If wars are won one battle at a time then SHARE (Seattle Housing And Resource Effort) won a small battle last week. The organization has received over $14,000 in donations to keep 11 of its 15 shelters open for the next month.
SHARE said it was a lack of city funds that caused them to consider closing. If the shelters had closed that would have put approximately 400 men, women and children out onto the street.
A contingent representing SHARE went to Mayor Mike McGinn's office last Monday then met briefly with the mayor and then with Aaron Pincus of the mayor's office. SHARE says they need $50,000 from the city to finish the year.
The money allows SHARE to buy tickets so homeless individuals will have transportation to shelters. SHARE will still need money for next month. The Mayor says the city is committed to keeping SHARE open for the rest of the year but the journalist in me thinks seeing is believing.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
So long to a friend
Robert Hansen was a contradiction. Take the face. This was the face of someone who'd lived a hard life; one on the streets in the cold and the wind. He looked older than his 58 years and sure smoked a lot. A lot of street people do. But getting to know Robert, he displayed a playfulness. A gentleness.
If someone was getting their picture taken at a Real Change event, he would walk behind people and flash a peace sign over their heads. I rode to the state capital with Robert once on Martin Luther King Day. We sat in the back seat of Brooke's car (the Real Change volunteer coordinator at the time) and Robert was having all kinds of trouble with his seat belt. Then before we rode back to Seattle, I had trouble hooking on my seat belt. Turns out I was looking straight ahead and Robert was holding on to the belt whenever I pulled it. He just smiled when I caught him.
The serious side of Robert was that he was interested in what was going on in the world. He spoke against budget cuts in front of the Seattle City Council. Once he got into a little tet-a-tet with Council Member Richard McIver. At one point, McIver told Robert his numbers were wrong. For months, Robert delighted in telling that story and how, in fact, his numbers were accurate. He said even Nick Licata, another Council Member, told him he was right.
Robert also attended events sponsored by the Freedom Socialist Party at the New Freeway Hall when he lived in Rainier Valley. Linda Averill rememembers Robert coming to some of her events when she ran for Seattle City Council. Members of the FSP and the Radical Women also knew Robert sell Real Change at the Seward Park PCC and at the Columbia City Market in the summer. A lot of people did, and he'd often tell his customers what articles were of particular interest.
A lot of people are upset about the circumstances surrounding Robert's death- how he was released from the hospital prematurely and was found dead in his new van that he was so proud of. In death, Robert stands as an example of how we all need health care. But on a personal note, I'll always remember that wide-eyed, open-mouth, toothless smile.
A Memorial Service for Robert Hansen takes place, Friday, May 14 at City Hall Plaza starting at 1:00
If someone was getting their picture taken at a Real Change event, he would walk behind people and flash a peace sign over their heads. I rode to the state capital with Robert once on Martin Luther King Day. We sat in the back seat of Brooke's car (the Real Change volunteer coordinator at the time) and Robert was having all kinds of trouble with his seat belt. Then before we rode back to Seattle, I had trouble hooking on my seat belt. Turns out I was looking straight ahead and Robert was holding on to the belt whenever I pulled it. He just smiled when I caught him.
The serious side of Robert was that he was interested in what was going on in the world. He spoke against budget cuts in front of the Seattle City Council. Once he got into a little tet-a-tet with Council Member Richard McIver. At one point, McIver told Robert his numbers were wrong. For months, Robert delighted in telling that story and how, in fact, his numbers were accurate. He said even Nick Licata, another Council Member, told him he was right.
Robert also attended events sponsored by the Freedom Socialist Party at the New Freeway Hall when he lived in Rainier Valley. Linda Averill rememembers Robert coming to some of her events when she ran for Seattle City Council. Members of the FSP and the Radical Women also knew Robert sell Real Change at the Seward Park PCC and at the Columbia City Market in the summer. A lot of people did, and he'd often tell his customers what articles were of particular interest.
A lot of people are upset about the circumstances surrounding Robert's death- how he was released from the hospital prematurely and was found dead in his new van that he was so proud of. In death, Robert stands as an example of how we all need health care. But on a personal note, I'll always remember that wide-eyed, open-mouth, toothless smile.
A Memorial Service for Robert Hansen takes place, Friday, May 14 at City Hall Plaza starting at 1:00
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Nickelsville movie is nostalgic
It wasn't directed by Martin Scorcese, won't win any Academy Awards, and the movie shown at the United Church of Christ on Friday night probably won't be the final cut, but Nickelsville - The Movie, a documentary on the homeless encampment named after former Mayor Greg Nickels, was still an enjoyable.
Over 50 Nickelodeon fans filed into the church hall (UCC was one of several venues to host the homeless encampment)and watched, what was for many, a trip down memory lane.
The movie was split into three sections - footage shot by Revel Smith from Real Change of Nicklesville's first week September 22-26, 2008; still photos by Peggy Hotes, the liason beween Veterans for Peace and Nickelsville; and interviews done by Peggy and Ion Gardescu, a graphic designer.
Yes, there were interviews. Plenty of interviews with Nickelodeons telling their story. The documentary begins with longtime Nickelodeon Richard explaining how the name was picked - names were put in a hat and Nickelsville was the name selected by the majority. Plus, there were interviews with New Hope Baptist Church Pastor Robert Jeffrey and University Christian Church pastor Janetta Craven Boyd who provided a home for Nickelsville.
Then there were clips from the first week of Nickelsville; and it was good to see the famous Nickelsville pink tents again. Revel, who shot most of this section of the film, got a laugh from the audience in her interview when she says, ``things are quiet now, but we'll probably hear from the Mayor and the police eventually.''
Anitra Freeman explained the campers options as Nickels' police ``stormed'' the West Marginal Way campgrounds that Black Friday of Sept. 26, 2008. Then we see Andrea Bauer, editor of the Freedom Socialist Newspaper, one of 22 Nickelsville supporters getting arrested (charges were eventually dropped). There's also a chubby guy with a blue jacket and a baseball cap who pops up a few times in the background- oh, that's me!
Nickelsville might also use this film as a fundraiser but Gardescu mentioned it could still use some tweeking- perhaps some musical tracks over the still photos. Nevertheless, it was still fun to see the beginning of Nickelsville, a time that sometimes seems like a millenium ago and other times just like yesterday.
Over 50 Nickelodeon fans filed into the church hall (UCC was one of several venues to host the homeless encampment)and watched, what was for many, a trip down memory lane.
The movie was split into three sections - footage shot by Revel Smith from Real Change of Nicklesville's first week September 22-26, 2008; still photos by Peggy Hotes, the liason beween Veterans for Peace and Nickelsville; and interviews done by Peggy and Ion Gardescu, a graphic designer.
Yes, there were interviews. Plenty of interviews with Nickelodeons telling their story. The documentary begins with longtime Nickelodeon Richard explaining how the name was picked - names were put in a hat and Nickelsville was the name selected by the majority. Plus, there were interviews with New Hope Baptist Church Pastor Robert Jeffrey and University Christian Church pastor Janetta Craven Boyd who provided a home for Nickelsville.
Then there were clips from the first week of Nickelsville; and it was good to see the famous Nickelsville pink tents again. Revel, who shot most of this section of the film, got a laugh from the audience in her interview when she says, ``things are quiet now, but we'll probably hear from the Mayor and the police eventually.''
Anitra Freeman explained the campers options as Nickels' police ``stormed'' the West Marginal Way campgrounds that Black Friday of Sept. 26, 2008. Then we see Andrea Bauer, editor of the Freedom Socialist Newspaper, one of 22 Nickelsville supporters getting arrested (charges were eventually dropped). There's also a chubby guy with a blue jacket and a baseball cap who pops up a few times in the background- oh, that's me!
Nickelsville might also use this film as a fundraiser but Gardescu mentioned it could still use some tweeking- perhaps some musical tracks over the still photos. Nevertheless, it was still fun to see the beginning of Nickelsville, a time that sometimes seems like a millenium ago and other times just like yesterday.
Monday, April 19, 2010
A whole new ballgame
The Seattle City Council passed ordinance 116807 establishing agressive solicitation as a civil infraction by a 5-4 vote today. But unless Mayor Mike McGinn has an unforesse change-of-heart, the bill is dead.
McGinn has said that he would veto the bill regardless of how today's vote turned out. But with only a 5-4 margin of victory, the Council doesn't have enough votes to override the veto.
“People who have concerns have been very clear about what their concerns are,” McGinn told Dominic Holden of The Stranger. “I don’t think it’s an appropriate piece of legislation.''
The legislation stated that anyone seen ``aggressively panhandling'' by a Seattle policeman could receive a $50 fine even though someone panhandling most likely doesn't have $50. Opponents of the bill noted there were already laws on the book that dealt with harassing people for money.
Less than a week ago, council member Tim Burgess, the driving force behind the bill, figured he would have an 8-1 majority. Even Tim Harris in his Real Change column said that the bill would probably pass.
But late last week the tide started to turn. First, McGinn said that he would veto the bill if it were a 5-4 vote. Then he said he'd veto regardless of the vote totals, highlighting the split feelings on the bill. Council member Nick Licata was the first dissenter of the bill and he was joined late last week by Tom Rasmussen. Bruce Harrell was undecided about the bill.
Then The Stranger's blog called out Mike O'Brien. In a Michael Moore moment, the first-term council member said that he would support the bill even though he hadn't actually read it. That led to a flurry of phone calls and e-mails to O'Brien's office Friday afternoon.
This afternoon, O'Brien went from hero to goat, receiving the biggest hand of the day from the homeless advocates who crowded into the City Hall chambers. ``This is the type of legislation I got on the council to oppose,'' O'Brien said. ``I had said I was going to support it but I changed my mind over the weekend.'' With O'Brien, Licata, Rasmussen and Harrell's nay votes, homeless advocates scored a decision if not a knockout.
Previously, the Seattle Human Rights Commission , which advises the council on civil rights' matters had voted 9-0 against the bill. The Commission said there was no connection between violent crime and panhandling. Most homeless advocacy groups had come out against the bill, the 34th, 36th, 37th and 43rd District Democrats had voted against it, and groups like the ACLU and NAACP were considering lawsuits.
A couple of hundred people filled the council meeting room for the vote. A total of 28 people were allowed to speak before the meeting began; 17 opposed the ordinance and 11 spoke in favor. The latter mostly represented downtown business interests who feel panhandlers are keeping people from going downtown.
However, at the end of the day it appeared that the ordinance wasn't a good piece of legislation. As Licata noted at a recent Public Safety Commission meeting, ``you can't legislate against fear. And that's what this bill is trying to do.''
McGinn has said that he would veto the bill regardless of how today's vote turned out. But with only a 5-4 margin of victory, the Council doesn't have enough votes to override the veto.
“People who have concerns have been very clear about what their concerns are,” McGinn told Dominic Holden of The Stranger. “I don’t think it’s an appropriate piece of legislation.''
The legislation stated that anyone seen ``aggressively panhandling'' by a Seattle policeman could receive a $50 fine even though someone panhandling most likely doesn't have $50. Opponents of the bill noted there were already laws on the book that dealt with harassing people for money.
Less than a week ago, council member Tim Burgess, the driving force behind the bill, figured he would have an 8-1 majority. Even Tim Harris in his Real Change column said that the bill would probably pass.
But late last week the tide started to turn. First, McGinn said that he would veto the bill if it were a 5-4 vote. Then he said he'd veto regardless of the vote totals, highlighting the split feelings on the bill. Council member Nick Licata was the first dissenter of the bill and he was joined late last week by Tom Rasmussen. Bruce Harrell was undecided about the bill.
Then The Stranger's blog called out Mike O'Brien. In a Michael Moore moment, the first-term council member said that he would support the bill even though he hadn't actually read it. That led to a flurry of phone calls and e-mails to O'Brien's office Friday afternoon.
This afternoon, O'Brien went from hero to goat, receiving the biggest hand of the day from the homeless advocates who crowded into the City Hall chambers. ``This is the type of legislation I got on the council to oppose,'' O'Brien said. ``I had said I was going to support it but I changed my mind over the weekend.'' With O'Brien, Licata, Rasmussen and Harrell's nay votes, homeless advocates scored a decision if not a knockout.
Previously, the Seattle Human Rights Commission , which advises the council on civil rights' matters had voted 9-0 against the bill. The Commission said there was no connection between violent crime and panhandling. Most homeless advocacy groups had come out against the bill, the 34th, 36th, 37th and 43rd District Democrats had voted against it, and groups like the ACLU and NAACP were considering lawsuits.
A couple of hundred people filled the council meeting room for the vote. A total of 28 people were allowed to speak before the meeting began; 17 opposed the ordinance and 11 spoke in favor. The latter mostly represented downtown business interests who feel panhandlers are keeping people from going downtown.
However, at the end of the day it appeared that the ordinance wasn't a good piece of legislation. As Licata noted at a recent Public Safety Commission meeting, ``you can't legislate against fear. And that's what this bill is trying to do.''
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
A bizarre morning
I feel like I fell through the Looking Glass and wound up at the Seattle City Council this morning. Today was the day, that the council voted to send Council Member Tim Burgess' ``Aggressive Solicitation Ordinance'' to full committee. About a dozen Real Change supporters showed up with signs but it was a far cry from the last Public Safety Committee meeting that featured a standing room only crowd of speakers.
Before the Public Safety Committee meeting, chaired by Burgess began, 15 minutes of public comment was held. Seven spoke (including a couple of Real Change vendors)against the Solicitation Ordinance and four in favor. It does seem like regular people are against this ordinance and those in favor are representing some special interest organization. Perhaps the type of organization that would support a Burgess campaign for Mayor? Just a thought.
After some provisions by absent council member Sally Clark were added to the ordinance, Burgess, council president Richard Conlin and council member Sally Bagshaw were joined at the table by the most progressive member of the council, Nick Licata.
Licata felt that the bill was now more humane than the original but still had two amendments. The first was a proposal for more police - bringing back fixed beat patrols and hiring new police officers. The second was for more street outreach and increased housing capacity and street services. Licata noted that ``services are now miniscule,'' a point that Burgess seemed to agree with when he ``debated'' Real Change director Tim Harris at Seattle University a month ago.
``You can't build a bridge halfway,'' said Licata. ``The bill shouldn't take effect until these provisions are met.'' However, Licata noted in an exchange with Conlin that even with the provisions he still wouldn't support the bill.
That became a mute point when none of the council members would support Licata's add-ons. It's worth noting that two of the Public Safety Committee members weren't in attendance. Burgess said that Sally Clark was ill but alternate Bruce Harrell was nowhere to be seen.
Those in attendance voted 3-1 to send the bill to full committee. Just like on the Supreme Court, Licata has the option to write a dissenting opinion which he hoped to do in the next couple of weeks. Council president Conlin said he would decide whether Licata's report would have to be done by next Monday. Somebody's in a hurry to get this bill passed.
As if those opposing the bill hadn't suffered enough, council member Bagshaw then said she agreed with Licata although she didn't vote for his provisions. Bagshaw then went on for another five minutes saying she was for Real Change, the Seattle Police, Tent City, more human services, and just about anyone else that came to mind. Bagshaw was offended when someone put up a sign that said, ``Liar.'' Actually, ``Please Shut Up'' would have been more appropriate.
Now it appears the ordinance will go to council and be passed by an 8-1 margin as Licata, unlike some council members, doesn't mind being the lone dissenting vote. Who knows what will happen when the ordinance takes effect?
Before the Public Safety Committee meeting, chaired by Burgess began, 15 minutes of public comment was held. Seven spoke (including a couple of Real Change vendors)against the Solicitation Ordinance and four in favor. It does seem like regular people are against this ordinance and those in favor are representing some special interest organization. Perhaps the type of organization that would support a Burgess campaign for Mayor? Just a thought.
After some provisions by absent council member Sally Clark were added to the ordinance, Burgess, council president Richard Conlin and council member Sally Bagshaw were joined at the table by the most progressive member of the council, Nick Licata.
Licata felt that the bill was now more humane than the original but still had two amendments. The first was a proposal for more police - bringing back fixed beat patrols and hiring new police officers. The second was for more street outreach and increased housing capacity and street services. Licata noted that ``services are now miniscule,'' a point that Burgess seemed to agree with when he ``debated'' Real Change director Tim Harris at Seattle University a month ago.
``You can't build a bridge halfway,'' said Licata. ``The bill shouldn't take effect until these provisions are met.'' However, Licata noted in an exchange with Conlin that even with the provisions he still wouldn't support the bill.
That became a mute point when none of the council members would support Licata's add-ons. It's worth noting that two of the Public Safety Committee members weren't in attendance. Burgess said that Sally Clark was ill but alternate Bruce Harrell was nowhere to be seen.
Those in attendance voted 3-1 to send the bill to full committee. Just like on the Supreme Court, Licata has the option to write a dissenting opinion which he hoped to do in the next couple of weeks. Council president Conlin said he would decide whether Licata's report would have to be done by next Monday. Somebody's in a hurry to get this bill passed.
As if those opposing the bill hadn't suffered enough, council member Bagshaw then said she agreed with Licata although she didn't vote for his provisions. Bagshaw then went on for another five minutes saying she was for Real Change, the Seattle Police, Tent City, more human services, and just about anyone else that came to mind. Bagshaw was offended when someone put up a sign that said, ``Liar.'' Actually, ``Please Shut Up'' would have been more appropriate.
Now it appears the ordinance will go to council and be passed by an 8-1 margin as Licata, unlike some council members, doesn't mind being the lone dissenting vote. Who knows what will happen when the ordinance takes effect?
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Just say no
I was only a teenager but I still remember the event quite clearly. I was running some errands in downtown Providence and figured I could catch a ride home from my father who worked nearby. The elevator to my dad's parking garage was located next to a small donut shop so, having been walking around all day, I sat on the ground next to the elevator and waited for my dad to arrive.
A woman sprang out of the donut shop in near-hysteria and told me that I couldn't sit down in front of the elevator- although she never really told me why I couldn't. For many years I just figured the woman was an up-tight East Coast person.
Sometimes in the summer I would visit my cousin out West, first in Santa Barbara and then in Seattle where people were less up-tight, more layback and relaxed. One of my first Seattle moments was going on the Pioneer Square underground tour in the early `80's. The tour guide pointed out ``our neighbors'' and the tourists waved to the people who were hanging out in the square. The people who would be called ``bums'' back East.
Of course, the Seattle establishment isn't as friendly towards the homeless these days (chances are those who hung out in Pioneer Square 25 years ago weren't homeless but lived in the downtown single unit houses that have long since disappeared). Heck, some in the Pioneer Square Neighborhood Association don't want Real Change moving there.
On Wednesday, the Seattle City Council Public Safety Committee will vote on Council Member Tim Burgess's Panhandling Ordinance. (see more details on the bill below). The bill has to get out of committee to even be voted on by the full Council. There are rumors that Council Member Nick Licata might block the bill and Real Change hopes to have a large contingent in attendance. Anyone interested should arrive about 9:00am.
There are already sufficient laws on the books to deal with people who are harassing their fellow citizens. This bill appears to be nothing more than another step towards criminalize the homeless. I urge anyone who feels this way and wants to take a stand towards ``a more uptight Seattle'' to attend Wednesday's meeting.
A woman sprang out of the donut shop in near-hysteria and told me that I couldn't sit down in front of the elevator- although she never really told me why I couldn't. For many years I just figured the woman was an up-tight East Coast person.
Sometimes in the summer I would visit my cousin out West, first in Santa Barbara and then in Seattle where people were less up-tight, more layback and relaxed. One of my first Seattle moments was going on the Pioneer Square underground tour in the early `80's. The tour guide pointed out ``our neighbors'' and the tourists waved to the people who were hanging out in the square. The people who would be called ``bums'' back East.
Of course, the Seattle establishment isn't as friendly towards the homeless these days (chances are those who hung out in Pioneer Square 25 years ago weren't homeless but lived in the downtown single unit houses that have long since disappeared). Heck, some in the Pioneer Square Neighborhood Association don't want Real Change moving there.
On Wednesday, the Seattle City Council Public Safety Committee will vote on Council Member Tim Burgess's Panhandling Ordinance. (see more details on the bill below). The bill has to get out of committee to even be voted on by the full Council. There are rumors that Council Member Nick Licata might block the bill and Real Change hopes to have a large contingent in attendance. Anyone interested should arrive about 9:00am.
There are already sufficient laws on the books to deal with people who are harassing their fellow citizens. This bill appears to be nothing more than another step towards criminalize the homeless. I urge anyone who feels this way and wants to take a stand towards ``a more uptight Seattle'' to attend Wednesday's meeting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)