The Ten-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness

Tuesday, September 7th, 2010

Overview & Takeaways

The neighborhood organizations representing the Kingston Hills and Kingston Woods neighborhoods held a meeting on Thursday, March 18, 2010 at the Arnstein Jewish Community Center. Bill Lyons, the City of Knoxville’s Senior Director of Policy & Communication, Jon Lawler, Director of the Ten-Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness, David Arning of Southeastern Housing Foundation, Bruce Spangler of Volunteer Ministry Center, and several representatives of area neighborhood groups were in attendance. There was also lively public input from community members who asked questions and made comments.

I’ve transcribed my notes from the meeting below with very few minor edits for clarity. I don’t want to use this post to editorialize about the meeting, but I will say that we took away several important points and some recommendations upon which we intend to act as soon as possible.

1. Quite a few attendees expressed the belief that the Ten-Year Plan (TYP) needs to do a much better job of communicating with the public about the TYP, specifically
   1. good and comprehensive estimates of costs to implement the TYP,
   2. clear and specific descriptions of case management and delivery of other services to people in permanent supportive housing,
   3. the history of the TYP and who participated in its creation.
2. Many attendees said that they’d like to see the TYP get out more often. They suggested that we conduct much more frequent and regular meetings with the public to explain the TYP and its approach to addressing chronic homelessness, and to get input from community members, answer questions and address concerns.
   1. We are committed to re-starting a public dialog about the TYP. We’re not entirely sure what shape that should take, so our next community meeting will be for the purpose of getting input on that. This next meeting is planned for Wednesday, April 21. We’ll get more details out about that meeting very soon.
3. It became clear at this meeting, as it has been clear at every single other one that I’ve attended, that the jargon surrounding the issue of chronic homelessness is very confusing to many members of the public who don’t live with this language every day. The TYP needs to find ways to disambiguate the discussion.

Meeting Notes

[These are my notes. I tried to capture as much of what was said as I could. If I've misrepresented anything here, or left out something you believe to be significant, please mention that in the comments below this post.]

The meeting’s moderator was Gene Patterson, and was structured to give the Administration and TYP time to present, Ron Peabody and homeowners’ association time to present, followed by a question and answer session.

Bill Lyons commented right after Mr. Patterson’s opening remarks, and expressed Administration’s commitment to an open and transparent public dialog about the TYP. The more we talk the better. We want to speak with you not talk at you. We want to work towards understanding, addressing, and contextualizing the controversy.

• National context–deinstitutionalization. Ten-Year Plans were established in 2003 and most of them stressed Housing First. People who are chronically homeless have no chance of getting off the streets and staying off unless they are first helped to find their way into Supportive Housing. Research show that housing first is the best approach in “most places.”
• The nationwide movement towards ending homelessness is bipartisan. Fundamentally, there are not competing views: there is a broad and deep consensus as to supportive housing being at the heart of the solution. The prior emphasis had been on delivery of emergency services, the kind you see a concentration of in Knox County in the Mission District. The services available in the mission district are specifically for homeless people who are experiencing a housing crisis.
• But residents of permanent supportive housing (PSH) are not homeless. There is absolutely no evidence that property values are lowered by PSH. On the contrary, residents of PSH are good neighbors because they are motivated to change their lives and because of the support they get in PSH.
• We’re working on a siting process. What is that? That’s what we want to find out. Whatever that process looks like, we’re committed to these inseparable moral imperatives:
  • We have a moral imperative to address the problem of chronic homelessness in the most effective way.
  • We have an equal moral imperative that no neighborhood is harmed by the development of PSH. If we believed PSH would harm neighborhoods, we would not do it. It’s as simple as that. This approach is not based on faith–it’s based on evidence, and its success is demonstrable.

Jon Lawler followed Dr. Lyons.

• TYP was established to end chronic homelessness, but it has several other objectives:
  • Reduce duplication of services, which is happening in Knoxville as we better-coordinate service delivery.
  • Fully implement HMIS (Homeless Management Information System) so we know our homeless population, the services they need and the services they use. HMIS is now widely deployed, and we now know more than ever about who the homeless are, their issues, and the environments in which those issues are being addressed.
  • Increase the accountability of people moving into PSH in order to prevent more people falling into homelessness. This is being accomplished right now through the placement of case managers in KCDC properties that are presently being used to provide PSH. Case managers at those properties have reduced evictions to the street from over 60 in one year to zero in the first year of implementation.
• Mr. Lawler gave the official HUD definition of Chronic Homelessness and then defined people who are chronically homeless as people with mental health, substance addiction, or other disabling issues whose lack of access to the resources to address those issues leads to homelessness. PSH provides support network that was missing before.
• PSH is a safe, secure apartment. The case manager relationship is integral to the PSH model. The case manager is the resident’s broker of supportive services to ensure success in housing. Every individual has a service plan to ensure that they reach their potential.
• Success in PSH means that residents have the opportunity and are empowered to become vital members of the community.
• Mr. Lawler said that the TYP is working.
  • In the past 18 months, we have housed over 300 people who used to be chronically homeless in PSH, and our retention rate is approximately 90%. That’s better than the national average of 84%.
  • In that same 18 months, there have been no evictions to the street at the KCDC towers in which we’ve placed case managers.
  • HMIS is being used by every major service provider
  • We have more PSH in the pipeline.

Gene Patterson spoke next to acknowledge members of City Council, County Commission, and other officials present at the meeting.

Ron Peabody presented a PowerPoint display titled Components and Costs Ten-Year Plan 2010. Tonight we want to talk about what it would cost to implement the TYP. Mr. Peabody said that he could not find specific information related to cost at the TYP website, and that he’d had to extrapolate costs based on his own independent research. After presenting, Mr. Peabody called for community forums to discuss costs.

John King, a local attorney, spoke next. He said that there are other approaches to addressing the challenges of chronic homelessness that are just as effective as Housing First. He didn’t offer any specific discussion of these alternate approaches. He addressed site selection and said that there needs to be “better due diligence.” Pedestrian access is nonexistent at the Teaberry site. This group of people is special-needs and they need special transportation networks. The Teaberry site wasn’t optimum. Review of any potential PSH site should include input from fire, emergency, law enforcement. Should be engineering review “very early on.” Access to public transit. Given the problems that these people have, we should require that any site proposed for housing for the chronically homeless should have sidewalk access to public transit. Access must be close so that these people aren’t endangered. Suggested appraisal very early in the due diligence process.

Don Daugherty followed Mr. King with some remarks advocating a centralized housing-with-services facility at the old Baptist Hospital site in South Knoxville. He said that we don’t want to leave this problem for future generations to have to deal with it. The TYP hasn’t been able to meet expectations. Scattering homeless across the county may not be the best idea. Proposes a central location services and housing. We’ve got other locations we could use: Rule, Oakwood, Brownlow, abandoned retail facilities. The TYP isn’t the only option.

At this point, Mr. Patterson opened up the mic for questions and comments.

Joe Creighton (sp?) is a  pastor and a psychiatric chaplain. Haven’t heard anyone say that they’ve asked the homeless what they want. Self-regard is a fragile thing. Putting people who are chronically homeless into a community where they’re not wanted is a  bad idea because it can lead to harm, especially with people who are mentally ill or who are addicts.

• Bruce Spangler, who supervises case managers at Volunteer Ministry Center (VMC), spoke about the wrap around supportive services that PSH residents need in order to succeed in housing and in the community. Case managers make the vital connections for their clients with these services. Mr. Spangler mentioned that he is the person who will be responsible for case management services at Minvilla.
• Jon Lawler made the point that the TYP works with VMC to provide case management in PSH developed in conjunction with the TYP.
• Bill Lyons reinforced the point that delivery of supportive services is an integral part of PSH.

Rodney Beverly said that these facilities would house patients with chronic conditions. He asked how we would ensure that people in these dwellings will not carry on in those conditions. What method ensures their good behavior?

• Bruce Spangler responded that people who live in PSH are residents, not patients, and that residents have to honor the terms of their leases. If they present a danger in housing, state law allows eviction within three days.

Ron Ashford referred to one of the numbers in Ron Peabody’s presentation on costs. He said that we needed to be cost-effective.

• Jon Lawler responded that if we have 800 CH people living in Knoxville, we are spending $32,000,000 to maintain them in homelessness ( at a cost of $40,000 per person per year). The cost to the community drops substantially when a person is housed.
• Bill Lyons mentioned that the costs to taxpayers are located in incarceration and consumption of other emergency services, and those things drop dramatically once a person is in PSH.

Robert Burgess asked how many people we serve who are from outside of Knox County.

• Jon Lawler responded that if a person falls into homelessness in a neighboring county, comes to Knox, and decides that for whatever reason this is where he or she wants to stay, then they’re going to stay here. This happens all the time in cities like ours that are surrounded by mostly rural counties, which are relatively undeveloped, less-populated, and can’t offer the array of resources for which all kinds of people, not just those who are homeless, move to cities. HMIS shows that for 80% of the homeless people who receive services in Knoxville, their last permanent address was within a zip code beginning with the 37 prefix; 59% had a last permanent address in 379. In any event, we don’t ask where people are born before offering them services, and we will serve anyone who is here.

Kelly Rafferty asked about case management and treatment. Not clear on medical needs. there are no clinics located in West Knox–all that stuff is located close to downtown. Will you build a medical clinic centrally? How do residents see providers?

• Bruce Spangler responded that case managers make sure their clients get to the services they need, wherever they live and however it has to happen. He listed several transportation alternatives. He also said that VMC considers 1:25 to be a reasonable, manageable case manager to client ratio. He underscored that case managers coordinate care, but that they are not themselves care providers. Care providers are the mental health care providers, physicians, dentists, employment specialists, etc.

Sheryl McCormick said that she lives in Rocky Hill. She’s got a psychiatric disorder and has been homeless. She would not have been successful if she’d been warehoused or segregated. Community integration, with housing built out in the community, is hugely important. The TYP needs to mount a strong community education campaign.

Dr. Reuben Pelot said that if you’ve never worked with people who are truly homeless, you’ve missed an opportunity. The homeless people he’s worked with are some of the most delightful people he’s ever come into contact with. The thing that keeps people from interacting with the homeless is fear, and that’s unfounded. Dr. Pelot welcomes what we’re doing and thinks it’s very positive. He applauds the TYP.

Don Byerly is a Professor (Emeritus) at UT. He wholeheartedly endorses the TYP. As a geologist who lives nearby, he already knew about the earth problems at the Teaberry site. He pointed out that no due diligence was done at the Meadows, which is now having a lot of soil-related problems. He also mentioned that sinkhole damage is very costly. He recommended having a geologist examine any properties considered for PSH development.

• Bill Lyons addressed the issue of real estate purchase contracts and likened them to putting down earnest money on a house. He mentioned that the day the option on Teaberry was executed, we made it public. We want to be early, transparent, and immediately initiate meetings with neighborhoods surrounding any potential PSH site. We’re committed to discussion, early in the process, to address suitability of any proposed site. As soon as we found out about the sinkhole, we investigated. Dr. Lyons repeated the commitment to early discussion.
• Gene Patterson asked if what had happened at the proposed site at Debusk had influenced the decision to become more proactive about communication related to site suitability.
• Dr. Lyons responded that earlier experience showed us that we didn’t have a rational place for input/access to elected officials. City Council can then vote, very early in the process, explicitly on site appropriateness, as opposed to voting on funding or some other issue, much later in the process.

Harlan Hannah spoke of his own experience of homelessness and suggested that most of us, if we had to forgo one or two paychecks, would experience homeless too. Knoxville people want to be in on every piece of what the TYP is doing. Want to track it, costs, etc. Mr. Hannah suggested that the almighty would bless us if we seek to address the problem of homelessness. The challenge is a big one, but so was the World’s Fair, and we did that. We just need to roll up our sleeves and get this done.

David Howard expressed personal appreciation for the TYP. He said that he is not qualified to say that it’s a bad idea to do this plan, but that he can say how it looks. If the Teaberry site had not been taken off the table, the TYP and the Administration would have been walking into a lions’ den tonight. The concept of exporting an urban problem to the suburbs just doesn’t make sense. The choice of the Teaberry site without public conversation was shocking. We do have a moral imperative to fix the problem. The way this happened was flawed, insensitive, uncaring, callous, and demonstrates Government arrogance towards its citizens.

• Dr. Lyons responded. This is a community problem, not an urban problem. The only people who even get considered as PSH residents are people who have demonstrated commitment. And we’re talking about where people will live. Those stereotypical problems won’t be here. Without the right motivation, people will not become residents of PSH. As to people who do come to live in PSH, they’re not in shelters. PSH facilities are safe. They feature controlled access, which means you’re not going to have a resident inviting a gang of friends over to drink Jack Daniels in his apartment. A well-managed PSH development is simply not detrimental to the community.

Joe Thompson mentioned that he’s got a brother in Nashville who works at a church, and lives in an old Sears building that has been converted into small apartments. Residents there have pulled themselves up. The apartment building has given them a place to have a permanent address, get off the streets. Not sure if there’s something like this in the TYP. If so, they need transportation as a first criterion. These are not people you need to be afraid of. I would like to know how you’re doing funding here.

• David Arning explained that SHF is the nonprofit affordable housing development partner of the TYP. We always look for convenient access to public transit. Essentially, residents of PSH are looking for the same things you’d be looking for if you were looking for an apartment. We do ask homeless people what they want in an apartment.

Clarence wondered why we don’t reopen Eastern State? What is the difference between the TYP and Habitat for Humanity? What about jobs? Due diligence?

• Mr. Arning explained the 90 day free look before any money at all was even put down. We do go through the process of due diligence as a conscientious developer for every property on which we propose to build PSH.
• Mr. Lawler explained that Lakeshore is not going to be restored to its formal size/function because of civil liberties, etc. As to Habitat for Humanity, a single family, owner-occupied home is simply not appropriate for people who need PSH; they need a small apartment.
• Dr. Lyons further addressed due diligence. Site control is first, then due diligence. When we begin this process, we’re entering a covenant with the community, the neighborhood, to stay engaged at the beginning of the process, in the middle of it, and after a development is completed and occupied. We need a better way to listen to concerns and to better explain what we’re doing along the way. We must, and we will, ensure that there are no negative consequences for the neighborhood.

Kyle Stooksbury asked if this approach (PSH/TYP) is Federally-mandated.

• Dr. Lyons explained that it is not mandated, but that it is a Federal priority. A lot of it is accomplished with private dollars, and because it is not a Federal mandate, there’s no danger that Federal funding for it will be withdrawn.

Stephanie Matheny expressed disappointment that PSH will not be developed at the Teaberry site. She lived in Seattle WA for 11 years developing PSH projects like the one proposed at Teaberry. In 1992-’93, she worked on the Wintonia Apartments there. The Wintonia contains 92 units: half of residents were chronic public inebriates and the other half were the chronic, long-term homeless. The developer held many community meetings, and much anger and controversy swirled around the project. But now, Wintonia is a success and is embraced by the community. In America, we have long, national experience with concentrating very low income people in relatively small areas, and we’re now spending billions of dollars tearing that housing down. But housing must be proper to its context. You do multifamily development in multifamily areas. In Knox County, we’re working towards a siting process. Every time a new PSH site is proposed, there’s a lot of concern expressed. The TYP is at fault because they’ve been too short on specific information. The TYP must cover all the bases in this conversation, and must address all the concerns.

Brad Fultz  asked how many homeless people are in Knoxville right now.

• Mr. Lawler responded that in a given three month period, there are 1100 people in our community who would benefit from PSH [a large subset of that number are people who are chronically homeless] and 870+ people who are episodically homeless will receive services in Knoxville.

Robin Zollin-Brown is a social worker. She suggests that the 1:10 client:case manager ratio is not good, and that we should have smaller facilities and more staff.

• Bruce Spangler responded that VMC’s present client:case manager ratio is 1:25, and that there are awake staff on site [who are not themselves case managers] in the Minvilla and Flenniken facilities 24/7. Rev. Spangler suggested that without this kind of case manager involvement, it’s not supportive housing.
• Mr. Lawler said that, yes, the 1:10 ratio does appear in the TYP document, but practitioners here believe 1:25 is a very good ratio, and very workable.

Diana Ritter asked if it were true that four sites have been rejected. She said that she was under the impression that if the TYP didn’t have a site under control by December 31, 2010, that the TYP is dead. She asked if that is true. [Actually, neither of those things is accurate.] Ms. Ritter said that PSH would really improve the area but that she has run into a great deal of irrational fear. We must embrace this solution. It’s a “we’re all in this together” moment.

Elaine Davis asked if it is true that a chronically homeless person, whose cost she pegged at $45,000 per year, will really only cost the community about $17,000 per year once that person is a PSH resident. She asked if that includes “all the variables.”

• Mr. Lawler answered that that estimate is all-inclusive, including the cost of the facility. He said that our goal is to build PSH debt-free so that the facilities can be operated with the highest level of efficiency.
• Ms. Davis asked if the developer would come back and ask for more public dollars to do rehab on PSH facilities.
  • Mr. Arning responded that the owner would protect his investment in the property by managing it very well, which will necessitate hiring a property manager who has experience managing these kinds of housing developments. Likewise, the owner will hire an organization to deliver case management services.
• Mr. Lawler restated the commitment to hold meetings with the public, and to stay engaged with the public.

Tim Hutchison said that he is a believer in helping people close to the mission district, because that’s where the services are already located. He suggests that the TYP get out into the community for meetings in advance.

• Mr. Lawler pointed out that the services available in the mission district are focused on helping people who are in crisis, and who are homeless. The TYP is focused on meeting them there and helping them move beyond crisis and into stability in PSH.

Dan Smith said that we’re all responsible for not being up to speed on this. He suggested that the TYP could be public-inputted to death, and that we should land on a number of people who are chronically homeless in our community and stick with it. Be up front with the community about the true cost of homelessness and the true cost of implementing any plan to address it.

Written comments submitted at the meeting

First commenter: Why hung up on splatter effect? Why not go to Baptist Hospital? Much more cost-effective. Centrally located to services. Less expenditure per year. If not Baptist, why not Lakeshore? Lots of land available, already owned [by City]. Originally chartered for similar usage. Safe environment. People need to know about this plan. Don’t ask us to endorse and pay for something that is so secretive.

Second commenter: 1. How is funding planned for such projects? 2. How can addicts and alcoholics be integrated int o a community which has mentally ill, depressed, handicapped? 3. If people are “homeless” (inferring unemployed), how can they be expected to pay any rent, etc. 4. I think the cost $40,000 for for 450 sq. ft. is ABSURD!  5 Why can’t unused school buildings, old Baptist Hospital, McClung Warehouses be renovated? 6. $38 million a year to support approximately 1200-1400 people is ridiculously expensive!! 7. [A certain private citizen] should consider contributing one of his buildings for the homeless.

Third commenter: How about 5th Ave. Motel being remodeled for the homeless? I passed by there this morning and crowds in each side of the sidewalk with cell phones, cigarettes in their ears and mouth, whose paying for all this? Why can’t they go there?