|Courtesy Olive Grove|
The first set of recommendations (10, if numbered consecutively), adopted in September and discussed here, showed up again last month in Karen Ray's list of 10 approved, and 20 pending (P) recommendations. Some of those 20 pending (P) recommendations have come forward in the second set of recommendations (11 through 22, if numbered consecutively, as shown here), and will likely be adopted at the December meeting. The second set also contains several new recommendations (highlighted here).
The pending (P) recommendations highlighted below have not yet been brought forward (and might not be). Note that leadership has elected not to include the recommendations of either the Polk County's Veterans committee or CANDO ("Favoring a systematic response to homelessness").
Task Force Recommendations
Will be completed/moot by the Task Force's last meeting
Community engagement/outreach (5).
Self-executing (requires no TF action)
"Endorse" the local LEAD effort (2, P11).
"Support" Salem's non-existent anti-panhandling programs (P10 and P12).
"Endorse" the local CCO's efforts to get more people into supported housing (3).
"Support" MWIC's affordable housing projects (P1 and 19).
"Endorse" MCREI's transitional housing project (P3 and 19).
"Endorse" [Westcare] veteran housing project (P4 and 19).
"Support" any and all DV and family housing projects (P5 and 20, 21)
"Endorse" UGM's relocation/expansion plan (P6 and 19)
"Support" PHA DV and homeless preferences (P7 and 21).
"Support" Dream Ctr, HOME expansion & similar neighborhood-based services (P14, 18).
"Support" SKATS' travel training program (P16).
"Endorse" Salem/Keizer's implementation of the HNA (11, 12, 13, 15).
"Support" YHDP grant to expand RHY services (1, P13 and 18, 19).
"Develop" landlord assessment tool (4).
"Determine" desirability of "temporary support-coordinated camping" program (P9c and 22c).
Inventory land/buildings suitable for housing, change zoning as needed (P8, P9d, 14, 22d).
Explore CDL as "regional tool" (P18) and adopt statewide resource network (P19).
Create "Development Team" to implement plan (P9 and 22).
for coordinating and facilitating grant applications (6, P9b and 16, 22b).
for more money from the state housing agency (7).
for a home-buyer tax credit (10).
for DV/homeless preference in new housing (P2 and 21).
for greater HMIS coverage and a plan to secede from ROCC (P9a and P20, 22a).
for collaboration between providers and WorkSource Oregon (P15).
for policy changes in SK 24J (P17 and 17).
expanding finlit training in schools (8).
bringing finlit classes to the poor (vs. making them go to a class somewhere) (7).
Stripped of excess verbiage, the plan can be seen for what it is: a perfect reproduction of the values of the provider community it comes from, namely Marion County -- siloed, uncoordinated, unsystematic, concerned with turf, and content to base decisions on anecdote and personal world views, rather than data. That's why, no matter how hard the Task Force tries, this plan will fare no better, and deserves to fare no better, than the 10-Year Plan to End Homelessness, which is only four years old, and sits on the shelf. Recall that Dr. Janet*, who was also on that plan's leadership team, when asked what she'd like to see coming out of the MWHI by the end of the year, replied, "some very solid recommendations" that would put some "meat on the bones" of the 10-Year Plan. Evidently, Dr. Janet was aware her 10-Year Plan needed work. Why, then, was that the last anyone heard about the 10-Year Plan? (Unless it was discussed at one of those secret "agenda-setting" meetings.) The answer: it's rubbish, and everyone knows its rubbish, just like the current plan.
*We apologize for not having observed Dr. Janet's doctorate in preceding blogs. We only just happened to notice yesterday from video footage the "Ph.D." on her name tent. Although we've been to all the meetings, the audience is seated so far away from the Task Force that none of the name tents are legible. We regret the oversight.