From this morning's News-Gazette By Steve Bauer:
A number of code violations were found by city of Champaign inspectors at the Catholic Worker House annex, seen Tuesday at 314 Cottage Court in Champaign. Notices sent Thursday to representatives of the Worker House listed several safety and building-code violations at the house, 314 S. Randolph St., and the Annex, a building occupied by staff at 314 Cottage Court. In one letter, Zoning Administrator Kevin Phillips cited the illegal use of land by tents for the homeless and orders the practice to be halted by July 17 or face fines of up to $750 per day. Phillips said city zoning in the area allows for emergency shelter for homeless, transitional housing for homeless and multifamily housing. "But all of those must be within a structure," Phillips said. "We have consistently, over the years, not allowed people to live in pitched tents." There have even been instances where city inspectors have found families who hooked up a recreational vehicle parked in a driveway with the intent to stay there all summer. That is also not allowed, he said. A "tent community" for homeless was set up this summer in the backyard of the Catholic Worker House. City officials met June 22 with about two dozen people to discuss the situation and organizers were told that the tent city was illegal.
I couldn't find the article earlier today online, but it appears to be up now. Hopefully they can find some reasonable transition for the folks who need assistance/shelter. From the sounds of it the folks running the current site are working on that, though the gov't seems to be taking a "not our problem" approach to it all:
Hopefully something can be arranged otherwise the situation just becomes worse than before as those arguing in favor of the tent community warned with the potential of closure. The number of code violations they found though seemed pretty substantial if accurate.
--
Glock21 Op/Ed
Something has been arranged. It's called the TIMES Center or the Salvation Army. Yes, you have to follow their rules. Many choose not to. Many live in tent cities all over the place, not just in the backyard of the CWH. Step off the beaten path and you'll find them.
Interesting comment in the IMC site. I didn't realize they had so much available space until I looked at their site. They control fairly large building, I believe an old post office. Could be a good use.
The Tent Community is
Submitted by anonymous on July 9, 2009 - 4:12pm.
The Tent Community is supported by the UCIMC as well it should. They currently are being removed from tents at the Catholic Worker House because of zoning issues. Where could they move that would provide them the dignity and safety that all desire? They currently are pitching tents in a backyard area that is no larger that 900 square feet with no running water and restroom. Who has the desire, motivation and the facility to accommodate this population of 10-15 with the possiblity of more to come. As well, the Gateway displaced an equal number of men, women and children with no place to sustain themselves according to information received from the UCIMC. Solution? Of course. Currently the UCIMC is offering more than 3488 square feet of space in their building with at least 4 restrooms with access to transportation hubs. This space is currently empty and would provide heat, air conditioning and water to a needy group of people. The area could easily house the 10-15 homeless with the ability to provide for even more if they would simply open their doors to them.
As Paul indicates "These people have nothing and all you can offer them is a waiting list?? We have to do better than that."
Why? There is room at the inn, Paul!
Chris Watson wants to know "How can concerned citizens of CU respond to this incident, and more importantly to supporting the Tent Community in its future endeavors?"
Well Chris, that is easy. Open your UCIMC doors, right now, for them. Put your words to action and open the door for this population before it is too late.
"There are institutions, collectives, special interest groups, and individuals working on the housing issue in Champaign, whose involvement and assistance would make a difference to the vitality of the tent community." Yes there are kbishop, and what is the UCIMC doing except providing the example for the rest of the community.
What should I be doing that you will not. Isn't that the question for all of us.
Somehow I don't see UCIMC going for that, though I wouldn't mind being proven wrong. I was wondering about the now defunct Crystal Lake pool house. It wouldn't be right on top of homes or businesses, and if the water was kept running, there would be toilets. sinks, and showers, and potential emergency shelter for storms and tornadoes. The concrete/cinder block construction isn't lovely, but it's designed to be tough. I'd expect that a lot of it could be cleaned with hoses and power washers.
The pool is on a bus line and also reasonable walking distance from downtown Urbana.
Maybe some of these displaced persons can camp at "Prussing's Folly," the large open grass and paved areas on the NW corner of Cunningham and University in Urbana. Restrooms are at McDonalds and Arbys and the laundromat.
Maybe the tent community could set up at Prussing's Campaign Office (aka Prussing's 2nd tax exempt home) after regular office hours.
There's another exchange on the UCIMC website about the suggestion that they open their doors to the homeless: http://www.ucimc.org/content/action-alert-safe-haven-under-attack This makes me think of an Onion-type story: "Activists passionately support the right of homeless people to camp in somebody else's back yard."
Seriously, I understand that the Tent City supporters prefer a site near downtown Champaign, but it might be a good idea if they were also willing to consider other locations that might not be their first choice.
"Seriously, I understand that the Tent City supporters prefer a site near downtown Champaign, but it might be a good idea if they were also willing to consider other locations that might not be their first choice."
Wayward - remember the three most important things in real estate are, 1) location, 2) location and 3) location.
Wayward - remember the three most important things in real estate are, 1) location, 2) location and 3) location.
But the Safe Haven community isn't buying real estate. Like it or not, they aren't in a position to call the shots; the City of Champaign has made it pretty clear that they can't keep staying in the CWH back yard. That's why I suggested looking for other sites.
Funny, the reasons IMC gives for not wanting to house the Safe Haven community is zoning, lack of plumbing and security. Gosh, aren't those the same issues the neighbors and city has with it at its current location?
I thought that the comments by JKing in that thread were quite reasonable. However, it did occur to me that there were some interesting similarities between the reasons UCIMC didn't want homeless people camping out there and the neighbors' objections to Tent City. I don't think that the idea of a tent city is a bad one, but it should be somewhere with access to toilet facilities and running water. Having it located very close to homes or businesses probably wouldn't work, but putting it out in the middle of nowhere wouldn't either. So, any ideas?
How about Homer Lake ??
Hessel Park has space, restrooms, running water, and a sheltered pavilion for safety in inclement weather. It is an open area making for easy surveillance by law enforcement agencies. It is also "dry" by park district ordinance.
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
We have a School of Architecture right here in the community--why not engage one of the studios to design temporary collapsible housing that can be set up wherever land is agreeably available to house people in the circumstances of those residing in the tent housing. Not as a subsitute for the Times Center, but as a short term fill. I have always been puzzeled in the process of problem solving that neither city has done this, in particular when Champaign took down the cardboard tent city that was set up along the west side of the tracks one winter. Many different Schools of Architecture when Katrina occurred designed very clever mobile housing as an "instead of" FEMA trailers that could be assembled and moved within days.
Pattsi Petrie
Hessel Park is also within a mile or so of downtown Champaign, instead of being out in the middle of nowhere. IIRC, there's also a green area north of the Champaign Police station, and I wondered about them pitching their tents there. That's very close to downtown Champaign.
We have a School of Architecture right here in the community--why not engage one of the studios to design temporary collapsible housing that can be set up wherever land is agreeably available to house people in the circumstances of those residing in the tent housing. Not as a subsitute for the Times Center, but as a short term fill. I have always been puzzeled in the process of problem solving that neither city has done this, in particular when Champaign took down the cardboard tent city that was set up along the west side of the tracks one winter. Many different Schools of Architecture when Katrina occurred designed very clever mobile housing as an "instead of" FEMA trailers that could be assembled and moved within days.
That'd be really interesting if someone could find funding for that. I've heard of people finding innovative ways to reuse large storage containers as mobile housing.
In addition, there is now permanent housing that has been constructed of storage containers. Great reuse.
Pattsi Petrie
Hessel Park is also a place where children come to play. This is a use that is not exactly compatible with a community of schizophrenics and drug/alcohol abusers. I'm not intentionally labelling every member of the so-called "tent community" as such, just merely illustrating a possible worse-case scenario. I also really despise the term "tent community" to label these people, because, after all, a fixed label gives them some permanency, and nobody wants that.
Let's face it, these people have no business being on the streets. They are there due to a lack of sufficient mental health treatment and/or a failure on the part of our community to have a designated facility to serve the short term needs of the newly homeless. There are facilities for those willing to jump through the bureaucratic hoops and who have time to wait for beds to open. The dialogue that should be happening now is not where we can site a tent community, but what kind of facility do we need to serve these folks' interim needs and what we can do to establish such a facility. If we have people living on the margins of our society, it's likely because we as a society have failed to integrate them. We need to look at what we're not doing to help provide a solution.
At the same time, we need to distinguish those people who refuse to be integrated. There is no place for those who are homeless by choice. Nor should there be.
Wayward, my comment about "location, location, location" was meant to be tongue-in-cheek. Sorry I didn't make that clear. I agree with you that while the tent city would like to set up where ever they see fit, they are in no position to call the shots.
Keith_Hays, it sure is easy to volunteer parks in Champaign (first Hallobeck in a separate thread, now Hessel) seeing how you live in Monticello, safely out of range of becoming a neighbor to tent city.
Keith_Hays, it sure is easy to volunteer parks in Champaign (first Hallobeck in a separate thread, now Hessel) seeing how you live in Monticello, safely out of range of becoming a neighbor to tent city.
I live in Southwest Champaign - or more specifically across the street from Champaign in an unincorporated area of Champaign Township. I practice law in Monticello.
Do you have a solution for these people? They are people you know.
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
An exchange of ideas whether we agree with each other or not seems most appropriate on the blog. What I do not understand is how personal insults enhance these exchanges. Such insults are appearing more and more often. (To be perfectly clear, I do not know Keith Hays and have never met this individual.)
Pattsi Petrie
Well Patti, you may see personal insults, but my comment was more of a challenge to Mr. Hays. You, me and Mr. Hays all have to play by the rules. No one is allowed to buy, build or rent a home in Champaign without following the zoning ordinances, building permits, city ordinances not to mention the property taxes levied by the local government bodies. Yet, a group of people want to pitch their tents where they want, without regard to the neighboring houses or the laws which govern the land where they have decided to squat. Mr. Hays has posted very righteously that everyone but him is not doing enough to accommodate these people. I stand corrected that he lives in Champaign and commutes to Monticello. May I suggest that he move his practice to Champaign (or his residence to Monticello) and donate the savings from the shortened commute to the homeless? That's not a personal attack. I'm just making suggestions to Keith, just like he wants to offer up my tax supported parks for the homeless to live alongside where our children go to play.
BTW the leader of the tent community is a 22 year old man who is homeless by his own choice. Doesn't sound like a victim of mental health to me. Just sounds like a spoiled brat who doesn't want to grow up, be responsible and get a real job. If he wants to dance to the beat of his own drum, that's fine, but while he is in the city limits, he needs to play by the rules and laws which govern the city. Personally, I think he should stop using the true homeless (those who are homeless, but not by their own choice) to push for acceptance of how he has chosen to live his life.
Clarification--my most recent posting on this thread was caused by the postings of Cousin Vinny.
To Anonymous @ 11:12P--my name is spelled Pattsi, not Patti.
Pattsi Petrie
Pattsi, my apologies for mispelling your name. Thank you for the correction.
Keith, I think we agree that the Hoovervilles were hard times experienced by unfortunate, but otherwise good people. I'm not sure how they apply to a young, able bodied, 22 year old man who is homeless by choice (his declaration, not mine). I would wager a guess that the people in the Hooverville YouTube video you posted were there out of circumstances forced upon them and not by their own choice. If I remember my history lessons correctly, the Hoovervilles disappeared after the economy improved and those who were living there were able to get jobs. The tent city king doesn't want to get a job, doesn't want to live by the rules set forth by our society and chooses to be homeless. That's fine, but that doesn't mean he is allowed to suspend local ordinances while he uses the misfortune of others to live his life the way he chooses. Keith, I truly admire your compassion for those who are truly down on their luck. From what he has said, I don't think the tent city king is one of the unfortunate, can't get a break, down on his luck people.
Mr. Hays, I loved the frame of the man holding the sign that said, "Who will help me get a job? I do not want charity!" Too bad we don't see more of that today. No one's asking, "Brother, can you spare a dime?" They want enough for rent, medical expenses, food, entertainment, educations and retirements without having to pay the actual costs themselves. People have their hands out saying gimme gimme gimme, and they want their neighbors to pay for it, or their children and grandchildren. Both types of greed are despicable.
As for safe haven, if the homeless want to start being contributing members of society, let them use the available means of getting back on their feet. They are ample and easily utilized. If they want to be homeless squatters by choice, let them do it elsewhere.
As for safe haven, if the homeless want to start being contributing members of society, let them use the available means of getting back on their feet. They are ample and easily utilized. If they want to be homeless squatters by choice, let them do it elsewhere.
Are there no Prisons?
Are there no Workhouses?
Are not the poor laws in full operation?
If they would rather die then let them do it and reduce the surplus population!
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
To ManicMondayMomma @ 9:07A--some years ago while teaching a social planning class one of my students made a rather profound comment--"these people that we are discussing, meaning citizens who are homeless or lack enough education to get a job or jobless for whatever reason, etc., after awhile of trying to change their lives no longer have the will and energy to do so. We think it is easy to go to the library and use resources there to find other resources, but think about our will to do so when we have been 'down and out' for months or maybe years. Our social policies are not constructed to move people back up the ladder." What may seem very easy for you and I, may not be so easy for someone who is depressed because the individual has tried, but not successfully to turn around a life.
Pattsi Petrie
Ms Petrie, what makes you think you have any clue where I come from? If you had any idea of my back ground or the people I came from, or what I have been through in my life, this could be a very interesting conversation.
Interestingly, I agree with your student. It IS easy do to those things. People lack the will because they lack the need or dignity anymore. Our social policies of hand outs and entitlements make it so.
To ManicMondayMomma @ 10:09 A--congratulations for whatever you have accomplished. I am always interested in learning how an individual turns a life around and under what type of circumstances because this is very valuable information related to social policy and how to improve thus. Nonetheless, we will just have to agree to disagree concerning present social policy that is basically constructed for failure. This enhances peoples' setbacks.
Pattsi Petrie
Mr. Hays has posted very righteously that everyone but him is not doing enough to accommodate these people.
I have never said that I am "doing enough to accommodate these people". I am not, for if I were there would be no reason for us to discuss Tent City or the need to relieve the homeless, the disparate, and the hopeless. I am just a broken down hack of a lawyer. I don't have the resources to "do enough". I can only add my meager contribution to those of other compassionate people and pray that it will eventually become "enough" in the aggregate. I have no illusion that we will reach the day that there are no people eking out an existence on the streets of Champaign-Urbana. They were sleeping in entryways and shacks along the IC tracks when I was born in Burnham Hospital 71 years ago this month. They will be there on the day that I die; beneath the Washington Street underpass; sheltered from view in an overgrown lot; or squatting in an abandoned house. Driving out Tent City will not make them go away. It will only hide them away.
I'm just making suggestions to Keith, just like he wants to offer up my tax supported parks for the homeless to live alongside where our children go to play.
I sympathize with your concern that they remain out of view and hidden from your children's consciousness. We think to protect our kids from the distasteful realities of life. We, too, don't want to see street people for ourselves. We want to hide them away for if we do not see them we are undisturbed and free to pass by on the other side. I suggested Hallbeck Park in response to a series of comments decrying the existence of the Tent City without offering any solution to the social dislocation of which it is evidence. I suggested Hessel Park in response to a facetious suggestion that the Tent City be relocated to Homer Lake. Those suggestions elicited exactly the response I was expecting. But they made you think, to visualize homeless people pitching their tents there. Those imagined images made you think about the conditions but, unfortunately, they did not lead you and others to imagine solutions to the social dislocation that those images brought to your mind.
That is the challenge that all of us face together in this time of economic decline. Imagining solutions instead of unreasoning reaction to perceived danger is the task to which we should all set ourselves.
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays
Are there no Prisons?
Are there no Workhouses?
Are not the poor laws in full operation?
If they would rather die then let them do it and reduce the surplus population!
Keith, would you be so kind as to point me to where anyone has suggested that these people be imprisoned, put into workhouses, have poor laws applied to them or killed in order to reduce surplus population?
Keith, would you be so kind as to point me to where anyone has suggested that these people be imprisoned, put into workhouses, have poor laws applied to them or killed in order to reduce surplus population?
I think he's quoting Charles Dickens (Ebenzer Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol").
Ohhh, thanks, so it wasn't just mean-spirited hyperbole. My bad.
I think he's quoting Charles Dickens (Ebenzer Scrooge in "A Christmas Carol").
Yes, it was Ebenezer's response to a solicitation for a fund to provide relief to the poor of London...
3 Score + 10
Keith Hays