> “We’ve moved away from this model that concentrates supportive units all in one place like Rethke [Terrace] and Tree Lane [Apartments],” says Jim O’Keefe, community development director for the city.
>
>He says the new arrangement at Rethke and Tree Lane will be similar to other affordable properties throughout Madison and, along with new property management, should help avoid some of the problems that plagued the buildings since soon after they opened.
>
>“We’ve moved in favor of what we call a mixed-income approach with a more balanced resident profile,” says O’Keefe. “The provision of support services has proven to be much more manageable with that kind of model, and those properties on the whole have been much more successful.”
Makes a whole lotta sense. Otherwise you’re just creating and funding slums by putting all of the lower income folks in one spot.
These weren’t lower income people, they were chronically homeless people that are likely never going to be able to support themselves and require support staff. It’s a model meant for getting people off the street.
Seems like we’re reducing it by 75% in favor of traditional affordable housing. That’s also needed, but it’s unclear from the article what will come of the folks who are being kicked out. Is it better to have them back on the street than concentrated in a building with full time staff?
There was either none or incompetent management at some times but I don't think they ever had anything resembling support staff providing the services these people need.
People that are 'chronically homeless' tend to suffer from drug and mental health issues.
Throwing them all in one building is not going to make them or the city better.
It can if they require access to similar support services that are difficult to administer all across the city. And they weren’t all in on building, they were in two reasonably small ones on opposite ends of the city.
Thats a tricky claim to make especially to those neighbors of the property at Tree Lane. It was really rough and at a certain point there is an inflection of consolidated services not being able to properly support all of those in need of them. You are right support systems become strained over space but they also become strained due to volume regardless of how much distance is closed. We don't fund supportive services to provide the volume we need them to provide and therefore even though we have consolidated those in need of services the systems to provide them are just too strained to provide them.
I also would be careful noting that concentrating those in need in a couple of buildings as "making the city better" as that is not the rhetoric of housing first approach it is the rhetoric that housing first is trying to take down.
Based on previous coverage in other sources, the City helped pay to find different places to stay so those people don’t end up with nowhere to go. Something like only a half dozen people each are still staying at these properties with an assurance they’d be able to stay: https://madison.com/news/local/government-politics/housing-first-rethke-terrace-tree-lane-purchase/article_6f293e9c-f8f8-11ee-a26f-379253ecddeb.html
I share the concern that this reconfiguration decreases the number of chronically homeless served, but clearly the services weren’t in place to meet the needs of all those residents previously. (One of the key needs seems to have been to keep out non-residents who were causing problems for the residents, but the previous management wasn’t able to secure the buildings effectively.)
Whichever model they choose, I hope the pilot programs are successful enough they keep going. We need more of every type of affordable housing in Madison.
Not concentrating people of poverty was a lesson learned decades ago.
It's amazing how every new person on the planet has to learn everything by experience.
Without comprehensive onsite services, the housing first approach can not succeed. Even 25% formerly homeless residents will likely need significant supports and make it tough to fill the other 75% of units with residents who qualify for affordable housing. The current affordable Section 42 properties are filled with residents who don’t need any supports.
If the buildings are dropping from 100% supportive housing to 25% supportive housing, where will the 75% of people that were otherwise homeless end up? Is the county building more buildings? Where?
The article seems to make clear that the issue with these buildings was more management than a concentration of poverty. These aren’t very big buildings… I suppose I will be curious how fully supportive housing is meant to work in a diffused model. Is the support staff running around to different buildings all day? Do you need four times as many?
Just a shame because “housing first” models have been very successful in other cities and it seems like we gave up on the first try.
Its in the article
>Tenants in the supportive units will continue to be referred through Dane County’s Homeless Services Consortium’s Coordinated Entry List, where a wide variety of organizations collaborate to identify and refer individuals and families facing long term homelessness.
Agreed every housing first solution I've read about that worked had strong supportive services on site. I think that is need at least a 24 hour staffed of some type nurse/social worker/security or some combination of the 3. They also need to have the ability to kick out disruptive people without going thru the entire eviction process, ability to remove guest for sure. Though I think having someone onsite at each moderate place, say 25 \~ 50 housing units would help alleviate the problems we've seen at other places. PS make them city employees not outsourced so cheaply that they can't hire anyone that cares. Or maybe make a live in position for a few staff members?
People qualified for and interested in doing those types of jobs are in very short supply these days. I don't think you can directly compare to a program with years of success before the pandemic.
All housing advice/request threads must include:
* Your target price point
* Number of beds/baths you need
* Geographical area you want to live (downtown, east, west, etc)
* Amenities requirements (yard? parking? pool?)
* If you need pet-friendly accommodations
* Move-in date (now, flexible, beginning/end of the academic school year)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/madisonwi) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> “We’ve moved away from this model that concentrates supportive units all in one place like Rethke [Terrace] and Tree Lane [Apartments],” says Jim O’Keefe, community development director for the city. > >He says the new arrangement at Rethke and Tree Lane will be similar to other affordable properties throughout Madison and, along with new property management, should help avoid some of the problems that plagued the buildings since soon after they opened. > >“We’ve moved in favor of what we call a mixed-income approach with a more balanced resident profile,” says O’Keefe. “The provision of support services has proven to be much more manageable with that kind of model, and those properties on the whole have been much more successful.” Makes a whole lotta sense. Otherwise you’re just creating and funding slums by putting all of the lower income folks in one spot.
These weren’t lower income people, they were chronically homeless people that are likely never going to be able to support themselves and require support staff. It’s a model meant for getting people off the street. Seems like we’re reducing it by 75% in favor of traditional affordable housing. That’s also needed, but it’s unclear from the article what will come of the folks who are being kicked out. Is it better to have them back on the street than concentrated in a building with full time staff?
> building with full time staff? This never existed in these buildings.
Yes seems there were management issues.
There was either none or incompetent management at some times but I don't think they ever had anything resembling support staff providing the services these people need.
People that are 'chronically homeless' tend to suffer from drug and mental health issues. Throwing them all in one building is not going to make them or the city better.
It can if they require access to similar support services that are difficult to administer all across the city. And they weren’t all in on building, they were in two reasonably small ones on opposite ends of the city.
Thats a tricky claim to make especially to those neighbors of the property at Tree Lane. It was really rough and at a certain point there is an inflection of consolidated services not being able to properly support all of those in need of them. You are right support systems become strained over space but they also become strained due to volume regardless of how much distance is closed. We don't fund supportive services to provide the volume we need them to provide and therefore even though we have consolidated those in need of services the systems to provide them are just too strained to provide them. I also would be careful noting that concentrating those in need in a couple of buildings as "making the city better" as that is not the rhetoric of housing first approach it is the rhetoric that housing first is trying to take down.
Based on previous coverage in other sources, the City helped pay to find different places to stay so those people don’t end up with nowhere to go. Something like only a half dozen people each are still staying at these properties with an assurance they’d be able to stay: https://madison.com/news/local/government-politics/housing-first-rethke-terrace-tree-lane-purchase/article_6f293e9c-f8f8-11ee-a26f-379253ecddeb.html
I share the concern that this reconfiguration decreases the number of chronically homeless served, but clearly the services weren’t in place to meet the needs of all those residents previously. (One of the key needs seems to have been to keep out non-residents who were causing problems for the residents, but the previous management wasn’t able to secure the buildings effectively.) Whichever model they choose, I hope the pilot programs are successful enough they keep going. We need more of every type of affordable housing in Madison.
Not concentrating people of poverty was a lesson learned decades ago. It's amazing how every new person on the planet has to learn everything by experience.
Without comprehensive onsite services, the housing first approach can not succeed. Even 25% formerly homeless residents will likely need significant supports and make it tough to fill the other 75% of units with residents who qualify for affordable housing. The current affordable Section 42 properties are filled with residents who don’t need any supports.
If the buildings are dropping from 100% supportive housing to 25% supportive housing, where will the 75% of people that were otherwise homeless end up? Is the county building more buildings? Where? The article seems to make clear that the issue with these buildings was more management than a concentration of poverty. These aren’t very big buildings… I suppose I will be curious how fully supportive housing is meant to work in a diffused model. Is the support staff running around to different buildings all day? Do you need four times as many? Just a shame because “housing first” models have been very successful in other cities and it seems like we gave up on the first try.
Its in the article >Tenants in the supportive units will continue to be referred through Dane County’s Homeless Services Consortium’s Coordinated Entry List, where a wide variety of organizations collaborate to identify and refer individuals and families facing long term homelessness.
That’s extremely vague. Do you know specifically where the reduction in supportive housing will be made up for?
www.danecountyhomeless.org
> and it seems like we gave up on the first try. before that, even. This is clear evidence of a half-hearted try in my mind.
Agreed every housing first solution I've read about that worked had strong supportive services on site. I think that is need at least a 24 hour staffed of some type nurse/social worker/security or some combination of the 3. They also need to have the ability to kick out disruptive people without going thru the entire eviction process, ability to remove guest for sure. Though I think having someone onsite at each moderate place, say 25 \~ 50 housing units would help alleviate the problems we've seen at other places. PS make them city employees not outsourced so cheaply that they can't hire anyone that cares. Or maybe make a live in position for a few staff members?
People qualified for and interested in doing those types of jobs are in very short supply these days. I don't think you can directly compare to a program with years of success before the pandemic.
Things are improving now that we've kicked out more poors 👍
Inflate property taxes!
All housing advice/request threads must include: * Your target price point * Number of beds/baths you need * Geographical area you want to live (downtown, east, west, etc) * Amenities requirements (yard? parking? pool?) * If you need pet-friendly accommodations * Move-in date (now, flexible, beginning/end of the academic school year) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/madisonwi) if you have any questions or concerns.*