Friday, February 22, 2019

Food Task Force Mtg 1

By Sarah Owens and Michael Livingston



Food Task Force web page
The atmosphere was generally positive at first meeting of the Food and Sundries Distribution to the Homeless Community Task Force (FSDHCTF, or Food Task Force). The meeting started on time, there were sandwiches and only a couple of people missing (no SEMCA rep, Murray G. was absent, and Sheri Wahrgren sat in for Kristin Retherford).  Ashley Hamilton represented the Mid Willamette Valley Community Action Agency (MWVCAA).

The task force was formed in January after the City put the area under the Marion Street Bridge off limits to groups serving daily meals there.  See "Meals Under Bridge on Shutdown."

The task force's assignment is to answer three questions over three or four meetings:

Q1. What community needs are being addressed by the distributions (What are we trying to achieve?)

Q2. What are the negative impacts to the park property, park users and rights-of-way? (What are the impacts?)

Q3. What solutions are recommended to address these impacts? (What are the solutions?)

Its ultimate goal is to present a staff report with recommendations to the City Council at its March 25 meeting and, thereafter, to implement any decision without undue delay.

After introductions, Mark Becktel gave a brief overview of the legal terrain.  The main problem with the City's view is that, while the Public Works Director has authority under SRC 94.200(d) "to regulate the activities in park areas when necessary to prevent congestion and to procure the maximum use and safety for the convenience of all", there is no provision in the code that requires a City permit for benevolent meal distribution.

Although City staff have repeatedly cited to SRC 94.200(c) as requiring such a permit, that section provides only that a "park or a portion thereof, may be reserved for organized or group activities."  So, it doesn't apply to an individual or group intending to engage in a regulatable activity, but not wishing to reserve space.  Therefore, if the City wishes to impose a permitting process for food distributions that don't involve space reservations, the City code will need to be amended. 

Perhaps one reason that there is no provision in the code requiring a City permit for benevolent meal distributions that don't involve space reservations is that regulating food distributions is a county health department function.  Oregon Food Sanitation Rules (OAR 333-150-0000 Section 3-201.11 (L))  are administered by the  Marion County Environmental Health Department.  Those rules require anyone wishing to set up a benevolent meal site (e.g., serve a meal or meals to the homeless community) to obtain a temporary restaurant license.  There is a fee involved.

Fee structure listed on Temporary Restaurant Permit Application
  
Back in 2003, when Dan Sheets and friends started serving meals to the homeless community inside the SonRise Church when it was located at the Marion Car Rental and Park, Marion County was inspecting the kitchen.  Their involvement ceased when the meals moved outside, sometime after 2011.  Oddly, it seems to us, the City has not asked the County to participate in the task force proceedings.  If uncorrected, this is a missed opportunity to expand existing opportunities for collaboration between the City and County (e.g., LEAD and CORT). 

Meal at SonRise Church in the Marion Car Rental & Park, 2011
Following the legal terrain overview, the task force was informed that staff had been unable to identify another city with a program that Salem might follow.  With that, they were then asked to answer Q1 and identify "what success factors will guide our discussions?"

As each person was asked to speak to Q1, themes emerged about the need for oversight, accountability, safety, accessibility and environmental controls.

Each person was then asked to add to the City's four "success factors":

SF1. Food distribution is allowed in Salem parks and rights-of-way.

SF2. Long-term, sustainable ways to significantly minimize the impacts are implemented.

SF3. The program is monitored and enforced.

SF4. Private property sites are considered.

Emerging themes included the need for clear, City-wide communication of expectations and all that goes along with that (e.g., web page, single POC) and a plan for short-medium-long term goals (e.g., plan to move meals back inside as soon as practicable).

Judging by some of the comments by members of the public at the end of the meeting (Dan Sheets, Kevin and Athena Gray, Kevin Spade, Randy Kelley, Michael Livingston), the next meeting should include a very clear and explicit statement by the City that, when the Public Works Director says, "It is not the intent of this task force to allow, or find ways to allow, distributions in areas posted for no trespassing", it means the area under the bridges is off limits for food distributions, period, not negotiable.  Otherwise, the issue is just going to keep coming up.

At its next meeting on February 28, the task force will identify the negative impacts on the parks and rights-of-way and begin the discussion on possible solutions (recommendations).  The third meeting on March 7 will finish the solutions discussion and attempt to prioritize them for incorporation into a draft policy outline.

Finally, from random comments during and after the meeting, we heard that since meal distribution moved from under the bridge over to the parking lot of 615 Commercial Street NE (aka, the ARCHES building), the frequency of meals had fallen from seven to two or three times a week, and that  youthful bicyclists and skaters had returned to the area.

No comments:

Post a Comment