Homeless are Sheltered for Another Day

After a long City Council meeting on January 12, at which more than 40 members of the public spoke out about the treatment of homeless people in Davis, the Council unanimously voted to reverse its previous course. They rescinded the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Davis Community Church (DCC) until the subcommittee can devise a new version in which the caps on the number of guests at the cold weather shelter merely reflect the fire safety capacity limits at each location (which begs the question, why not just reference the fire limits?).

Long before this issue became public, two neighbors of DCC complained about homeless services on the D Street block and convinced the City Council to take action. The city first assessed an enormous fee on the Interfaith Rotating Winter Shelter (IRWS) for the permit this year, its third year of operation. When IRWS negotiated a reduction in the fee, the city put forth an indemnity agreement to DCC, which the church was advised by lawyers not to sign. Eleven days later, the city attempted to involuntarily down-zone the church’s property. Despite questionable legality, the church decided instead to rebuild goodwill by signing a Memorandum of Understanding with the city. Throughout the negotiation process (in which the neighbors were involved), the church had little to no leverage, and the final version was quite restrictive, not only of the church’s homeless services, but also of the IRWS and Grace in Action, other organizations that utilize the church’s property at times. Most notably, it imposed caps on the number of guests that could be served.

Since then, many previously unanswered questions have been addressed. Fortunately, the data show that crime is significantly less prevalent on that block than other areas of downtown (See the Davis Crime Mapper). In addition, Davis offers only 37 emergency beds, while there are a total of 114 homeless persons, hardly a plethora of services. And 114 homeless people does not seem like much to me in a population of 64,401. Studies show that most homeless people remain in the area where they are from, and there does not seem to be evidence that the IRWS is drawing homeless people from out of town.

Councilwoman Sue Greenwald commented at the January 12 meeting, “I very much hope that we will continue to serve the homeless and do it in a way that is somewhat less centralized.” As for centralization of those services, DCC may not be the correct target. The IRWS serves 25 people each night, and DCC serves bag lunches to about 15 people per day. In contrast, Davis Community Meals (DCM), which is also on the very same block, serves 50-75 people each day! (See “Many hands make light work” in the Davis Enterprise on August 15, 2009). The city of Davis pays $46,000 annually to the Short-Term Emergency Aide Committee and Davis Community Meals for their services, including the provision of 12 emergency beds. The IRWS provides 25 emergency beds on a budget of $4,000, entirely funded by donations.

The MOU was passed on December 1, 2009 because it looked like the right thing at the time. Two council members, who otherwise disagree on everything, presented the Council with a document on which they seemed to have reached a consensus. The church appeared to be endorsing the document as well. Finally, the public was noticeably absent on that night. The MOU simply did not seem to be the divisive document that it was later shown to be, largely because Davis resident and DCC member Emily Henderson took it upon herself to shed light on it. Emily publicized this issue widely and spoke before City Council on multiple occasions about her personal experiences and opinions regarding this issue.

Council chambers were packed with people at the January 12 City Council meeting. This was an emotionally charged full room, and several people made accusations of discrimination toward homeless people. Folks couldn’t help but clap and hoot when a speaker delivered a particularly cutting remark, despite multiple requests to avoid such behavior (kudos to David Greenwald and Don Saylor for emphasizing that point). I met someone outside just after her own three-minute speech, who was already in tears over the emotion of the experience, and the frustration she felt with this situation. Even the Council recognized what was at stake. Councilman Lamar Heystek summarized by saying, “This document seems to have caused more pain [in our community] than would the solutions to any problems that might result from the feeding and sheltering of people at Davis Community Church.”

Heystek went on to say, “I feel really bad about what has happened, and I want to assure everybody in the room…that we all [on the Council] really care and want the best [for Davis].” It was further gratifying to hear Councilmen Souza and Heystek recognize, “[IRWS] provides a service to us, and we don’t pay them for the service, but we might want to consider it.”

So what is the final word from the neighbors who complained so vociferously about DCC’s homeless services and initiated this city-wide debate in the first place? They did not speak on January 12. I am not certain whether anything has been resolved from their perspective. However, one Davis citizen who is currently homeless shared a story about them. He said that he was present several years ago when these neighbors had an issue with homeless people who were sleeping on the DCC property at that time.  This behavior was ended before the IRWS shelter opened, and sleeping on DCC property is no longer tolerated. Was this a bad memory that never got resolved? I can only speculate.

Whatever the cause, these neighbors have done a great service to Davis, and I am personally grateful. I honestly did not know myself how much I cared about this issue until I felt the shelter being threatened and the homeless people being in need. Furthermore, I did not know how many people in Davis feel so strongly about it. It was a wonderful thing to see all those people on January 12. People from all different faith organizations, people representing the IRWS, Grace House, the homeless population, and even the ACLU. This is a community that truly stands up for others in need. The people of Davis have spoken, and I have learned a lot about my community that I did not even know before.