Presentation of master plan for Ashland Street homeless services facility due at Nov. 18 and 19 council meetings
By Morgan Rothborne, Ashland.news
As the 2200 Ashland Street ad hoc committee faced the 11th hour of its available time to create a plan for the property, committee members wrestled with diametric opposition of perspectives and unease about uncertainty during a Wednesday evening meeting.
Committee Facilitator Jan Calvin reminded the group the window to complete the plan closes soon — its presentation is scheduled for the Nov. 18 and 19 City Council study session and business meetings.
“Finally wrapping up with the unknowns, and we can never know anything. We have a scope of work, you guys committed a huge amount of time. … How will this building and site be used? To benefit people experiencing homelessness and have co-benefits for the community — it’s not one or the other. Common ground,” she said.
Working through a list of possibilities for the site, neighbors of the building expressed concern services without enough structure could lead to a continuation of troubling circumstances in south Ashland. Those working with homeless people pressed back that too many limitations lead to serving too little to the many in need.
The discussion began with a reversal of the previously agreed upon proposal for a pilot program of pallet houses on the property for seniors and medically fragile individuals through the winter.
“If we had a plan for these folks to begin with, we wouldn’t need pallet houses. This is just so over the top. … I’m sorry, you folks just aren’t getting it. You don’t understand the homeless problem. It’s a housing crisis. There’s no place to put people,” said Debbie Niesewander.
Jason Houk stated he was not comfortable with the program at the previous meeting and was not comfortable now. Rachel Jones stated she was unclear how the program could be implemented for this winter because, “that’s now.”
Mayor Tonya Graham informed the group that she and Councilors Bob Kaplan and Gina DuQuenne toured the property the previous day with city staff members, including the head of the Community Development Department, city manager, emergency management coordinator and fire marshal. Staff related state requirements for pallet houses, such as suitable bathrooms and showers, heating and air conditioning, and operation of the program by an experienced shelter provider.
Graham stated the city is now considering working with an organization such as Rogue Retreat or Opportunities for Housing, Resources & Assistance (OHRA) to ensure the pallet houses are used.
Houk remembered some issues when Southern Oregon Jobs with Justice took over the city’s previous pallet house operation from Rogue Retreat. No exit plans were established and, in an apparent lack of oversight, some guests were actively using substances and a couple others seemed to have filled their pallets with “things stolen out of every car in the neighborhood.”
Trina Sanford expressed concern if the pallet houses went to OHRA.
“I’m sorry it’s still within our neighborhood, it’s still on the southside, it still lends itself to the community’s concerns with what’s happening around our houses. … OHRA doesn’t control what they’ve got in their facility,” she said.
Graham confirmed the committee would no longer be able to oversee the pallet houses if they moved to a providers property, but she would request the city manager report on the topic at the Nov. 19 council meeting.
Sanford made a bid for more time for the committee’s work and asked if the city could consider repaying the state the grant funds used to purchase the property and accompanying restrictions on its use. Jones and Alison Wildman echoed this.
“It’s not that I’m saying that I don’t want to consider other uses of this property. What I’m uncomfortable with is at this time we have so many questions. … We have nursed this thing. We have been carrying this thing for months, we’re giving birth to like, OK, here’s this thing,’ and now we don’t get to do anything with it. We’re putting it in the hands of people who haven’t been in this process,” Sanford said.
Graham stated this group’s purview was not to consider if the building should be used for homelessness services but to determine how it would serve this purpose. She proposed that, after the council presumably accepts the committee’s recommendations, the site would enter a “design phase.” More granular details of site use could benefit from another ad hoc committee which could be composed of members of this group.
Avram Sacks attempted to bring the group back to deciding on the list of recommendations in the agenda.
“In the short term, this building is appropriate for laundry, shower and storage. Everyone agrees on that,” he said.
Sanford responded she remembered these as “floating ideas” without consensus.
“If somebody can come get their clothes clean and their body clean, and their stuff in storage, they can go to a job interview,” Sacks said. “If you’ve got a filthy body and you stink, your clothes are dirty, how are you going to go to a job interview? How are you going to get off the street? If those three things were here, it could change lives.”
“We’re so upset now over every single issue, and yet we’re being asked to decide on all these things,” Wildman said.
The group redoubled its efforts to finalize recommendations, with Jones suggesting adding a new recommendation — for Ashland to have a livability team such as the one in Medford. Calvin responded that this form of street outreach is offered in Ashland by Neisewander largely working alone and, while expansion of outreach is vital, the next committee will discuss this.
Houk expressed concern the recommendations were unbalanced against those seeking services.
“We have a lot of expectations of the folks we’re going to serve, we don’t spell out anywhere what they can expect to get back. I think they should expect if they’re going to come into this building that they’re going to be treated by a staff that’s trained, that has the resources to do the job,” he said.
The group reached consensus that management expectations, client policies and procedures, exit plans, some form of security and a livability team were all recommendations, but the specifics would be deferred to the next iteration of the ad hoc committee.
Then a new sticking point emerged in a recommendation that the site should serve residents of Ashland. Niesewander reminded the group homeless people often don’t have proper identification materials.
“As someone that serves homeless people — it’s not something I would even know how to do,” Sacks said of confirming residency.
He suggested removing the recommendation for focus on Ashland, but neighbors stated they were uncomfortable with this.
Sanford remembered finding a woman crying with “all her possessions” on Independant Way. The woman told Sanford she was exited from OHRA, wanted to go to family in California but when staff were unable to confirm family in California, denied her a bus ticket. Sanford filled her van “to the brim two times” to help the woman get where she wanted to go. The experience left her suspicious if service providers are adequately helping people leave if they want and thereby expanding those who are in Ashland.
Matthew McMillan stated the already agreed upon restriction of services by appointment only would likely deter anyone but those already in Ashland and desiring to stay.
Niesewander then attempted to resurrect the previously discarded idea of a “day center” at the facility.
“One of the problems is all the folks on the street doing nothing. Well they could be here, hopefully getting outreach and services,” she said.
McMillan stated an appointment process creates an opportunity for control.
“If you have it just wide open, you don’t know who’s coming in. I think the sexual predator thing came up before. I think there has to be a screening or you don’t know who’s coming by or what they’re going to do,” he said.
The group agreed on potential for office space at the building for organizations that may “have a relationship to the homeless reality but are not meeting with individuals to help them move along,” as Graham described it.
The group united around frustration the building was not being used for trainings and events related to homelessness. Sacks, Jones and Sanford all stated they had inquired with multiple members of city staff about this potential and were told the vacant building could not be used for this purpose until the master plan was completed.
The group almost agreed everything on the site will be indoors with no further use of portable toilets or the laundry shower trailers. The mention of the previously considered installation of a a “Portland Loo” on the property inspired spirited discussion.
“I don’t understand why we would put the Portland Loo on this property. How do you have people schedule an appoint or time for a s— break?” Niesewander said.
Calvin reminded the group the portable toilets were used by severe weather shelter guests last year as they do not go through background checks and cannot move beyond the building’s garage into its interior where the present bathrooms are located.
“I’m concerned about the neighborhood too, not just this property. That’s what you all expressed at the very beginning. We got addiction issues, we got mental health issues, we got people defecting and urinating, this doesn’t solve any of that. Anything we’re doing here isn’t solving anything out in the community. … I would rather not see people s——- and peeing all over town,” she said.
Rogue Valley Transportation District offered grant funding for loos if they are near bus stops, she said. More public toilets would help solve the larger issue. Installing such an expensive facility on the site for a severe weather shelter that is sometimes only open 15 days a year did not make fiscal sense. The group agreed to revisit the concept of these facilities.
As they prepared to leave off their finalization of recommendations for the final meeting, McMilan urged keeping the recommendations from becoming too complicated.
“One thing I want to remind people, this is just for starters. A year from now we could revisit it,” he said.
Email Ashland.news reporter Morgan Rothborne at [email protected].
Nov. 4: Corrected Rachel Jones name.
Related stories:
Trauma informed training Wednesday for severe weather shelter volunteers (Nov. 2, 2024)
Future uncertain for Ashland’s severe weather shelter at 2200 Ashland St. (Oct. 31, 2024)
Public comment window for 2200 Ashland St. property nears end (Oct. 20, 2024)
Public forum planned regarding plans for 2200 Ashland St. (Sept. 26, 2024)
No easy answers: 2200 Ashland Street ad hoc committee parses through the possibilities (Aug. 26, 2024)
‘Already the 11th hour of crisis’: Ashland council reviews Homeless Services Masterplan (Aug. 7, 2024)
Success and snafu as Ashland’s 2200 Ashland St. shelters transition (April 10, 2024)
Ashland City Council declines funds for emergency shelter (March 6, 2024)
Ashland City Council weighs costs, benefits of 2200 Ashland St. shelter (March 5, 2024)
Ashland City Council to discuss future of 2200 Ashland St. Monday (March 1, 2024)