Homeless Tiny Home Community

Comments

• Jared

  November 24

  I don't know how any site can be selected. I think this type of vote is going to be so contentious from every neighborhood nearby not wanting a large homeless population built up in their backyard. Ideas like this will create more NIMBYs. I don't really have a better idea but I don't see how this works out well.
• hood

  November 24

  Yeah, with any luck we'll end up selling these things off to the next unfortunate municipality. The only option I wouldn't be up in arms over is the old Barnes St School, I'd just be disappointed. I don't want to see us get into the habit of encroaching on park space for these sorts of services, that would be the beginning of the end for parks as we know them.
  
  imo The best things we can do to reduce homelessness are increase economic opportunity and grow the housing stock, of course coupled with a safety net for the legitimately disabled (including proper mental facilities). I have no interest in helping to house able-bodied and sound-minded adults. I tend to think that the local homeless problem is overblown, I'd be surprised if our metro is producing more homeless than our existing programs can handle, I'd really like to know how many are from out of the area.
• david_shane

  November 24

  How are the homeless generally treated by local authorities, by the way? What I mean is, a couple of weeks ago, I was catching a bus around 8:00 AM by the Five Guys in EL, and noticed a guy sleeping in the "ATM Vestibule" of the Chase Bank right there, where I assume it was much warmer than it was outside that morning. Bank opened at 9:00, I called them at 9:30 just to make sure they were aware this was happening. "Oh yes, thank you, we had... authorities here this morning."
  
  But what actually happens to such a person? The police show up. "Buddy, you aren't allowed to be there." OK... and then what? He gets arrested for trespassing? He's just ordered to leave the property, as a pamphlet with information about local services is pushed into his hand, and that's the end of it? What actually happens?
• gbdinlansing

  November 25

  As an alumnus of Barnes Avenue School, I think the idea of this project there is just stupid. That is one of the most stable and fully populated neighborhoods in the whole city. There are huge swaths of former industrial land, that are near bus routes and stores etc. that could be converted into a tiny house community. The former REO site comes to mind if it has to be in the central city. I have homeless people in my backyard [Albert Ave, and the alley], I have to make a decision every day to offer some help and sympathy, or to turn away and walk on by. The guy who cussed me out the other day, Alex is his name he always wears a towel over his head, was out there by the Target the next night, he asked me for help, I said I had no cash on me, he says I don't need money I need help. I had to say I'm sorry I don't have any help to offer. This stuck with me for a long time; I felt guilty in a liberal/Christian way having to turn my back on someone asking for help. I don't know where they come from or where they go at night, I am so blessed that I have a roof over my head, but I think it would be a terrible idea to bring this burden to a nice little neighborhood. I think that it may be true that we already have enough resources to house our community's number of homeless, there are very many reasons a person might chose not to take advantage of those resources and stay outside, I guess it should a priority to find methods of getting everyone off the street, and have people feel that they are safe to except help.
• hood

  November 27

  There is really no way for city officials to get out of this without looking bad and people being angry, buying these was a bad move. If they do get used, people near the chosen location will be very angry and some portion of residents in general will be displeased. If they sell the pods off then another contingent of bleeding-heart types will be up in arms about not doing enough for the homeless.
  
  This seems relevant: https://www.wlns.com/news/holy-cross-services-dramatically-changing-homeless-services-in-lansing/
  I don't know what kind of effect this is going to have moving forward.
• gbdinlansing

  November 28

  I wonder why it is so difficult to find a place to start a tiny home community when we indeed have large open spaces not very near any other community, other than the city wants to again do something half-assed and on the cheap. I think that the number of tiny houses could be times ten. Maybe it might be good to imagine a community that gives people a chance to become people that other communities would welcome rather than fear. If they had a home, they are no longer homeless. Imagine that if people had a home they would spend most of their time in their home not out on the street or in our parks. It is kind of unfair to put this burden of fear whether justified or not, to place this kind of transitional community right in the middle of a neighborhood, but I think there are real solutions to this issue.
• hood

  November 28

  Obviously we could just buy some land, build some form of housing and allow people to stay there for free, but that all side steps the most important issue: Who pays for it? Maybe I'd like to sell my house and live in a tiny home community on the taxpayer's dime. The "solution" is ensuring that there's ample opportunity for those willing and able to take care of themselves, institutions for the mentally ill, and some sort of safety net for the severely disabled.... Then once you have those issues largely covered (we're really not that far off, the 'opportunity' bit is where we lag the most) you can crack down on the kind of behavior that we all complain about with a clean conscience. Society doesn't owe drug addicts or simply lazy people anything, those that do contribute to society deserve safe, clean and comfortable communities. You will get more of whatever behavior you incentivize.
• gbdinlansing

  9:36AM

  Well, I think we have covered this issue pretty well, I believe that "drug addicts" are mostly people who need medical and mental help, if it was one of your family members who is addicted to drugs would you rather see that person get some help, die or go to jail? Many people become homeless due to circumstances beyond their control, not by being lazy, it is those people that a "tiny house" community could help. If someone were to decide to sell their house in hopes of moving into "free" housing, that person would have assets above the level that would allow them to live in a subsidized housing. No offence intended but I would rather live in a society that believes it does owe everyone at least a chance at a good life and an education from parents and schools that includes how to be a good member of the "commonwealth". When I encounter those annoying group of guys who come to downtown EL most days of course I don't like being cussed at or threatened, but their presence in my backyard also makes me feel a little sympathy for them and disappointment that our society has come to the point where we have the poor, mentally ill people on the street outside our door.
• hood

  12:10PM

  Well I'm also not trying to offend, I did try to offer the "agree to disagree" line on the subject, but I feel a compulsive to need to counter what I consider to be a destructive belief system when I encounter it. I'm trying to push you towards either understanding more of the picture and/or shifting your mental energy towards finding real sustainable solutions to an issue you obviously care about that aren't destructive to the rest of society. Your opinion is the majority one, which is why the problem continues to get worse and why I feel the need to counter.
  
  I get wanting to help and wishing everything could somehow be better via simply wanting it to be so. Wouldn't it be nice? That's not how the world works, there's cause and effect. If you give away a ton of resources and make it easier to be a non-contributor to society you will only get more people behaving like that because, like all animals, people follow incentives. Like giving a dog a treat for pissing on your carpet. *This is the fundamental point here.*
  
  Regarding having too much assets to receive assistance: There's no system that tracks people's assets, there's no way to know what someone owns or how much is in a particular bank account unless an individual discloses it. Same with income, unless your with the IRS or its state equivalent... So how do you propose screening your prospective beneficiaries to prevent my hypothetical? Why does it even matter if it's just about helping people? You mean I have to get way poorer and completely grenade my life before I'm worthy of help? (sounds a lot like what people have had to actually do to keep government benefits, huh?)
  
  Regarding the "if it was your family/friend" trope: I grew up in Lansing and graduated from its public schools, I still live near downtown on a street where homeless are a *constant* presence. I hung out with the kind of kids who are part of the crime problem and very nearly became one of them. I have friends and family (one close friend, other schoolmates/acquaintances, multiple cousins, and at least on uncle) who have been (some still probably are) homeless and/or fully dysfunctional drug addicts. Once people get past a certain point the only thing I've seen help them is hitting rock bottom. You can't be an enabler. This isn't some foreign problem to me, these policies you support as a feel-good measure, an effort to do what seems "right", have destroyed generations of people and many communities. Even without my personal backstory my opinion would still be every bit as valid, but my history makes me largely impervious to the guilt-tripping.
  
  I'm sorry to rant, but I'm past the point of allowing this ideological disease to fester unchallenged for the sake of kindness and conflict-avoidance. If you want to fix things you have to come with real solutions, not some feeling that we're all obligated to "help" in some nebulous way that ignores the cause-and-effects of reality.
  
  Please, PLEASE, remember: What you see around you: this technological, peaceful and incredibly prosperous society.... Is not permanent or invulnerable. It's actually incredibly delicate, far more so than the pre-industrial world that people persisted in for thousands of generations. It can be easily destroyed yet would be nearly impossible to rebuild. The system was brought to its knees by a self-imposed partial shutdown of mere weeks. It's DELICATE. If it falls, we'll be right back to the old ways of man. We can't just wish what we want into reality, as I said, there's a cause and effect.