« Summer Streets Comes Vandy Open House Post Mortem »
June 8, 2009
CB8 Votes Against Re-Opening Homeless Shelter
At a packed meeting on Thursday night, the Housing Committee of Community Board 8 voted unanimously to oppose the re-opening of the closed Peter Young Homeless Shelter. Operated for years in a space at 1138 Pacific Street, the shelter was closed by the City several months ago (and turned into a 24-hour detox center) and was supposed to remain closed to help compensate the community for the city relocating its main homeless intake center to the Bedford-Atlantic Armory right across the street; the city even talked about turning a portion of the Armory into a track and field center at the time. But not only is the sports facility not happening, the city wants to reopen Peter Young. This committee vote must now be ratified by the full Board at its regular June meeting next Thursday, at 7 PM at the Center for Nursing and Rehab, on Classson between Park Place and Prospect Place.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/10060
Comments
I was at the meeting. Peter Young, not part of the DHS system, like the Armory shelter, but a private entity, wants to expand their drug treatment center from a walk-in center to a 75-100 bed live-in center, for both male and female clients. Previously, they had been a shelter, housing about 300 men. They closed that as a condition of the Armory becoming the city's intake center, and still kept the walk-in drug treatment center. When the armory center had a fire, earlier this year, they re-opened to accommodate the armory population. After the damage was fixed at the Armory, they wound down and emptied out the shelter population again. Now they want to get out of the shelter business, and have this live-in treatment center.
Their representative gave an impassioned presentation at CB8's meeting, insisting that they were different from the Armory people, they weren't running a shelter, and if fact, they opposed the Armory shelter, because the rampant drug dealing going on there was detrimental to their clients' recovery. She started to get rather testy when community people lumped both facilities together. She also insisted that the majority of her clients came from the 11216 zip code, and we should accept them, because they were allowing recovering people to stay in the neighborhood.
Well, the audience wasn't having it, neither was the Land Use Committee. Most people are just tired. The Armory is literally across the street from this photo, about where the text is. There is another treatment facility a block away, not to mention several more social service agencies with live-in or transient patient populations within a 10 block radius. Peter Young may well be doing a great job, but enough is enough. Rumor has it the city is starting to go ahead with alterations inside the Armory, to transform it to the intake center, as if community protests and concerns did not exist. That fight has just begun, but if we can stop anything else from establishing itself in our neighborhood, we will. We have 6 times more social service facilities than any other neighborhood in Brooklyn. This isn't about us not wanting to help people, it's about fair share.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at June 8, 2009 11:29 AM
In all fairness- she spoke really well and faced a pretty hostile crowd. It was understandable that she got a little upset- most people there really didn't want to hear her out and did lump her facility with the Armory which is a totally different animal. I thought for the most part she spoke well and did her best to convince listeners- but that was her job. Peter Young is a treatment facility, and is now run by Oasis which offers many good programs.
The real issue is as MM says- we have 6 times more social service facilities than any other neighborhood and we are not going to be Bloomberg's dumping ground for every problem he wants to sweep under the rug.
So there are a number of questions that remain- will Peter Young do an end run around the community and open the live-in facility anyway? That's a real possibility considering Bloomberg. And the people they treat are already in the neighborhood or coming in for treatment- I have a suspicion that point will be used by Bloomberg as well.
The sad thing is that their treatment program is far superior to anything the Armory will provide and in fact the Armory intake center will most likely discourage the homeless from even seeking help because of the location and difficulty i getting to the Armory. Bloomberg expects even homeless people in the Bronx, Queens and presumably Staten Island to come here- hows that for a truly imbecilic plan?
Crown Heights and Bed-Stuy should not have to take responsibility for the entire city. And we won't. Tie for other neighborhoods to do their fair share. Like MM said- enough is enough.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 8, 2009 12:10 PM
Thanks for the update Montrose. Very helpful.
As a resident of Crown Heights and a community worker in Bed Stuy, I've been speaking with CHRM about how to mobilize Bed Stuy against this as well.
Of course - Crown Heights is grossly disproportionate in the number of social service beds that we house - but Bed Stuy is also saturated beyond its fair share.
And, I will keep saying this, the closest train stops to the armory are in Bedford Stuyvesant. Smack in the middle of the new business improvement district, at that. Bed-Stuy will be the first stop for the tens of thousands of homeless men from around the five boroughs.
The irony is that the mayor was lauded for his role in bringing the BID to Bed-Stuy. Now, if he allows for the intake center, he (and any of the other Bed Stuy leaders who are not actively trumpeting against this) will be complicit in its undoing.
One step forward. Two steps back for Bed-Stuy.
Posted by: Wont UB My Nabor at June 8, 2009 12:19 PM
There was a press conference yesterday that was embarrassingly sparse. If people really want to stop this they are going to have to step up and show support. Not to mention The ever-absent Al Vann -who not only didn't show up, but didn't even send a rep. He's going to lose a lot of votes over this.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 8, 2009 12:41 PM
Bxgl:
My experience with these matters is that the city and the sponsors of the facility will do an end run around the community residents.
Also, Al Vann is not ever absent. Did you miss him at the Housing and Land Use meeting on Thursday?
Posted by: BrooklynIsHome at June 8, 2009 12:50 PM
Right, BrooklynIsHome. Al showed up after the entire topic of the Peter Young facility was over. When no one made a big deal out of his presence, he was gone.
Nabor, you are correct on all points. The Armory is on the CH/BS border, and both communities need to come together and form a united front on this. Both communities have come so far in the last 10 years, and instead of either acting like we are powerless, or acting as if we deserve whatever crap falls on us, we need to step up and make our voices heard. I'm hoping that will start to happen in a major way soon, or it will be too late.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at June 8, 2009 1:13 PM
I'm sorry to hear that the rally yesterday was poorly attended. I had my sign ready to go, but I had to change plans because my daughter was sick. As far as Al Vann's presence at Thursday's meeting is concerned, he was only there for five minutes and didn't contribute anything -- unless I blinked and missed it.
Connie Brown did her best to try and disassociate her facility from the armory, but she could have done flips and it would not have changed the audience's views regarding Peter Young. I agree that they have a great program, but we just cannot house them all.
Is anyone attending the Community Affairs meeting tonight?
Posted by: faithful at June 8, 2009 1:18 PM
No, Brooklynishome- I did see him for all of the hot minute he showed after the discussion. He might as well have been absent for all the good he did.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 8, 2009 1:20 PM
I think the points about the impact to Bed-stuy are dead on. I'd also encourage people to go to Google maps and locate the corner of Franklin and Pacific - the closest corner to Peter Young Facility and the Southwest corner of the Armory, and a popular hangout for their residents. Checkout where it sits in Brooklyn. The Armory is four blocks away from Vanderbilt Avenue in Prospect Heights. It is only a little bit further to the heart of Clinton Hill. This gets discussed as a Crown Heights problem, but the folks on Utica and Troy are much further away from this facility than the people on Washington and Carlton.
There seem to be a number of competing theories about how homeless men will respond to the relocation of the intake center. Many, including the Manhattan Borough President and many of the homeless advocacy organizations, claim that homeless men will simply remain on the streets of Manhattan, and will thus be forced to forego shelter and services. Others, including many in Crown Heights and increasingly other nearby neighborhoods, are concerned that homeless men will permanently relocate to brooklyn, and because their services are located in Manhattan, will be increasingly untreated and in greater states of crisis. Then there are those who suspect that the whole plan is part of a mayoral initiative to simply drive homeless people out of New York City by making resources so slim and hard to access. I suspect we will see some mix of the above, though I don't expect many homeless to leave (where else can they go?) and expect that any that do will be replaced by the newly homeless, courtesy of the economy. I sincerely hope that the unspoken policy of our mayor is not to drive the homeless from our City. New York should be better than that.
Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 2:09 PM
quote:
Then there are those who suspect that the whole plan is part of a mayoral initiative to simply drive homeless people out of New York City by making resources so slim and hard to access.
ding ding ding ding ding! we have a winner!. they will be led out systemically via things like this to areas upstate like Troy and Schenectity, poughkeepsie. believe me, that has been the plan all along, i dont even have to use the psychic side of my brain to realize that.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at June 8, 2009 2:49 PM
Actually I think its more cynical than that. Knowing Bloomberg is all about the bottom line, my belief is that he is hoping fewer and fewer homeless access city services.
I'm sure he'd like them to leave but I think he cares more on how much money he thinks the city will save. To relocate would take a lot of money- there's no way any other city will deal with our homeless when I'm sure they have plenty of their own. I really believe he cares nothing about anything besides Manhattan and his disneyfied concept of how he thinks it should be.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 8, 2009 3:15 PM
It takes nerve for you to accuse bloomberg of not caring when you and your neighbors are bending over backwards to keep the homeless out of your community. if you want to see someone who doens't care and who care only about money (i.e. your property values), look in the mirror. In the end, this will all be moot, because your opposition is far too weak to stop this.
Posted by: Big Jugs at June 8, 2009 6:49 PM
"It takes nerve for you to accuse bloomberg of not caring when you and your neighbors are bending over backwards to keep the homeless out of your community. if you want to see someone who doens't care and who care only about money (i.e. your property values), look in the mirror. In the end, this will all be moot, because your opposition is far too weak to stop this."
The What throws Big Jugs a box of Skittles!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at June 8, 2009 7:34 PM
What's up Big Jugs!
You never answered me on the Armory thread the other day, and that made me feel bad! So, like I asked, do you think this is a good plan for the homeless or for Crown Heights North (my neighborhood)? Or do you just not care? I'm really curious. If you have an argument for this policy, I'd like to hear it. Most of us in this community are not arguing that all homeless services be removed from our neighborhood - just that we have a more reasonable amount. I think a lot of us would be fine with doing more than our fair share. But we already have 6X the boro average BEFORE the intake center. What part of this don't you get? Send me a separate email and I'll explain it more to you if you are still having trouble (I don't want to make everybody suffer through the somewhat simple explanation again).
Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 8:01 PM
Also, for the record, I'm not really concerned about my property value, since I don't plan to move for a while. I also don't really consider the homeless men hanging around B-A to really present that much danger (but many of my neighbors do). My main problem with it is that concentrating so many people with so many problems in such a small area totally changes the feel of the neighborhood. More trash on the street, more men pissing between cars, harassing women, publicly drinking and generally posing a nuisance in a dozen ways. This is a residential neighborhood full of families. We should do our part and shoulder a reasonable amount of these services in this neighborhood, but we shouldn't absorb it for the whole city.
I'd have a harder time opposing this plan if it wasn't so obviously (except to Big Jugs!) such a bad policy for the homeless. Does it make sense to concentrate homeless men in an area far away from any jobs, where drugs can still be purchased on the corner and gangs are visibly active? Is this the kind of environment that is going to help them get their lives on track. Hey BJ - why do you think the Partnership for the Homeless and Picture the homeless are against the plan and suing the City? Because they want to prop up my property values?
Just curious Big Jugs - where do you work? Feel free to be vague, but I'm really curious about where you are coming from. Thanks.
Posted by: Dr Dean Franklin at June 8, 2009 8:13 PM
Dr. Dean Franklin- actually big jugs just doesn't want the homeless in his neighborhood so he feigns a little righteous indignation because he would never put his money where his mouth is and live next to a shelter, residence or halfway house (but honestly- what can one expect from a person who calls himself "big jugs?")
Posted by: bxgrl at June 8, 2009 8:35 PM
Big Jugs never really answers questions after making his grand pronouncements, and never clarifies his position, so don't expect him to do it now.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at June 9, 2009 11:00 AM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Le Barricou
added November 20, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Der Schwarze Kölner
added November 19, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Oak Wine Bar & Café
added November 18, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Mr. Wonton
added November 17, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Casa Rosa
added November 16, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Cousin John's Café & Bakery
added November 13, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Elote
added November 12, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Miracle Grill
added November 11, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Phoebe's Cafe
added November 10, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Ruthie's
added November 9, 2009 12:00 PM in Clinton Hill, Downtown Brooklyn
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.