the economic recovery. We're listed, in Business Insider, as one of 20 such flailing cities. Meantime, San Antonio is in Texas which is booming right along in Recovery heaven. And while we have one of the 20 weakest economies (of the 100 biggest US metro areas), San Antonio is one of the 20 strongest, according to a March Brookings report. A recent article in Slate, "Lone Star: Why Texas is doing so much better economically than the rest of the nation," tells us Texas's economic health is because the state embraces globalization [its exports surpass California, now], didn't suffer a housing-price bubble because of the open spaces there, and because of energy resources. The funny thing is that the energy isn't gushing crude [where production is now half what it was two decades ago] but wind and natural gas. Thus, San Antonio, in Texas, can attempt and succeed at things Sacramento cannot imagine in 2010.
BTW, Haven for Hope isn't Texas's only new, innovative, compassionate homeless-help facility that dazzles. There is also The Bridge Homeless Assistance Center in Dallas, financed by a city bond. A change.org article from January, "Shelters Enter the 21st Century," tells us "The Bridge, open 24/7, is a hub for the services of dozens of local organizations. Among its goals are providing emergency care for 700 homeless people, emergency housing for 350 and permanent housing for 125 every four months. It removes the barriers of some other shelters by offering health care, laundry, recreational activities, storage, a kennel, stable mailing addresses, veterans benefits assistance and more." The Bridge is also very green. "Design features that optimize daylight and reuse water and a roof partially covered by vegetation helped it get LEED silver certification [from the US Green Building Council], making it just the fourth 'green' shelter in the country."
H4H's aim [as described at Business Wire]: Haven for Hope is an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of homeless people in the San Antonio area by providing a wide array of necessary social services in a convenient central location. Its mission is to help reduce homelessness in the San Antonio area by providing homeless people the resources, skills and assistance necessary to become self-sufficient in a dignified manner that’s efficient and cost-effective.
Why it can't happen here: For good or ill [and I would say 'ill,' obviously 'ill'], the Sacramento homeless-help industry is firmly controlled by fringe-communist wackos: Commie lawyers, commie admirerers of Dorothy Day, commie nonprofit executives. Raising large sums of money as can happen in Texas can't happen here, even if the economy here got to be as healthy as it is in San Antone.
But, then, I have considerable doubt that $100 million can be used effectively at combatting homelessness, anywhere, for the simple reason that it is far too much money!
Also, the way up and out, to my mind, includes pivotal policy adjustments that are relatively inexpensive to implement and would best help the majority of cognitively-unimpaired homeless people: (1) Give us a place to store our stuff and a way to look employable. (2) Stop wasting our time with endless, pointless meetings and hour upon hour of waiting waiting waiting and (3) the one factor that envelopes all the problems: END THE PHILOSOPHY OF "WAREHOUSING THE RABBLE"; move to a policy of widening the pathway to opportunities.
As for those who are addicts, something must be done about the easy access they have to a designation of being "disabled" and the SSI funds that then are made available to addicts, in the amount of ~ $900/mo. The public is funding people's suicidal addictions, sending money to Mexico (marajuana), Columbia (cocaine), Wisconsin (beer), and Afganistan (heroin), and helping to kill policeman (because of the illegal-substances black market). It's insane. The federal and local governments [and core homeless-help nonprofits] are in the misery-creating business; this must end. This madness is little reported on. I cannot understand it. One possible solution is to have a percentage of SSI payments come as housing vouchers.
As for those who are afflicted with mental illnesses. They should be helped! Everyone, very much including Sacramento's homeless-help charities, do not do nearly enough. Mentally ill people remain lost, out of the streets, ignored, abandoned. What the hell!?!?!?
Things that should happen here: Many of the ideas afloat in Sacramento are really just stopgap. A "SafeGround" Tuff Shed village will work sort of and then all the problems with substance abuse and violence will sink it, either because the cost of addressing the problems is too expensive or because the village becomes an eyesore or an obvious slum.
The idea of putting homeless people in housing will put many on the road to better, productive lives, but it is more expensive than what is needed and creates problems since we end up giving non-working homeless people more than what a follows-all-the-rules works-full-time stressed and struggling minimum-wage worker gets. We must honor workers and not screw up the incentives of hard work.
Better would be to require that affordable housing be available for all the poor. This can come from legislation that requires that builders include small, affordable homes and apartments in new construction.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Odds and Ends
Two things / matters of interest that impact Homeless World Sacramento that I think y'all should know about:
----------
Many retired Sacramentans volunteer to help out at Loaves & Fishes and Volunteers of America and elsewhere to provide survival and other services to aid the homeless population. It is interesting to learn that such volunteering likely is very good for the well-being of those who volunteer.
A newsbrief in the March 2010 issue of the small publication titled Mind, Mood and Memory tells us this:
----------
Robert Tobin, president and CEO of Cottage Housing Inc., which operates both Serna Village and Quinn Cottages, wrote an opinion piece for the Bee that was published Friday, titled "Viewpoint: Safe Ground plan is not the answer."
The Safe Ground plan is to construct structures, possibly modified Tuff Sheds, as residences to house 50 to 100 homeless people on an as‑yet‑to‑be ‑found/‑determined 2‑ to 5‑ acre parcel somewhere in Sacramento proximate to RT services.
Tobin lists four objections to this Safe Ground plan [although he alludes to others]:
It is true that the plan would not accommodate "a large percentage of those who remain unsheltered," but it would provide shelter to many. A variety of shelters that provide 'a space to be' to many would provide shelter to "a large percentage of those who remain unsheltered!
The community would have a varience to housing codes and would not lower them, generally. Besides, a community of garden sheds, as Tobin calls them, is likely better [more comfortable; safer] than roughing it in a bag or blanket out on the street on a wet, cold night.
The plan is not devisive if a majority of folks who decide such things recognize that all viable options must go forward! The wolf is at the door. Let us get all the beds out there we can!
I have many misgivings about a Tuff Shed community, all of which differ from Tobin's. I worry about the devisiveness/chaos that can ensue when people are living in such close quarters. I worry about tempers arising and fights occuring when alcohol and other substances can easily be brought into such a village.
A great many homeless adults have substance-abuse problems. And of those many, a significant number of homeless men get angry easily when they are high. The problems associated with abuse of substances will not go away if we ignore them or pretend we can easily control their use, somehow.
The SafeGround encampments that there have been — in Camp Pollock and on C Street, for example — have experienced significant problems relating to substance abuse.
--------
----------
Many retired Sacramentans volunteer to help out at Loaves & Fishes and Volunteers of America and elsewhere to provide survival and other services to aid the homeless population. It is interesting to learn that such volunteering likely is very good for the well-being of those who volunteer.
A newsbrief in the March 2010 issue of the small publication titled Mind, Mood and Memory tells us this:
A Health News article from United Press International speaks of the same news from the same source material in the Journal of Gerontology, and adds this: "A randomized trial is needed to determine whether volunteering itself prevents the onset of frailty, or if there is something about the types of people who volunteer regularly that keeps them from becoming frail."Volunteering to Help Others May Stave Off FrailtyPitching in to help other people may be a good way to stay strong as you grow older. Researchers analysed data collected between 1988 and 1991 on 1,000 healthy, physically active adults in their 70s. Compared to 19% of adults who had a job and 25% who cared for children, the 28 percent who volunteered to help out in their communities experienced a lower risk of becoming frail, even after allowing for factors such as disablity, age, and cognitive function researchers reported in the online Dec 16, 2009, issue of Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences.
----------
Robert Tobin, president and CEO of Cottage Housing Inc., which operates both Serna Village and Quinn Cottages, wrote an opinion piece for the Bee that was published Friday, titled "Viewpoint: Safe Ground plan is not the answer."
A big problem with the piece is that Tobin's organization is, well, basically, a competator with the "Safe Ground plan" that he refers to.
The Safe Ground plan is to construct structures, possibly modified Tuff Sheds, as residences to house 50 to 100 homeless people on an as‑yet‑to‑be ‑found/‑determined 2‑ to 5‑ acre parcel somewhere in Sacramento proximate to RT services.Tobin lists four objections to this Safe Ground plan [although he alludes to others]:
• It has not been implemented quickly as any "emergency" shelter, by definition, must.At this point ALL inexpensive options should go forward. Surely, the SafeGround plan could go forward quickly if a majority of the powers that be, and others — hopefully, including Tobin — would just get behind it.
• It is unlikely even to eventually accommodate a large percentage of those who remain unsheltered, replicating an Oregon project that never expanded beyond a 50-unit prototype since relocated from downtown Portland to property near the airport.
• It would substantially lower housing code protections for those who need them most.
• It is proving divisive when our community must unite around real solutions to difficult problems.
It is true that the plan would not accommodate "a large percentage of those who remain unsheltered," but it would provide shelter to many. A variety of shelters that provide 'a space to be' to many would provide shelter to "a large percentage of those who remain unsheltered!
The community would have a varience to housing codes and would not lower them, generally. Besides, a community of garden sheds, as Tobin calls them, is likely better [more comfortable; safer] than roughing it in a bag or blanket out on the street on a wet, cold night.
The plan is not devisive if a majority of folks who decide such things recognize that all viable options must go forward! The wolf is at the door. Let us get all the beds out there we can!
I have many misgivings about a Tuff Shed community, all of which differ from Tobin's. I worry about the devisiveness/chaos that can ensue when people are living in such close quarters. I worry about tempers arising and fights occuring when alcohol and other substances can easily be brought into such a village.
A great many homeless adults have substance-abuse problems. And of those many, a significant number of homeless men get angry easily when they are high. The problems associated with abuse of substances will not go away if we ignore them or pretend we can easily control their use, somehow.
The SafeGround encampments that there have been — in Camp Pollock and on C Street, for example — have experienced significant problems relating to substance abuse.
--------
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Support for the homeless by the county falls off a cliff
A document, squirrelled away at the county website, dated April 14, and prepared as a starting position for discussion of the coming year budget tells us the County of Sacramento will likely abandon their obligations and hand over the door keys to homeless survival services to the Usual Suspects at the homeless-help agencies. There's no assurance that the homeless-help agencies can take on the burden or would want the obligation to assume the burden the County is poised to abandon.
Already, operations at Mather have been turned over to Volunteers of America to run as they please. VOA has much notoriety in Homeless World Sacramento for their administration of Overflow at Cal Expo, which operated as the metropolis winter shelter in winters ending in 2008-2009. The operation was a clear example of "warehousing the rabble," as John Irving has identified the practice of herding and hiding the homeless to keep them out of the sight of elite society.
The April 14, 2010, document, "sac_022453.pdf," misfiled (?) as a pdf Probation Dept document, reads thus in regard to Homeless Programs:
Department reductions include reductions to homeless programs. Staff is working with homeless partners to find alternative funding and support to mitigate the loss of county General Fund support. Unless another entity assumes the county's role in this program there will be no capacity to prepare the required Continuum of Care grant application, coordinate homeless services, monitor program outcomes, administer the homeless programs as required by HUD, and prepare for the required 2011 Homeless Count. HUD requirements dictate that HUD funding will cease as soon as administration, monitoring and reporting of HUD sponsored grants stops.My Friends,
Transitional Housing - The County will risk losing most, if not all, of the 837 transitional housing beds (377 family beds) that DHA currently administers. This represents a loss of 83% of the total (1005) community transitional housing beds, leaving 168 beds remaining.
Permanent Supportive Housing - The County will risk losing most, if not all, of the 1655 permanent supportive housing beds (937 family beds) that DHA currently administers. this represents a loss of 91% of the total (1815 community permanent supportive housing beds, leaving 160 beds remaining.
Emergency Shelter Beds - In addition to the risk of losing transitional housing and permanent supportive housing beds, the County will be unable to administer and operate emergency shelter services, which include 432 year-round beds (188 family beds) and 149 winter shelter beds (117 family beds). this represents a loss of 69% of the total (624) community emergency shelter beds, leaving 192 year-round beds remaining.
Without availability of emergency shelter, transitional and permanent housing beds, Sacramento Communities will experience more individuals and families on the streets with a resulting concern for safety and increased calls to emergency responders.
The sky is falling. This is the Hindenburg explosion while the moon splashes into the Pacific.
Despite my many misgivings, approval of a SafeGround community of Tuff Sheds should happen lickity-split with construction begun the next day. And another parcel of land should be set aside for homeless people to put up tents in a legal encampment. The Union Gospel Mission should be allowed to shelter more people if they choose to. Friendship Park should be used nights as a place for homeless folk to sleep.
Johnny, unbolt the door. All the obstacles to homeless people helping themselves should be pulled aside.
Kind Citizens of Metropolitan Sacramento: There is misery enough, already - now - out on the streets. There is sure to be much more. Mitigate. Mitigate. Mitigate.
UPDATE 4/21/10 4:30: Within an hour of me putting up this blogpost, the County "refiled" or retitled the document from their website. Still, it can be accessed here: http://www.budget.saccounty.net/coswcms/groups/public/@wcm/@pub/@obdm/@shared/documents/webcontent/sac_022453.pdf
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Help for Arthur who was hearing voices
He told us that he was hearing voices and that while he tried to lie still, the enemy was at hand and that he couldn't get the enemy to leave him alone.
He was obviously spooked, nervous and consumed with fears.
Most mentally ill homeless people in Sacramento don't get much sympathy from their brethren nor enough proper attention from the homeless-help nonprofits. And the primary element that's deficient, and all the more so with the economy in Sacramento as it is, is adequate funding for staffing for outreach and fundamental services for those who are cognitively impaired. [The mentally ill were tossed out of asylums in the 60s, and a great many have been left to fend for themselves out on the mean streets ever since.]
Many of my dorm-mates responded dismissively to the complaints of the man ― whom I'll call Arthur. A couple weighed in with derisive comments.
Me being me, I went over to Arthur and tried to assuage his fears in hope that he could get some sleep and that he could be led over to Loaves & Fishes in the morning where help was possible. Arthur seemed placated, if not assured, that he was safe and asked if I was an angel. I told him I was not that, but just another guy, one who fully wanted the best for him. One of our dorm-mates then told Arthur that he could be secure by holding firm to his faith in God.
The next morning, Arthur didn't have any clothes in his locker — having thrown them away, he said — and was left with just the sweatpants he had borrowed as nightclothes. Happily, the mission provided him with some basic slip-on shoes and a T-shirt. It was cold that morning, but access to the mission's clothing room wasn't possible to outfit Arthur with a jacket.
I walked with Arthur the mile to Loaves & Fishes. He told me of the voices he heard, and that he was always worried about the enemy following him. He beseeched Jesus for aid and guidance, but was disappointed that he remained in his world of problems. At Loaves & Fishes, between the Wash House and Josef's help in Friendship Park, Arthur got fully, properly outfitted for the chilly weather.
Josef, an excellent park volunteer, took control and said he would get Arthur over to speak with a spiritual counselor at Side-by-Side, and with an assessment counsellor at Genesis. Great, I thought.
A little after noon, I saw Arthur in the park and he told me he had been at Side-by-Side and Genesis. He told me he was instructed to go to TLCS ― not an anagram that meant anything to me ― but Great, I again thought, another stop in progress that was being achieved in tending to Arthur's problems.
We went to TLCS , which was not far from Loaves & Fishes, and were told that nothing could be done for Arthur then ― that Friday afternoon ― but he should come back early Monday morning.
Friday night at the mission, Arthur did some things that were mildly disruptive of the sermon, displaying evidence of the schizophrenia that he appeared to be suffering from. Later that night, I learned Arthur had failed to claim his bed for the night and had been led outside the property gate. I gave up my bed such that I could be with Arthur to see him through the night.
It was a cold night that Arthur and I spent trying to sleep on the sidewalk in front of the mission where perhaps one or two dozen others were bundled for sleep. We weren't well prepared, but bundled ourselves as we could. Our chatter was pleasant, with Arthur talking about his fears and efforts to be true to his faith. At just before midnight, Arthur awakened me and told me of his dream of a tapeworm eating feces. Soon, he ascribed the dream as being one I had told him about and suggested that I was his enemy, and had no business talking that way. He seemed angry.
Nonetheless, I stayed with him as we tried to sleep on the sidewalk. We each got intermittent periods of sleep. In the wee hours, Arthur said he was sorry and expressed gratitude for my help and friendship.
At 6am in the morning, I got up, and asked Arthur if he was awake. He responded and I asked him to come with me to McDonald's. He said he was too sleepy and said I should go alone, which I did, with my promise of returning very soon.
To my happy surprise, Arthur showed up at McDonald's shorty, as I was consuming my muffin and coffee. I bought Arthur the same and things were OK except that Arthur felt compelled to get up to greet a customer of the restaurant he didn't know, and to tell me about flying saucers he saw that night.
Worries I had about how to keep Arthur all right till Monday morning were mounting. As Arthur and I left the restaurant, Fred, a longtime member of the Homeless Sacramento community, was in the parking lot. To my great surprise, Fred and Arthur knew each other quite well.
Fred immediately (and brilliantly) assessed the situation. "You've got to go to Manny at Clean and Sober," Fred said, bluntly, to Arthur. "You're mad and off your meds. That's got to be fixed, or you'll be in the drunk tank for thirty days. You want that?"
Arthur said he knew he needed to get to Schmick [the prime mental health facility].
"Then call 911 right now," said Fred.
I expressed my doubts, from things I'd heard, that the police did things like that now that they'd been downsized because of budget cuts.
"They'll do it," said Fred, with that crispness and certainty that was always there in his speaking. "McDonald's has a phone."
Fred and Arthur then went in McDonald's' side door as I headed back toward the mission to retrieve my backpack.
As I got back near the mission, I ran into Lenny. I told him what had transpired at McDonald's. A firetruck passed us, heading in the direction of McDonald's, which Lenny, who used to work with the fire department, told me was a part of the response to the possible-5150 call.
UPDATE: I had thought that Arthur was new to Homeless World Sacramento after a recent release from jail. While Arthur had certainly been incarcerated for a long spell, he was well known to our area's longstanding homeless-community members.
The next day, after Frank had called 9-1-1 for Arthur, Arthur was back in front of the mission interacting with other guys out on the street. He told me he had gotten the medication he needed.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Workin' in the Wash House
 |
| Not an actual homeless person. |
I've used the Wash House a lot in my nearly two years of homelessness. I like taking a shower there shortly after it opens (before the place gets steamy and my glasses fog up); getting a razor to rake the stubble off my face; and, sometimes, trading in a wrinkled shirt that reeks of Tom, for a fresh unwrinkled one.
If you enter the small building on 'the shower side,' you walk past a busy service window where guys seek toiletries and trade dirty clothing items for clean ones. There can be quite a lot of friendly banter and, what can seem like, serious bartering going on.
Getting on the other side, the worker side, of the window gave me insight to the challenges that the Wash House staff has that I couldn't have appreciated otherwise.
It also helped me to understand why, as a user of that service that Loaves & Fishes provides, I am so appreciative of the upbeat culture of the Wash House and its smooth operation, generally.
On the other side of the service window
My job Tuesday morning was one of trying to do some of the things that Mark, Doug, Dave, Neil and Monty have learned to do easily and expertly. Quickly, after I had a sense of where things were, I was put to the task of trying to satisfy guys seeking toiletries and swaps for their dirty clothing items.
Mark, and the guys I was working most directly with, Doug and Dave, explained the task thus: I was to give each guy who came up to the window the best we had in direct exchange for dirty clothes that were dropped in a plastic barrel. No one was favored; no clothes were "out back," somewhere, saved for special people. We were to do the very best we could for each guy who stepped up seeking service.
But there were situations to be avoided. Transactions needed to happen quickly. "Shopping" was to be avoided: We couldn't take the time for stretched-out negotiations and long considerations of what would make a guy look sweet out in Homeless World. Give the guy the shirt (or whatever) that fits and seemed to best suit his tastes and move on. A guy could certainly balk, and explain why he needed some different article of clothing more appropriate for his aims that day, and get a different swap -- but long, strung-out deep-thought cogitations and extensive item try-ons were to be nixed.
Psychology and the case of John
Also, in the clothing swaps and in other matters dealing with my homeless brethren, some psychology was often employed.
An interesting case came up on Tuesday when Tim in Friendship Park had been approached by a homeless guy known to be particularly eccentric — whom I'll call John — who voiced an interest in taking a shower.
Unbeknownst to John, his interest in a shower set in operation a careful battle plan to get John cleaned up and his many layers of stinking clothes replaced.
In was in the early afternoon, at a perfect time, while the Wash House was closed for a short spell. With care, Mark shooed away or pulled inside guys who were hanging around the Wash House so as not to spook John as he came around, hopefully to take his shower.
The plan was to steal John's clothes while he was in the water and replace them without John becoming keenly aware of what all had happened.
Many minutes passed before John came up to the outside service window to talk to Mark. I and the other working guys inside pretended to be nonchallant as John and Mark conversed. It turned out that John was no longer intent on taking a shower, but accepting some underwear was a possiblity. A white pair of boxers and another article of underwear was shown to him.
John accepted the underclothing and explained that he would take them, but he would first have to handwash them before he would ever think about putting them on. His skin was delicate, it seemed.
The greater war wasn't won: John remained a reeking mess. But a lesser goal was achieved. John would be modestly cleaner and might be less timid in the future about using Wash House services. One day, we all of course hoped, we'd get him inside the building to be scrubbed and outfitted in clean clothes.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
A look at Loaves & Fishes' stats
NOTE THIS IS A WORK IN PROGRESS, TO BE FINALIZED IN A COUPLE DAYS.
Below a lengthy table that looks at the statistics on Loaves & Fishes' 2009 Annual Report, contrasted to stats from the 2007 and 2008 reports, with my comments and further interesting related numbers I was able to compute from the reports and from the public Form 990s L&F is required to file by mid-May every year, reporting on the prior calendar/fiscal-year's financials. [Does that make sense? That was one very long sentence.]
Loaves & Fishes trots out some big numbers as metrics, but there's no context, nor explanation given to provide readers with a sense of their significance. Frankly, it is "typical L&F": A wall of balderdash to impress potential donors without really informing them. In typical fashion, Loaves & Fishes disrespects its donors: "Just hand over the loot and don't ask any penetrating questions."
You can tell that Loaves & Fishes doesn't take any care in publishing their metrics. While many employees are likely to have expended a lot of time with counts and collections to create careful data, no care is taken to see if the numbers are understandable or reasonable. As you can see from the table below, some 2008 numbers 'aren't real'; they are just repeats of the 2007 numbers. Other numbers just seem to be increased a little year after year. The pounds of food the warehouse receives should be 'tested for reasonableness' by asking questions and seeing that individuals aren't given five pounds of food on their foodtrays.
I've never seen people going into the Park library being counted. Isn't that just some mad concoction pulled out of a hat? If it's not a precise count, but a count done for a period of time and then extrapolated, that background information should be provided.
Really, I am only suggesting that one responsible person sit down with the numbers and spend one lousy stinking hour to verify them for reasonableness. And that there be one senior administrator that was responsible for something, instead of everybody not being responsible for anything.
Asterisks [*] indicate MY intrusive information.
Below a lengthy table that looks at the statistics on Loaves & Fishes' 2009 Annual Report, contrasted to stats from the 2007 and 2008 reports, with my comments and further interesting related numbers I was able to compute from the reports and from the public Form 990s L&F is required to file by mid-May every year, reporting on the prior calendar/fiscal-year's financials. [Does that make sense? That was one very long sentence.]
Loaves & Fishes trots out some big numbers as metrics, but there's no context, nor explanation given to provide readers with a sense of their significance. Frankly, it is "typical L&F": A wall of balderdash to impress potential donors without really informing them. In typical fashion, Loaves & Fishes disrespects its donors: "Just hand over the loot and don't ask any penetrating questions."
You can tell that Loaves & Fishes doesn't take any care in publishing their metrics. While many employees are likely to have expended a lot of time with counts and collections to create careful data, no care is taken to see if the numbers are understandable or reasonable. As you can see from the table below, some 2008 numbers 'aren't real'; they are just repeats of the 2007 numbers. Other numbers just seem to be increased a little year after year. The pounds of food the warehouse receives should be 'tested for reasonableness' by asking questions and seeing that individuals aren't given five pounds of food on their foodtrays.
I've never seen people going into the Park library being counted. Isn't that just some mad concoction pulled out of a hat? If it's not a precise count, but a count done for a period of time and then extrapolated, that background information should be provided.
Really, I am only suggesting that one responsible person sit down with the numbers and spend one lousy stinking hour to verify them for reasonableness. And that there be one senior administrator that was responsible for something, instead of everybody not being responsible for anything.
Asterisks [*] indicate MY intrusive information.
| Volunteer Placement and Orientation | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Attendance at Thur. orientations | 520 | 750 | 1473 | |
| Attendance at first-Sat-of-month orientations | 84 | 110 | 200 | |
| * Total attendance at orientations | 604 | 860 | 1673 | up 95% this year. No explanation offered for whopping increase. |
| Folks who volunteered | 3564 | 3880 | 4140 | This most likely means instances of volunteering, as opposed to what it says, "people ... who volunteered." |
| * Volunteers per day | 9.8 | 10.6 | 11.4 | |
| Advocacy Action Group | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
Number of community members | 2200 | 2200 | 2892 | Does 'community' mean the homeless community? This is something homeless people can have signed up for without knowing they are being claimed as supporters of whatever L&F is doing. The Greater Sacramento community? This could just mean subscribers to a newsletter. Dunno. |
| Dining room | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Aggregate count of instances of a person being fed | 159,185 | 177,867 | 175,755 | aka, number of meals prepared. Does this include staff meals? Don't know. Does this exclude instances when outsiders prepare the L&F lunch. Don't know. |
| * Days serving lunch that year | 364 | 365 | 364 | Every day except Thanksgiving (when there is a huge meal served at the nearby Salvation Army). 2008 was a leap year. |
| * Average served each day | 437 | 487 | 483 | I would have expected 600 or more. Perhaps it's the case that ~20% of people getting a lunch ticket don't use theirs. I don't use mine ~ 30% of the time. |
| Friendship Park [& Wash House] | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| FP Library visits | 38,127 | 39,538 | 39,341 | Curious thing: the 2007, 2008, 2009 reports all call the library "full service." Oh, yeah? That's not even so by 1963 standards. Books cannot be checked out and most never get taken off the shelf year after year after year. |
| * Average per day [est. open 250 days/year] | 153 | 158 | 157 | |
| Memorial services for fallen FP denizens | 19 | 26 | 27 | |
| Day labor referrals | 1877 | 1558 | 1590 | Perhaps the recovery, when California joins in, will greatly pump up this stat in 2010. Employers are skitish about hiring permanent employees but will hire temporary ones. |
| Men's Wash House: Instances of providing laundry service | 3185 *12.7 /day | 3250 *13.0/day | 3120 *12.5/day | I'm not sure about 2007, but in the past couple years "laundry lotto" is the means by which L&F does men's laundry. [Per-day computation assumes lotto was done 250 times each year.] |
| Men's Wash House: Showers provided | 35,484 *142/day | 35,780 *143/day | 34,475 *138/day | [Per-day computation assumes the Wash House was open 250 days each year.] |
| Genesis Mental Health | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Instances of assessments, counselling and referals | 4438 | 5488 | 5532 | |
| Guest Health Outreach | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Triage | 7,952 | 8,752 | 10,280 | |
| TB Testing | 130 | 218 | 315 | I don't understand these figures at all. TB tests for TB cards had been given at a clinic on C St., then that function was moved to Mercy on North C in 2009. I don't think this is something L&F has its hand in - but I could be wrong. |
| Blood Pressure tests | 713 | 653 | 884 | |
| Blood sugar tests | 443 | 476 | 689 | |
| People attending health fair and taking classes | 540 | No such data for '08 or '09. | ||
| Jail Visitation | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Instances of service to Sac'to jail inmates | 4958 | 4958 | 5010 | Same numbers in '08 as in '07? |
| Letters sent to courts or attorneys | 4413 | 4413 | 4560 | |
| Personal toiletry kits given to released jailees | 804 | 804 | 600 | |
| Bus passes given (to just-released jailees?) | 503 | 503 | 550 | |
| Maryhouse | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Instances of services provided [W=women F=fathers C=children] | W 1575 F 6 C 978 | 1429 3 945 | 1619 9 927 | |
| Weekday breakfasts served | 19,536 *78/day | 21,578 *86/day | 24,571 *98/day | Per-day computation assumes 250 days of service/yr. |
| Showers | 12,279 | 12,082 | 11,681 | |
| Supplies dispensed | 6,070 | 5198 | 5409 | [eg, diapers, formula, personal hygene] |
| "Adopt-a-family" | 136 fam (404 ch'n) | 127 fam (366 ch'n) | 104 fam (296 ch'n) | Matches volunteers with families that need assistance during Christmastime. |
| Mustard Seed School | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Children | 162 | 145 | 146 | Ages 3 to 15. |
| Pupil days | 3926 *24 ave | 2726 *19 ave | 3569 *24 ave | Average for children is 4 or 5 weeks of school. A little over a month. |
| Children returned to public schools | 57 | 37 | 49 | |
| Medical & Dental visits arranged for children. | 8 m. 91 d. | 8 m. 21 d. | 23 m. 41 d. | |
| Sister Nora's Place | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Women given shelter, meals and case management. | 31 | 25 | 30 | |
| Warehouse/Procurement | ||||
2007 | 2008 | 2009 | SacHo comment | |
| Pounds of food received | 25,000 in year 2007 | 25,000 in year 2008 | 14,157 per week | What!? 14,157 lb. per week equals about 707,800 lb. in 2009 |
| From USDA | 1% | 2% | 49% | No explanation provided as to why more food was suddenly from USDA and less from food banks in 2009. |
| From food banks | 85% | 85% | 42% | |
| From private companies | 10% | 10% | 9% | A percentage combining "from private companies" and "donations from the general public" was given in 2009. |
| Donations from the general public | 4% | 3% | ||
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Bad credit doesn't make for bad employees
 |
| [graphic from Buffalo News] |
…researchers say there is no evidence showing that people with weak credit are more likely to be bad employees or to steal from their bosses…Eric Rosenberg of the TransUnion credit bureau said, in testamony before Oregon legislators last January, "At this point we don’t have any research to show any statistical correlation between what’s in somebody’s credit report and their job performance or their likelihood to commit fraud.”
The article, "As a Hiring Filter, Credit Checks Draw Questions," tells us that legislatures in states across the country are now thinking about restricting or disallowing the use of credit reports in hiring determinations. A bill has been introduced in California, but is now stalled "because of opposition from credit bureaus and other businesses."
In the U.S. Government, too, there is interest in stopping employers' practices of using credit information to filter out resumes. Rep. Steve Cohen, a Tennessee Democrat, hopes to introduce legislation he is set to author to that effect.
Further, the article tells us the practice of using credit checks "unfairly tars the huge pool of people whose credit was damaged by layoffs, medical bills or other factors beyond their control. They also say it disproportionately screens out minorities."
Too, credit checks screen out capable homeless people who are seeking jobs in order to put their lives back together. What a great shame it is that people most in need of employment are now being screened from getting employment by a means [ie, credit checks] that has no meaning in determining who might be the best employee.
A great many homeless people, having directly, personally suffered deprevations are especially motivated to be outstanding employees.
A recent post in California Credit Law blog, "Bad Credit Can Mean No Job," tells us this…
…The [Wall Street Journal] reports that 47% of employers check credit history for at least some positions. Most do so with respect to jobs with fiduciary or financial responsibility or for senior positions.
Employers can legally check credit if the applicant authorizes them to do so. Employment agencies point out that if the applicant refuses, there is little chance of getting a job.
Credit checks create a vicious cycle that prevents those who most need jobs from getting hired. At least one bill in Congress and some in the state legislatures would restrict credit checks except for specified positions.
Friday, April 9, 2010
SafeGround seeks land in plan to catch up with Reno Tent City
| Reno's Tent City |
In her email, Burke included a link to an online pdf file: "Request for Proposal for Land Development / SafeGround Sacramento, Inc / April 2, 2010." The document calls for a search to identify potential sites for a homeless encampment or community of cottages in Sacramento County.
SafeGround, Sac, wants from two to five acres to accommodate 60 to 100 adults in fifty to eighty cabins or sleeping cottages.
It is believed that the new push for a safe ground encampment or cottage site comes as a result of a recent event: The acceptance of a legal 100-person homeless campground by city officials in Reno, Nevada. The encampment, there, is downtown and in public view.
The second half of a March 27 article in the Reno Gazette-Journal, detailing the new sanctioning of the Reno camp, talks about Sacramento's homeless encampment problems and relative lack of success with politicos here. John Kraintz, identified as president of SafeGround Sacramento, says something to the effect of Reno being ahead of Sacramento in doing something about the homeless problem. [Kraintz is not quoted directly.]
It my understanding that L&F Board Director David Moss, L&F CEO Libby Fernandez and Kraintz, and possibly others, have taken or will be taking a trip to Reno seeking pointers on how SafeGround Sac might duplicate the success seen by the Reno homeless.
Majorities of elected representative on the city council and on the county Board of Supervisors in Sacramento continue in staunch opposition to authorization of a homeless encampment or village.
The Reno encampment will have (if it doesn't already) rules prohibiting drugs, alcohol, open flames, dogs off their leash and messy areas. Residents will be required to attend "community meetings" to create and maintain sanitation policy and security.
A major bar for getting a homeless encampment or other community in Sacramento is the determination by many officials here that a Sacramento homeless community would have to have outside security, which is a colossal expense, relative to the cost of running a community without paying outsiders for security.
Thursday, April 8, 2010
Capital Public Radio wins Murrow Award for "Homeless in Sacramento" segments
The RTDNA website tells us this about the 2010 awards:
The Radio Television Digital News Association has been honoring outstanding achievements in electronic journalism with the Edward R. Murrow Awards since 1971. Murrow's pursuit of excellence in journalism embodies the spirit of the awards that carry his name. Murrow Award recipients demonstrate the spirit of excellence that Edward R. Murrow made a standard for the broadcast news profession.The winning news segments can be heard here, at the RTDNA website.
The series of segments total 27 1/2 minutes, comprising of reports beginning in April, 2009, relating to the end days of Tent City; the extention of Overflow, and its end; the July 1 SafeGround march; the short-lived "Tent City 2.0" (between VOA and the mission on Bannon St.); efforts to put Tent City folks in housing; and news about the troubled beginnings of Winter Shelter 09-10.
The reports are true to life and include statements from a variety of members from the homeless community. Capital Public Radio is greatly worthy of its award for truth-seeking and truthful reporting.
Much reporting on Tent City, and Homeless World Sacramento, generally, has been greatly in error and has used John Kraintz pretty much exclusively as the voice of the homeless. These CPR News reports are refreshingly right on. Nice to know that local reporting in Sacramento can be done very very well. Extraordinarily, splendidly well.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Revenues and Expenses slightly down at Loaves & Fishes
The 2009 Annual Report includes a variety of statistics and information on key employees and who's now on its Board of Directors. SacHo will look at all that tomorrow.
Today, we'll compare some key data: Revenues and Expenses, 2008 v 2009. This information was not provided on the 2008 Annual Report [found on the last page of this document], but it was on the Form 990 that Loaves and Fishes is require to send to the IRS by May 15 in the year that follows its fiscal year. [The 2008 Form 990 can be found in two parts here.] L&F's fiscal year jives with the calendar year. The 2009 Form 990, due a little over a month from now, has not yet been completed by Loaves & Fishes, to our knowledge.
Last year, information on expenses relating to its various programs was also provided on the Annual Report. Not so this year. Last year, SacHo had some questions regarding a large expense category, Brother Min's Ministry - relating to the Volunteering program, that was never satisfactorily explained. Fiscal info on expense categories/programs will appear in the 2009 Form 990 report.
Here, a quick and easy table of the new 2009 data compared to 2007 & 2008, with change and percentage change data for 2009 contrasted to 2008:
| 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | change 2009 vs 2008 | ....%.... | |
| Revenues | $4,611,112 | $4,070,321 | $3,942,066 | <$128,255> | - 3% |
| Expenses | 3,456,440 | 3,675,838 | 3,647,091 | <28,737> | - 1% |
| Excess for year | 1,154,672 | 394,483 | 294,975 | <99,598> | - 25% |
| Net Assets (or Fund Bal.) at end of year | 5,220,679 | 5,613,414 | 5,910,137 | 294,975 | + 5% |
| Admin as a % of all expenses | N.A. | 5.64% | 7.00% | + 1.36% | |
| Fundraising as a % of all raised funds | N.A. | 4.97% | 1.00% | - 3.97% |
While Loaves & Fishes got a tremendous amount of publicity in 2009, because of Tent City and the Oprah thing in February, which surely boosted donations, the economy worsened making it more difficult for people to give. That year, too, SafeGround became a new charity — yet an almost-wholly owned independent subsidiary of L&F — snagging donations most of which would otherwise have gone to Loaves & Fishes.
Last December, on the 22nd, Loaves & Fishes sent a letter in advance of a press conference. Emboldened in the letter was this text―
Yet you our donors have been affected by the economic downturn. The number of December donors is the same this year as last but the dollar amount of the donations is down by 14%. The same number of people are giving but they are each able to give less money this year.To the great discredit of the once-mighty, now-feckless Bee newspaper, they printed an article passing along the L&F text without questioning it.. Such a call for donations by Loaves & Fishes is an example of the usual truthiness coming from the organization, that can now be demonstrated with the full-year 2009 data. While it is likely technically true that donations for the first part of one month were down significantly, the REAL situation is that donations were not down much for the year. Taken in scope, with donations to SafeGround, which are not known, donations to the L&F Empire are almost certainly up. As are funds that are being held in reserve. [That is, Loaves & Fishes continues to receive, year after year, much more money than what it spends.]
Lying by omission or use of selective, misleading data to get into the wallets and purses of those who donate to Loaves & Fishes is a terrible practice. Donors should be honored and respected and told the unspun truth such that they have a correct understanding of what a charity is doing and its circumstance. Libby Fernandez and Joan Burke of L&F should stop inveigling donors and tell things straight. And the sleepy Board of Directors of Loaves & Fishes should wake up and Do the Right Thing. What is the right thing? They would know if they'd wake up and think independently, and not behave like a glutinous mass that must all slavishly buy in to Der Leaders' far-Leftist groupthink.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Roseville Sutter facility "dumps" homeless patients in Sacramanto.
A letter that seems clearly legitimate, published in the Roseville Press-Tribune yesterday, tells us that psychiatrists at the Sutter facility in Roseville have been sending homeless patients to Sacramento during the past twenty years, by bus. The practice is referred to as "Greyhound Therapy," and is clearly a means of "dumping" the patients here to relieve the Sutter facility and Placer County the expense of properly caring for and providing for the people.
The letter was written by Roseville-resident Susan Lawson who tells us she used to work for Sutter in Roseville, but now works for Mercy in Sacramento.
The letter ends with this sentiment which demonstrates Ms. Lawson's frustration, observance of hypocrisy, and keen compassion:
The letter was written by Roseville-resident Susan Lawson who tells us she used to work for Sutter in Roseville, but now works for Mercy in Sacramento.
The letter ends with this sentiment which demonstrates Ms. Lawson's frustration, observance of hypocrisy, and keen compassion:
This is unethical, not to mention illegal. We are responsible for taking care of the homeless in our town. In probably the wealthiest area in greater Sacramento with more shopping centers and strip malls and of course, the almighty Galleria, it is shameful that we are doing this.
I have never seen so many people wearing diamond crosses in churches here claiming to be “Christian” but turning a blind eye to the problem. It is time to act. We need a shelter in our town. We need to care for “the least among us” as the Bible says.
Homeless people aren’t “pretty” and often don’t smell good, but they are human beings and we can do better.
The violin breaks: Usual Loaves & Fishes dunderheadedness screws up Census count
The poor ignorant 2010 Census people gave Libby Fernandez the possibility of meddling in the count and that is what happened.
Ms. Fernandez is quoted at Channel 10, thus:
"We want everyone to know that you don't have to even give your real name," said Sister Libby Fernandez of Loaves and Fishes, "It's not about the name or your legality here in the United States. It's about counting your head and that you're a resident here in Sacramento."Elsewhere ― in the original of a Cynthia Hubert story in the Bee online that was changed and greatly shortened after it first appeared online ― Libby is quoted saying that "few, if any" who showed up at Friendship Park on the morning of Mar 30 didn't participate in the Census.
Be aware that on Mar 29 the Union Gospel Mission and Salvation Army shelters were beseiged by a good number of Census workers who gathered data. Almost ALL the guys from Union Gospel Mission go to Loaves & Fishes each morning, and certainly a great many from Salvation Army.
If "perhaps none" of the people showing up at Friendship Park failed to give census information, AND they are encouraged by Fernandez to use false names AND were given very bodacious data-providing parting gifts, the likelihood of a significant double-count of homeless people is certain.
Here is the "parting gift" that early arrivals got for participating in the Loaves & Fishes mismanaged Census-data-gathering effort. Homeless people got all of the following:
- A spiffy toiletries bag
- lip balm
- small bottle of hand sanitizer
- rain pancho
- tooth brush with cap
- toothpaste
- bandages in a bandage container
Here, from what I could find from a brief google search this morning, provisions of Title 13 re penalties for false reporting to a Census worker [emphases, mine]:
Sections 74, 84 and 210 of title 13, U.S.C., 1952 ed., described the same type of offenses, but the penal provisions varied. Section 74 prescribed maximum fine of $1,000 and maximum imprisonment of one year, for refusal to answer or giving a false answer; section 84 prescribed maximum fine of $1,000 for refusal to answer or giving false answer, with no imprisonment; and section 210 prescribed maximum fine of $500 and maximum imprisonment of sixty days for refusal to answer, and maximum fine of $10,000 and maximum imprisonment of one year for giving a false answer. In addition, such section 74 prescribed a minimum fine of $300 for refusal to answer or giving a false answer. This revised section adopts the penalties of such section 210, which was the latest enactment on the subject, and which might have been regarded as having superseded the penal provisions of such sections 74 and 84. According to its own terms, its penal provisions were applicable not only to the censuses of population, agriculture, etc., provided for in chapter 4 of title 13, U.S.C., 1952 ed., but also to any schedules prepared under the act of March 6, 1902 (sections 1–6, 77, 101, 111, and 112 of such title), or under acts amendatory thereof “or supplemental thereto.” This reference did not cover sections 74 and 84 specifically, but such sections, enacted in 1924 and 1916, respectively, could probably be regarded as having been “supplemental” to the 1902 act. In any event, this revised section establishes uniform penalties for refusal to answer, or giving a false answer in the circumstances stated. Further, the prescribed penalties are the maximum, and any lesser penalty can be imposed if the facts of the case warrant it.
UPDATE: Perhaps the following is most germane to Ms. Fernandez's conduct ― though "intent" to screw up the Census is a part of the described misconduct. I do not see evidence that Ms. Fernandez had the intention of breaking the law.
TITLE 13 > CHAPTER 7 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 222
Whoever, either directly or indirectly, offers or renders to any officer or employee of the Department of Commerce or bureau or agency thereof engaged in making an enumeration of population under subchapter II, IV, or V of chapter 5 of this title, any suggestion, advice, information or assistance of any kind, with the intent or purpose of causing an inaccurate enumeration of population to be made, shall be fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)