New York City to charge rent to homeless shelter residents with jobs

[Amerigo Vespucci]

City to charge rent to homeless shelter residents with jobs

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/04/13/2010-04-13_city_to_charge_homeless_people_with_jobs_rent_to_stay_in_shelters.html#ixzz0l3WtQ0w7

BY Adam Lisberg
DAILY NEWS CITY HALL BUREAU CHIEF

Originally Published:Tuesday, April 13th 2010, 5:00 PM
Updated: Tuesday, April 13th 2010, 7:47 PM



Nothing's free in New York - not even a stint in a city shelter.

Homeless people with jobs are going to have to start paying the city rent to stay in shelters, officials said Tuesday.

"Open-ended handouts, we know, don't work," Deputy Mayor Linda Gibbs said. "This is not a moneymaker. We're not doing this to close budget gaps. It's really the principles ... involved."

A 1997 state law requires New York to charge rent to the homeless who can afford it. The city never did, but has been pressed to do it since a state audit last year.

Shelter residents would have to pay as much as 44% of their income in their first year in the program.

Critics say the plan penalizes people who are struggling.

"It makes far more sense to allow those families to save their meager funds in order to be able to get out of the shelter system sooner," said Steven Banks, chief attorney of the Legal Aid Society, which may sue to block the plan.

"This is an extreme policy that has no discernible benefit, that will end up hurting the families and costing the taxpayers money," Banks said. "If necessary, we'll certainly go to court."

[no_hypocrisy]

1. That's discriminating against the working poor. What's next -- charging rent for prison time?

[Gman2]

2. Havent you heard?

[Donnachaidh]

4. Don't give Bloomberg any ideas - after all, he can't raise taxes on his wealthy buddies

THAT would make his social life suffer.

Let's kick the people who can least protect themselves -- and THEN roll them for their money.

[Recursion]

17. Umm.. Virginia at least does that

I thought a lot of states did?

[KamaAina]

20. "Motel 6 to 12"?

:eyes:

[Taverner]

24. VA, TX, TN and MS I think

I'm surprised they don't charge the family for executions

[WolverineDG]

60. But if the inmate has a spouse or minor children

they don't pay. The State makes a claim against the inmate's estate, but even then, if the (former) inmate dies but has a surviving spouse or minor child, the State can't collect.

Yeah, I know, Texas is heartless that way.

dg

[TheMightyFavog]

47. The county jail here charges people incarcerated there $20/day...

And the local yokels are OK with it.

[Blue_Tires]

59. Rhode Island tried that once when i lived there...

it failed because the state realized that charging prisoners rent elevated them to the legal status of "renters" and gave them all the rights with it...

[SOS]

3. Meanwhile on East 79th Street just off 5th Avenue

Our billionaire mayor (and supporter of charging the homeless) has purchased another palatial townhouse.
He is quietly combining his two townhouses into one 12,500 square foot mansion.



http://gothamist.com/2009/02/25/mr_bloomberg_builds_his_dream_townh.php

[Laughing Mirror]

69. Sleeping soundly in his castle

What great courage and heart the rich king has.

[pschoeb]

5. How very Dickensian nt

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

6. I heard this on the news yesterday. NYC is doing this to avoid state fines..as per the

article
"A 1997 state law requires New York to charge rent to the homeless who can afford it."

I think this horrendous but the law has to be changed at a state level. Right now, NYS in serious financial trouble and I doubt there will be moves to rescind that law. I am however, going to contact my state reps.

[bobbolink]

11. Thank you for contacting your state reps! I very much appreciate you taking action!

I hope you can get many others to do the same!

:yourock:

[lurky]

7. Ugh. Freaking Bloomberg.

The suggestion of course, is that people are staying in the shelters because they are greedy freeloaders living rent-free on the city's dime.

Remember, the lucky ones get to stay in a crowded room full of cots where they risk getting stabbed or having the shoes stolen off their feet while they sleep.


The less-lucky ones get to sleep on the floor in the hallway, like these people at the Emergency Assistance Unit in the Bronx:


And the even-less lucky ones are out in the cold.

If the shelters are so nice, maybe Bloomie and Linda Gibbs can spend a few nights in one? :shrug:

[Jkid]

96. I would love to see the mayor sleep in a homeless shelter for once.

To be honest this was the first time I actually saw a picture of a homeless shelter.

[bobbolink]

8. Fight this one hard, Legal Aid! I won't even bother pointing out all the illogical crap.

People don't pay attention to it, anyway.

One more step toward forced labor. People will rail about mines and company towns, and the damage done to workers that way, but just watch... "progressives" will not raise one peep about this.

:nuke:

[okieinpain]

9. they should just legalize drugs, all of them. that way they get

taxes off of the sales, and they can stop paying to house non-violent drug users and dealers.

[bobbolink]

10. For gawd's sake! What the hell does it take for "progressives" to GET that homeless people are NOT

druggies, drunks and crazies?

Turn off the Faux and start paying attention!

[laughingliberal]

13. +1 nt

[okieinpain]

33. no I'm saying to raise money. sorry if I wasn't clear. n/t.

[dionysus]

46. uh, mentalk illness and addiction are 2 of the main causes of homelessness

[bobbolink]

49. uh, you are Wrong. Read the actual information, rather than Faux. Uh....

[dionysus]

53. you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

The major reasons and causes for homelessness as documented by many reports and studies include: <45><46><47><48><49>

Inavailability of employment opportunities.
Poverty, caused by many factors including unemployment and underemployment.
Lack of affordable healthcare.
War or armed conflict.
Mental disorder, where mental health services are unavailable or difficult to access.
Substance abuse

(more)

[bobbolink]

57. When you can't discuss the facts,, you resort to attacks. Geee, where do you get that?

Try going to a REAL source... instead of FAUX.

Try loooking it up with the National Coalition for the Homeless.

You must think that drunkenness and "mental illness" don't exist in mansions.

:rofl:

[dionysus]

61. you're projecting a lot of stuff, and lying to boot. wtf is your problem?

In 2004 the United States Conference of Mayors, a nonpartisan organization of cities with populations higher than 30,000, surveyed the mayors of major cities on the extent and causes of urban homelessness, and most of the mayors named the lack of affordable housing as a cause of homelessness. (See Table 1.1.) The next three causes identified by mayors, in rank order, were mental illness or the lack of needed services (twenty-one of twenty-seven), substance abuse and lack of needed services (twenty), and low-paying jobs (sixteen). The lowest ranking cause, cited by five mayors, was prisoner reentry (release from incarceration). Other causes cited were unemployment (thirteen of twenty-seven), domestic violence (twelve), and poverty (seven).

Read more: The Nature of Homelessness - Causes Of Homelessness http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/2280/Nature-Homelessness-CAUSES-HOMELESSNESS.html#ixzz0l6dzula5

[bobbolink]

68. Your insults may work with other people you deal with, but not with me.

YOU be homeless and deal with these kinds of insults, and then get back to me.

[dionysus]

73. my insults? no one is calling YOU mentally ill or an addict, but it IS a leading cause

of people being homeless. it's an undeniable FACT.

if you want to deny reality like that, go right ahead.

[bobbolink]

92. In YOUR world, "what the fuck is your problem" is not an insult?

THAT is why so many of us have no use for this generation.

Use insults like that to gain votes for your preferred candidates?

No, don't answer that, because I really don't care.

BUT, I thank you for that, because you have just shown those who don't understand homelessness how we get treated, and how we are spoken to. You have helped me to educate people to the REAL issue.

[dionysus]

98. you know what, i take it back, maybe you are on something.

:rofl:

[choie]

56. ever try to find an affordable apartment in New York City?

It's impossible. That's what causes homelessness as well..

[bobbolink]

58. Exactly. the FACTS are There are over 9 million people who need low-income housing.

There are 6 million available units.

Anybody (who actually gives a damn) can do that math.

Thank you for understanding the facts of the matter.

[dionysus]

63. fact of the matter is mental illness and substance abuse are two leading causes. it's a fact.

an undeniable fact.

:shrug:

[leftstreet]

101. Why do you use pejorative terms to refer to people with addiction issues?

"druggies, drunks and crazies"


hmm....

[bobbolink]

117. That's obvious, isn't it? BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE TERMS USED AGAINST ALL OF US.

Thanks to the ignorance of people like those posting here.

[laughingliberal]

12. 44% of their income??!!??? Guaranteed to keep them poor and homeless

I don't think I know enough 4 letter words to adequately describe my thoughts about this.

[prolesunited]

14. No kidding

They will never be able to save up to get an apartment.

Yeah, homelessness is just a "lifestyle" choice and they are just trying to scam the system. :sarcasm:

This makes as much sense as ending unemployment when there are no jobs.

[bobbolink]

16. Thank you!

:cry:

We deal with so much ignorant discrimination, and yet we are not important enough for "progressives" to really fight for.

Yet, they expect us to jump through all the ridiculous hoops it takes for us to be able to vote for them. Fuck it.

:cry: :nuke:

[Raineyb]

54. Figures. NYC has been trying working to push out anyone who isn't rich for years.

Granted the state is helping but how do these idiots expect someone to save up enough to get an apartment if nearly half their income is being given over to the state for inadequate housing?

I guess they figured this is punishment for not taking the bribe to leave the city.

I hate these people.

[caseycoon]

15. This is totally asinine!

"It makes far more sense to allow those families to save their meager funds in order to be able to get out of the shelter system sooner," said Steven Banks, chief attorney of the Legal Aid Society, which may sue to block the plan.

"This is an extreme policy that has no discernible benefit, that will end up hurting the families and costing the taxpayers money," Banks said. "If necessary, we'll certainly go to court."
*****************************************************************

I have to agree with this attorney. I hope he sues the socks off these imbeciles. Do they think these people actually WANT to stay in these stinking shelters? It's insane!
:grr:

[G_j]

18. nice way to keep people homeless

as someone above thread said, sounds like a Dickens story.

[dajoki]

19. This has got to be...

the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen. If the people could afford rent they would move into an apartment or something, this law just garauntees that they will be stuck in the shelter or move to the streets. AND 44%, like they say, only in New York. DISGUSTING!!

[KamaAina]

21. Well, that's one way to get people out of the shelters

unfortunately, they're going to end up back on the streets. :grr:

Wonder what would happen if they set up an encampment in front of Bloomie's place at 79th and 5th?

[zorahopkins]

22. Cruel, Heartless, Greedy Monsters!

Words escape me.

This is barbaric, monstrous, and evil.

The PEOPLE of New York City should D.E.M.A.N.D. that this STOP.

[bobbolink]

23. How's this for a RADICAL "progressive" action idea----GET HOUSING BUILT!!

Forget the damned "shelters" and start making a commitment to HOUSE the citizens of this country!

What, that isn't as progressive as health care????

[Taverner]

25. But that's SOSHULIZM!!!!!Oh noes!!1111!!! Cod Browne!

Brother Glenn tells me even caring for someone in trouble is soshulism justiss

[bobbolink]

26. I get your humor. But please understand that for those of us deperately in need of housing, this is

no laughing matter.

We would really appreciate that effort put into real action.

[Taverner]

28. Look - I agree with you - and anyone who doesn't is an a**hole

And the more we can laugh AT these pathetic f**ks the better...they need to be riddiculed for being so heartless.

Humor is a tool you can use, not an enemy to shun

[bobbolink]

30. I took a risk sharing with you. I gave you a glimpse into my pain.

ACTION is what I'm asking for, and that is not only reasonable, it is legitimate.

I hope you will reconsider your reply.

[Taverner]

32. Huh? I'm agreeing with you but you're mad?

I don't understand...

[bobbolink]

36. What's to understand? I asked you to listen to my pain, and to take action.

You lectured me about "humor".

I have said all I can to get this across to you. If you don't want to step back and look at how you could deal with this differently, then don't tell me you are "agreeing".

"Progressives" can see things from another perspective when that is called for. Really.

[superduperfarleft]

65. .

:rofl:

[bobbolink]

70. How ...."progrressive" to laugh at the pain of others.

Welcome to my ignore list.

I suggest you do the same, because you obviously won't like anything I have to say.

This is really pathetic when "progressives" laugh at people they consider beneath them, then wonder why the votes don't materialize at election time.

Congrats... yours is one of the posts I will save to show others just why people have given up voting for "progressives". Congrats.

Bye now... you can have the last laugh, since that seems to stroke your ego.

[superduperfarleft]

76. I'm just enjoying how you go batshit insane on every single one of these threads.

If I didn't enjoy it, I'd probably make a futile attempt to explain how your nasty behavior would put ANYONE off from helping you, and that would be a waste of both of our time.

[Obamanaut]

113. +1 nt

[progressiveinaction]

95. Bobbolink

How long have you been homeless?

[Raineyb]

55. Oh no, they only have need for luxury buildings didn't you get the memo?

:sarcasm:

On a serious note, there have been activists working for affordable housing for years. But the powers that be don't give a rat's ass. The rent guidelines board gives landlords a raise in rent whether they need it or not. Finding a condo that's less than 300,000 is nearly impossible even in the outer boroughs yet we can force people out of their homes to build a stadium for the Nets (who suck not that that matters)

[Cal Carpenter]

86. In a city near me

There is a requirement that any new downtown housing has to include some 'affordable' units or the developer has to pay into the city's affordable housing fund.

Well, you can imagine how that's going in this economy. There are more and more homeless people - particularly families who have never been homeless before - and less and less development because who's gonna build now in SE Michigan?

Having human services tied so directly into for-profit development is really messed up. Many of the liberals in this town supported the idea of doing things this way. There was no outcry. And look at what happens when we have market-based solutions to the very problems the market causes? It's so messed up.

I won't even get into how they define 'affordable', that's a whole nother story. Even best case scenario it doesn't do crap for the chronically homeless or people who are at-risk of becoming that way.


What has shown to be quite effective is the 'housing first' model. That model can also include having folks pay 'rent' based on some portion of their income if they have one - but it's not a fucking shelter, it's a real apt or house. The idea is to get people in the habit of having bills and budgeting - not punishing them for being poor.

I'm not saying housing first is perfect (you probably know a lot more about it than me) but this is just sick. Is there anywhere the 'market' doesn't creep in anymore?

Anyway, just know that here's one more person here on your side.

[ecstatic]

99. Projects? nt

[JerseygirlCT]

105. Yup

Affordable housing has got to be damned near impossible to find in NYC. Imagine what a difference affordable, supportive housing could make!

[Greyhound]

27. OMFG.

But when the shit hits the fan, it will be the fault of "those people".
:grr::eyes:
:kick: & R

[bobbolink]

31. Yes, it is always WE who gets blamed. As Jim Wallis said, "Listen to those closest to the problem"

Yet, those in power REFUSE to do so.

But, I remind you.. not only the violence that you allude to, but the DISEASES spread.

Bloomberg is no more immune to TB than anyone else, and that is exactly what he is promoting.

Please, if you know people in NY, please get them to fight this law!

Thanks so much! :yourock:

[blindpig]

29. Principle?

Libertarian principle maybe.

[a la izquierda]

34. I don't even know what to say...

But I will say I'm not shocked. We live in such a greedy country, nobody gives a crap about the poor. I hope New Yorkers flood the phonelines of their Reps.

[bobbolink]

37. "I hope New Yorkers flood the phonelines of their Reps." Hear that, NY DUers?

Are you willing?

Can you do this small thing?

Please?

[a la izquierda]

114. Hugs

[bobbolink]

35. Sounds like Bloomberg will make it impossible for people like me to EVER have housing

Those who are too old, too sick, or too injured to work can go hurl themselves off a cliff.

What about it, progressives? Are you going to allow this????


Plan Would Require Homeless to Work to Qualify for Rent Subsidies
By JULIE BOSMAN
Published: April 13, 2010
The Bloomberg administration is planning to require more homeless families to get jobs in order to qualify for rent subsidies, city officials said Tuesday.

For the last three years, the city had provided certain homeless families with vouchers good for one or two years of free or steeply discounted rent. Since the program began, more than 18,000 families, and some single adults, have received the so-called Advantage vouchers, more than 7,500 of them last year.

Most of those families qualified for the vouchers because they had already found work, and as a result were eligible to pay only $50 toward their rent each month for up to two years. But families who had become the subject of child welfare investigations were granted an even-more-generous voucher, good for up to two years of free rent — because of their vulnerability.

Now the Bloomberg administration is seeking to require that nearly all families have at least one member with a job before they receive a rent subsidy. Participants would also pay more toward their rent — rather than $50 a month, they would be required to pay 30 percent of their income during the first year of the subsidy. During the second year, they would pay 50 percent of the total rent.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/nyregion/14homeless.html

[Echo In Light]

38. Uniquely American

[bobbolink]

39. THIS is the real issue.. please read this

"Ms. Gibbs said it was unclear whether the change would save money in the $141.8 million plan, but she said she hoped that it would help more families find jobs and permanent homes. She added that New York has an “extraordinarily generous” shelter system and housing subsidy program. "
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/nyregion/14homeless.html


Same as requiring a co-pay on Medicaid... it doesn't even pay for the work it takes to collect it, so it is PUNISHMENT.

Please, DUers, do the right thing and start protesting this crap!

[dixiegrrrrl]

40. Jesus. even Fed. guidelines say 25% of income is

the most you should spend on housing.

When did the Puritans take over the country?

[bobbolink]

50. Unfortunately, those guidelines were changed years ago. It is 30%

When you don't have much, that 5% makes a big difference.

44-50% is criminal!

But I don't know how to get "progressives" to actually fight these injustices... ideas?

[superduperfarleft]

64. More public libraries with internet access.

That way the homeless will be able to post on messageboards more.

[dionysus]

83. zomg

:spank:

[Quantess]

94. Oh no, you didn't!

:spray:

[NM_hemilover]

115. I love starting the day with a good laugh,

And coffee dripping out my nose, Thanks !

[dixiegrrrrl]

79. Yeah, I have an idea.

Send this article to some of the lefty blogs and ask for action ideas, esp. in the NY State blog directory.
Here is link (s) to the left/progressive portals:

http://www.leftyblogs.com/

http://newleftblogs.blogspot.com/

Push for comments/updates from the Legal Defense office.
Ask people, via the NY and other progressive blogs, to write to letters to the newspapers, masses of letters.
I know NY has to have a street newspaper or 2, yes.

In other words, organize and get publicity.And find out when the elections are that impact the morons who want to push this deal thru.

[bobbolink]

81. Great ideas, thank you!

Will you do this? Will you enlist some NY DUers to work on this?

I am single-handedly working on a presentation on homelessness right now, and it is taking all I have.

I realize that because I'm homeless that people think I should be doing all of these things, but without others to pick up the ball, I simply can't do it all.

Your efforts on this would be greatly appreciated!

[conspirator]

41. This screws up my plans. I was planning to "retire" in a homeless shelter with

the rest of the money I have. And never having to work again.

[earth mom]

42. Those monies should be put in individual accounts so that the homeless can save toward getting

their own place to live.

How in the hell will they ever get OUT of the shelter if they are paying so much to stay there?

What the city is doing is ridiculous and illogical not to mention flat out cruel!

[Cirque du So-What]

43. This is perhaps the worst case of kicking people when they're down

that I've ever heard. Up to 44% of what people make? Absolutely draconian in its burden upon those least able to afford it. I am SICK of all these efforts to balance budgets on the backs of the poor - and in this instance the poorest of the poor. I hope the rich remember all these affronts to decency when the skids get greased & blades get sharpened on the guillotines.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

44. Yeah, THAT will keep them off the streets. -nt

[G_j]

45. kick

[BreweryYardRat]

48. Ugh.

That's appalling. No way in hell a homeless person can save up enough for a security deposit (especially in NYC) if they're having to pay nearly half of their monthly income (which'll probably be coming from a minimum wage job) to a shelter.

[bobbolink]

51. Exactly. So much for that "hope" thing.

:nuke:

[Mojeoux]

52. k/r

[WolverineDG]

62. I can see charging de minimus rent

but 44% is a bit much. What's wrong with a sliding scale based on income & family size, or keeping the rent in line with what the Housing Authority charges?

dg

[bobbolink]

72. oh, you can, huh? so, you want this "shelter" to remain permanent housing?

You truly don't believe that people should be able to save their wages to get an actual home??

Maybe you would benefit from living in a shelter for a while, and see just how wonderful a life it is.

[WolverineDG]

74. $5/month isn't too onerous nt

[bobbolink]

75. As I said, its easy to say that from your position. Try living it.

Try explaining to your kids that you can't get them paper and pencils for school because you have to pay the SHELTER!

[WolverineDG]

80. You can't tell me that someone who lives in a shelter

where food, clothes, & utilities are provided AND is working a minimum wage job can't afford $5/month.

dg

[bobbolink]

84. Oh, yes, I CAN tell you.. Because you obviously haven't been in a shelter.

This is more and more like an exchange with a RWer.

I even gave you the example of a homeless family who can't afford school supplies, but yet you INSIST that you know it all.

How, pray tell, is that different from what the RW wants to insist?

Again, I implore you, TRY IT.

Here is a good start for your education:

The Homeless Challenge Project
Economically‑privileged people dressing down, emptying their wallets
and spending time on the streets as homeless people.

For more information, please contact Michael O'Neill at:
202.462.4822 x 222 or [e-mail]

[WolverineDG]

97. If you're working & living in a shelter

where food, clothing, utilities are provided to you for FREE, you can afford school supplies for your kids and pay a small "rent." If you can't, then might I suggest your priorities need adjusting.

I think 44% is ridiculous, but sorry, if you're able-bodied & not at least looking for work, don't expect to keep getting something for nothing.

dg

[ecstatic]

100. What if their presence is keeping someone with no job at all

from having somewhere to live? How should that be addressed?

[bobbolink]

116. HOUSING.

[superduperfarleft]

66. If it's just the "principle" involved, this seems incredibly cruel. n/t

[G_j]

71. exactly,

making it more difficult to improve their situation out of principle. I guess that principle is cruelty.

[Odin2005]

67. Un-fucking-believable!

:puke:

[Mojeoux]

77. K/R

[bobbolink]

78. Sadly, it is all too believable. Run homeless people out of town.

Make it against the law to feed homeless people.

Ticket and fine homeless people $100 for sleeping anywhere the public can see them.

I could go on, but tears are clouding my vision.

:puke: indeed!

[miscsoc]

82. are these not idiots familiar with the concept of perverse incentives

or are they consciously trying to discourage people from improving their situation and becoming productive members of society.

what on earth sort of "principles" are involved here? it's punishing people for working.

If I was unemployed and homeless this sure as hell would make me less likely to want to get a job.

The policy is fucking demented from any political perspective.

[bobbolink]

85. Its simply the idea that poor and homeless people are "Unworthy". A typical 'Murkin

attitude.

Once that attitude is what runs the thinking (or what passes for thinking), its easy to see that PUNITIVE becomes the rule of the day.

[miscsoc]

87. i think you're right

it's a demented and evil attitude to take, though. sadism.

you can't even justify this in terms of "tough love", it's just cruelty for cruelty's sake.

actually there might be some very sinister political considerations at play here. to do with maintaining and growing a group that is useful as a scapegoat. if homeless people start getting jobs and stop becoming homeless, you can't use them as a target for draconian rabble rousing laws

[bobbolink]

90. "actually there might be some very sinister political considerations at play here"

"to do with maintaining and growing a group that is useful as a scapegoat. if homeless people start getting jobs and stop becoming homeless, you can't use them as a target for draconian rabble rousing laws"

you have just made my day--thank you!! :yourock:

I keep saying.... it is no longer OK to openly express racism, it is no longer OK to openly express sexism, it is no longer OK to openly express homophobia.

Poverty and homelessness is the only acceptable target left, and if you see some of the replies here, you will see that. Those posters would NOT express the same sorts of things about those other groups, but it is OK to use homeless people in that way to vent their spleens.

Thank you for getting it. Now, I hope you will help us to combat this!

:pals:

[Bluenorthwest]

88. My last trip to NYC I heard so many stories of displacement

and housing horror stories. This is another one. Pure punishment, counter productive, and cruel.

[bobbolink]

91. "Pure punishment, counter productive, and cruel." absolutely, and thanks.

If they do take almost half or half of their pay, then they have created permanent homelessness, and that IS cruel.

If, as one poster insists is "proper", they take $5 a month, that is only punitive, just like the co-pays for Medicaid. It would cost more to process it than it takes in, which is PUNISHMENT.

WHO ARE WE????

Thank you for understanding and caring! :yourock:

[amborin]

89. K&R

[alarimer]

93. The usual formula is that you should spend no more than 25% of your income on rent

44% is outrageous. A token amount, sure, but that is ridiculous.

[Raineyb]

102. It's 30% now. And in NYC it's likely to be more. 44% is despicable.

Welcome to NYC.

[maryf]

103. K&Rnt

[JerseygirlCT]

104. How about they check the income of people living in

rent controlled apartments first?

How many do you hear about with these amazing rents - regardless of their means?

This is cruel and stupid all at once.

[freeplessinseattle]

106. Dupe, sorry.

maybe a couple bucks a day, or a week, but they're not staying there for the fine accommodations. Plus it is only at night they can be there, even when it's cold, so it is a far cry from a regular home in so many ways. People stay there because they are desperate, and will never get ahead if they are made to sacrifice too much.

When I worked at a domestic violence shelter we we mandated to charge the residents $20/day, something sort of DSHS funding requirement I didn't really understand, but we had a system worked out with them so residents/survivors could pay it off in chores. Nothing really heavy, and just an hour or two a day. Most everyone went that route, and it worked well, just like sharing a household with multiple people and dviding up chores, so it wasn't a hardship. The few women who more financially able also volunteered to do chores too, anyway. That was just a short-term gig, though, and if these homeless people were being charged $20/day, that would be too much of a sacrifice and they would never get ahead. Go get money from your rich peers Bloomberg!

[freeplessinseattle]

107. That is so effed up I don't even know what to say

maybe a couple bucks a day, or per week, but they're not staying there for the fine accommodations. Plus it is only at night they can be there, even when it's cold, so it is a far cry from a regular home in so many ways. People stay there because they are desperate, and will never get ahead if they are made to sacrifice too much.

When I worked at a domestic violence shelter we were mandated to charge the residents $20/day, some sort of DSHS funding requirement I didn't really understand, but we had a system worked out with them so residents/survivors could pay it off in chores. Nothing really heavy, and just an hour or two a day. Most everyone went that route, and it worked well, just like sharing a household with multiple people and dividing up chores, so it wasn't really much of a hardship. (The first couple days they did get to just have a break to just process and have a meltdown).

The few women who more financially able also volunteered to do chores too, anyway. That was just a short-term gig, though, and if these homeless people were being charged $20/day, that would be too much of a sacrifice and they would never get ahead. Go get money from your rich peers Bloomberg!

[bobbolink]

119. thank you for understanding, and for posting your wisdom.

I will say, though, that while people think it "builds character", that whole "chores" thing can backfire bigtime.

A woman who has just left home because of violence is dealing with a LOT of trauma, and needs all the time she can gather to deal with that trauma.

Plus, she likely has children, and needs that time to spend with her children, who are also traumatized.

This is the typical no-win situation so many women are put in.... you MUST do a lot of work to prove you are "worthy", but if it cuts into your mothering time, then you are an unfit mother.

:nuke:

[freeplessinseattle]

121. I hear ya, but there's that "empowerment" philosophy

built-in there I guess, I don't think anyone there felt it "builds character", that would be kind of warped-it's just normalizing life and it's basic stuff they'd be doing at home anyway-but without being fearful and as stressed about how perfect everything is. Plus the main idea there is to move forward, and get away from the learned helplessness that comes with being abused.

I'm not really sure how they could have dealt with the fee situation any other way without losing vital funding, and I'm sure the women would rather do some laundry rather than have no refuge. We volunteers often did chores alongside them ("chores" does have negative connotations, harkening parental overlord, so maybe they should reframe it) so it didn't seem like punishment plus they got some counseling/support at the same time. In addition, there is more going on at DV shelters than getting counseling and processing the experience-it is short-term and focused as well on life ahead.

It's kind of like depression, which I've dealt with for over 25 years, (and been through the DV thing too, with little support, even from my family) and it is so easy to just give in and pull the covers over your head-which I still do sometimes. But just getting out and doing something, anything can seem overwhelming until it you are experiencing it. Just a walk around the block, or tackling a few dishes, huge accomplishment for me some days, but I feel so much better for it.

[bobbolink]

123. I've been on the receiving end of those things, too, and feel much differently about it.

Maybe its my age... I know myself very well, and know what I need, and an overlord isn't one of them.

[freeplessinseattle]

124. well, that's your perspective and framing n/t

[Vinca]

108. This will probably cause people to need a shelter for a longer period

of time because it will taken them longer to save for a place of their own.

[rucky]

109. It would be more principled if this were just to close budget gaps

[lonestarnot]

110. What bullshit!

[Solly Mack]

111. Damn

K&R

[quaker bill]

112. At some modest point

charging rent is a good thing. 44 percent is excessive. The transitional shelter I volunteer at charges nominal rent, the food, which I help provide, is free. The rent is very low, but enough to make it critical that folks work to keep their jobs, or find another. There is some leniency if folks run into trouble through no fault of their own, and some of the jobs are in other local shelters, helping with management and operations.

The point of transition shelters is that you get somewhat better accomodations as long as you are working steadily toward being able to get your own place. They also offer substance abuse counseling and job placement assistance, as long as you are clean and sober.

[Rex]

118. Well Lord knows NYC would NEVER ask the rich to kick in a little pocket money.

Much better to pick on the homeless and downtrodden. I swear America loves to hate the poor and working class.

[bobbolink]

120. Very well said. Its called PREJUDICE.

[freeplessinseattle]

122. This is what is even more warped about this!

You just know it was Bloomberg's idea, probably came up with it at a cocktail party.