Metro Jacksonville

I'm sure this won't end well...

QuoteFinding ways to help the homeless population is one of the hardest problems any big city faces. However, one South Carolina municipality has found a cheap and easy solution: Out of sight, out of mind.

Under the "Emergency Homeless Response" plan (which can be read in full here), passed last week by the Columbia City Council, homeless-looking citizens in Columbia's 36-block downtown area will be asked by police to move to a shelter on the outskirts of the city. Should the person refuse, the State reports, "they could be arrested under a range of public nuisance laws that include loitering, public intoxication, public urination, aggressive panhandling or trespassing."

Coercing suspected homeless into shelter on the edge of town is just one of the plan's controversial aspects. Once at the shelter, the potentially unwilling residents would be prevented from leaving except by specific appointment. The only approved way to exit the installation is by reserving a shuttle ride. In order to further ensure shelter-goers do not return to the business district, a police officer will be placed on the road leading downtown to redirect homeless people away from the area.

full article: http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/08/22/kicking-out-the-homeless-in-downtown-columbia-south-carolina/#ixzz2d75k7Orh

Wow that is certainly a forceful reaction to the problem. I wonder how their street homeless population compares to Jax, of course most of those maneuvers would be illegal in Florida, and how much the city figured the financial burden of non-profit sheltering and filling jails would be outweighed by them being removed from the streets. I also wonder how much they put aside for litigation as I am sure there is an ACLU paralegal slaving away on research at this very moment

Don't forget that not all that long ago our Sheriff did suggest and try for a homeless relocation camp outside of town. 

Historically, relocation camps of any kind have never worked out to well for anyone.

Is Don Redman advising in Columbia now?  :)

If we move the homeless out, downtown will be completely empty on the weekend. ;D

Quote from: JayBird on August 26, 2013, 07:01:14 PM
Wow that is certainly a forceful reaction to the problem. I wonder how their street homeless population compares to Jax, of course most of those maneuvers would be illegal in Florida, and how much the city figured the financial burden of non-profit sheltering and filling jails would be outweighed by them being removed from the streets. I also wonder how much they put aside for litigation as I am sure there is an ACLU paralegal slaving away on research at this very moment

I lived in Columbia from 1988-96 and this issue has perplexed that city since before then, and ever since.  Of course, the same can be said for Jax of course.  Both cities seem to have more than their share of homeless, as compared to most cities I have been to.  Supposedly, the number of homeless has noticeable increased there recently too.

Also like JAX, Columbia has struggled to revitialze it's CBD for decades as well.  Some recent success in that area has occurred and the merchants and developers responsible are the proponents of this plan, as I understand it.

It's common sense.

Deconsolidate homeless resouces from Downtown, and you'll have less homeless in Downtown, whether in Columbia, Jacksonville,  or wherever.

People who are homeless tend to hangout near where they can be given meals, beds, and other services (showers, case management, etc).

In Jacksonville, that's Downtown, and to a far lesser degree the beaches.

Cities all over the US are implenenting new homeless policy/strategy.

Look at Tampa & Miami recently. Just today Raliegh was in the news for making a church group get a permit to feed homeless in a public space.

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 26, 2013, 11:19:33 PM
It's common sense.

Deconsolidate homeless resouces from Downtown, and you'll have less homeless in Downtown, whether in Columbia, Jacksonville,  or wherever.

People who are homeless tend to hangout near where they can be given meals, beds, and other services (showers, case management, etc).

In Jacksonville, that's Downtown, and to a far lesser degree the beaches.

Cities all over the US are implenenting new homeless policy/strategy.

Look at Tampa & Miami recently. Just today Raliegh was in the news for making a church group get a permit to feed homeless in a public space.

It is common sense.  Homeless is defined as:

QuoteA homeless individual is defined in section 330(h)(4)(A) as "an individual who lacks housing (without regard to whether the individual is a member of a family), including an individual whose primary residence during the night is a supervised public or private facility (e.g., shelters) that provides temporary living accommodations, and an individual who is a resident in transitional housing." A homeless person is an individual without permanent housing who may live on the streets; stay in a shelter, mission, single room occupancy facilities, abandoned building or vehicle; or in any other unstable or non-permanent situation. [Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C., 254b)]
An individual may be considered to be homeless if that person is "doubled up," a term that refers to a situation where individuals are unable to maintain their housing situation and are forced to stay with a series of friends and/or extended family members. In addition, previously homeless individuals who are to be released from a prison or a hospital may be considered homeless if they do not have a stable housing situation to which they can return. A recognition of the instability of an individual's living arrangements is critical to the definition of homelessness. (HRSA/Bureau of Primary Health Care, Program Assistance Letter 99-12, Health Care for the Homeless Principles of Practice)

At which group of people will this stop at?  The poorest among us who can't afford permanent housing?  The men and women who are in a recovery program?  Someone who happens to stay at an extended stay like 3rd and Main too long?  The person or family that has to move three times in one year?

While many may think of the people living on the streets or staying in the various shelters as the homeless, the definition encompasses many more than that.  Laws get passed that can and will be used against any group of people some other group doesn't like.  Ask Bill Hoff, he will tell you how they would use something like Columbia's laws in Springfield.

And what happens next?  What law gets passed when they see a majority of the homeless they are trying to move on coming back to their Homes? Staying Home in downtown even though the services have been moved on?  How do the cities pay for the resulting federal lawsuits?

Common sense.  We have to hope it is used here and problems are worked on to be solved not simply moved somewhere else.

I don't know anything about something like that in Jacksonville, let alone SPR.

I was commenting on how deconsolidating services from one spot (ie, downtown) leads to less numbers of people who use those services in that one spot. Whether it's a beer drinker-bar, handyman-hardware store or homeless-homeless services, same concept applies.

We (Jax residents & leaders) tend to think it's a tough issue to figure out, but it's really not.

The best way to help people with serious issues is another (very interesting, I think) discussion.

An old man came in to the thrift story crying one afternoon.  He told me that JSO just "removed" everything he owned from under a tree and now his beloved trash bag of belongings was gone.

He said "now I have nothing."

There but for the grace of God...and anyone who doesn't think so, hasn't been paying attention for the last decade.

Govern yourselves accordingly.

QuoteSenator: Food Stamps Are Just Like Slavery

By Zack Beauchamp on August 26, 2013 at 1:39 pm

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) equated government programs that prevent people from dying of starvation with slavery in a new profile of his medical practice published today, revealing himself to hold a view of the role of government so limited as to nearly define the state out of existence.

Paul's philosophical excursus is buried in the midst of the too-friendly-for-parody article (it ends with a patient waxing poetic about how Paul "loves people"), but the words are unmistakably Randian. "As humans, yeah, we do have an obligation to give people water, to give people food, to give people health care," Paul allowed, "but it's not a right because once you conscript people and say, 'Oh, it's a right,' then really you're in charge, it's servitude, you're in charge of me and I'm supposed to do whatever you tell me to do."

The comments are an echo of his 2011 claim that accepting a human right to health care "means you believe in slavery," but the Senator's new variation on the theme is notable because it puts the reasoning behind the crazy in stark relief. Particularly, this line: "You don't have a right to anyone else's labor. Food's pretty important, do you have a right to the labor of the farmer?"

The basic idea is that if slavery means forcing people to do things, and saying people have a right to food means the government should require farmers to provide it to them, then a right to food means the enslavement of farmers. A moderately bright high school student could spot the leap of logic here: no one's forcing anyone to farm against their will. In a democratic-capitalist economy, people have a right to choose their career and, as it turns out, enough people end up being farmers that there's generally enough food to go around. A socially-accepted "right to food" merely means the government should pay for the provision of food to those who can't afford it. No stealing, and definitely no slavery.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/26/2525961/rand-paul-food-health-libertarianism-hayek/

I used to do a lot of work in Columbia, their downtown even at that time was way better than ours. I suspect it had something to do with USC being right down the street. I never really noticed that many homeless downtown, unlike here. Our propblem seems to be getting larger and expanding. Now there is a nice camp set up under I-95 at Church St overpass, right down from the middle school. Nice.

Well when Orlando wanted to construct/improve Church Street Station they moved all the homeless shelters to the outskirts of the county, and thus created an influx of homeless on Jacksonville's shelter system (1996/1997??) so there is an example that proves that decentralizing resources provides a solution. However, some of the things Columbia are illegal under Florida law, keeping someone locked in any type of shelter, with the exception of a jail cell for committing a crime or a mental evaluation center under the Baker Act, is considered kidnapping. Ask Sulzbacher directors about that when they attempted to lock their doors at 9pm. Now they have a policy stating that you may leave as you wish, but you may not enter during curfew hours.

Also, JSO is pro-homeless as an organization. They do not target them or harass them as in other cities. The only time they will take action is if it is a flagrant disregard for the law or if a citizen contacts them with a complaint, as I would assume you would find with SheClowns incident listed above.

Working with the Jacksonville homeless for over 8 years now, I believe what needs to happen is that all of the resources need to come together and cross-honor each others services (several move from food line to food line having three dinners and getting several outfits of clothing per day) and provide limitations across the board. This would entitle the homeless to a hand up, but the help is limited. If after 6, 12, 18 months you are still in the same position than you are no longer eligible for such services and must move on elsewhere. One thing I find unique to Jacksonville is the lack of transition in transition programs, which in my opinion is where the fault lies. The funding recieved by the state and city and that recieved through grants and philanthropical organizations is all based on "number served/housed" so if people were to move on, without the same amount or more entering the shelter/agency would see less funds as they are serving less people. So, even though that should be positive and their mission should be dictated by the level of care and those transitioning out of care services, it is instead operated with a "for profit" non-profit mentality.

All that being said, I have yet to see proof saying that removing the homeless from the streets is economically beneficial to the area in which they currently reside. After all, you must factor in the funds given to those social services to relocate and operate as well as to the law enforcement and courts for the influx of petty misdemeanors. Most of the homeless are "invisible" to the businesses and customers and tourists, as humans we see what we want to see until it is forced upon us by panhandling or public displays. I believe most of the people whom complain or comment on the homeless situation in downtown Jacksonville have never actually been downtown. On a recent count on Saturday,  July 20th that was done from 12 midnight to 2am by myself and six others for the Catholic Diocese resulted in finding 36 people sleeping unsheltered in downtown/LaVilla/sports complex; 23 in Springfield below 12th street; 9 in San Marco; 41 within the boundaries of the City of Jacksonville Beach (it should be noted this count was before the JBPD did their nightly beach sweep removing those sleeping on the beach); 7 sleeping within the property of St Johns Town Center; and 68 sleeping in the Argyle Woods (a wooded lot accessed on the southwest corner of Blanding Boulevard and Argyle Forest Drive and a small camp located immediately south of Starbucks before the creek). So those numbers show there are actually more street dwellers living in the "suburbs" than downtown.

That camp mentioned on Church Street is actually supported by the Shiloh Metropolitan on Beaver in order to remove them off of their property. They provide food, clothing and volunteers walk the camp at night providing a feeling of safety.  Keep in mind Jacksonville's shelter system is no where close to full, they operate at about 55-60% capacity throughout the year, those on the street choose to not enter the shelters for whatever reason.

Those you see on the street are also ineligible for food stamp benefits as you must have a qualified address in order to file and the Department of Children and Families verifies that address every six months or every time you reapply whichever is sooner. Though Rand did have some interesting and credible points in his article, his definition was so broad that anyone and everyone could be considered a slave.

QuoteThough Rand did have some interesting and credible points in his article, his definition was so broad that anyone and everyone could be considered a slave.

Actually, if you have a library card, and you didn't pay a fee for it, you are a slave.  Such is the logic of the far right.

Quote from: JayBird on August 27, 2013, 09:30:15 AM
That camp mentioned on Church Street is actually supported by the Shiloh Metropolitan on Beaver in order to remove them off of their property. They provide food, clothing and volunteers walk the camp at night providing a feeling of safety.  Keep in mind Jacksonville's shelter system is no where close to full, they operate at about 55-60% capacity throughout the year, those on the street choose to not enter the shelters for whatever reason.

I too have worked with the homeless.  What is sometimes but not always the case is that shelters can be very dangerous places for them.  You have (often) overcrowding, strong attitudes on both sides, and a concentration of mental illness.  I have heard of a full scale riot at a shelter over a simple ballpoint pen (some man thought the man next to him lifted it).  Fights and riots are not uncommon, so if the weather is mild or pleasant then lots of homeless prefer to set up outside in camps where they can form camp bonds and look out for each other, all while having a little more space and less authoritative oversight.  Most homeless you see on the street will always be homeless, so a 6-8 month "program" is not going to get anywhere.

I sympathize with Columbia because I have heard that other cities take advantage of Columbia's generally more lenient laws and its programs.  Most cities are net exporters of homeless, which in my opinion is far more cruel and inhumane (to give them a one way bus ticket).  Columbia has been a net importer.  The law is sad and sounds wrong, but I think this issue runs deeper than anyone here can really comment on.

I live in an import city with a far higher population than any other in the country (in terms of %, and I believe in terms of sheer numbers too).  Just last Friday this sad article came out about a similar system where hospitals in Nevada and other states ship their homeless patients directly to SF.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Deaf-blind-man-called-example-of-patient-4754815.php

The kind, caring liberal people of the city do tend for the indigent, but internally we would ALL prefer there to be less homeless here too.  It's just a harsh reality.

Columbia has the problem of a number of college towns in that panhandlers see the area as easy pickings, and there are a lot of do-gooders in the student and church communities providing services and free food. They attract people from all over the place. The same thing happens in Gainesville.

freakin' do-gooders

the world would be so much better off without them

(SARCASM inserted here)

---------------------

Listen...the homeless problem in Jacksonville is only a problem because we freak out about it.  If that "homeless-looking person" isn't bothering anyone, leave him alone.  If he is breaking a law, arrest him. 

We can't fix everything in Jacksonville...duh...and certainly not the homeless situation.

Those who say they are the source of crime are just picking on the small guy.  Very few homeless are criminals.

Believe you me, we have more to fear -- in this city -- from those who wear suits and smell good.

Actually very few people blame them for crime, and usually those who do are criminals themselves. It isn't so much trying to fix everything as it is trying to help out fellow humanity. No one is forcing them to get help, no one is forcing them to get off the streets, all that is being done is trying to let them know the choices they have and offer help to obtain those choices.

Those "do-gooders" are the voice for the homeless just as you are the voice for the historic homes of Springfield.

Quote from: JayBird on August 27, 2013, 06:42:31 PM
Actually very few people blame them for crime, and usually those who do are criminals themselves. It isn't so much trying to fix everything as it is trying to help out fellow humanity. No one is forcing them to get help, no one is forcing them to get off the streets, all that is being done is trying to let them know the choices they have and offer help to obtain those choices.

Those "do-gooders" are the voice for the homeless just as you are the voice for the historic homes of Springfield.

Jaybird...I was TOTALLY being sarcastic.  I'll adjust my post.

QuoteColumbia's plan to address homelessness tangled in disagreements

Published: August 19, 2013

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/08/19/2930011/columbias-plan-to-address-homelessness.html#storylink=cpy
By CLIF LeBLANC — cleblanc@thestate.c

COLUMBIA S.C. — Disagreements emerged Monday between key Columbia staffers and the councilman who is the primary author of a plan to convert the city's winter shelter into a round-the-clock operation to divert homeless people from the city center.

Interim Police Chief Ruben Santiago said his department cannot transport homeless adults to the riverfront shelter to get services nor can police tell them they would be charged with a nuisance offense should they refuse.

City manager Teresa Wilson said that neither she, Santiago nor City Council has agreed to transfer any police officers to enforce laws that prohibit loitering, trespassing or other public nuisance offenses in the 36-block Main Street financial and retail district.

Councilman Cameron Runyan, who has pushed a goal of getting homeless people out of the city's financial district so that a fledgling economic boom can continue, contradicted the chief and the manager.

"It was in the plan that council adopted the other night," Runyan said of Wilson's statement about assigning officers to enforce nuisance laws. "So the first thing she needs to do is read the plan.

"Santiago is the one who said in the (Aug. 5 City Hall) meeting that they could transport people," the councilman said. "It was in a meeting with about 15 people – three of whom are elected officials – in which he said the Police Department regularly transports citizens from point A to point B, including the shelter and particularly the women's shelter."

Council unanimously voted at about 2 a.m. on Aug. 13 to proceed with converting the winter shelter from a nighttime operation during cold months into a 24/7 operation starting in mid September. The vote occurred during a 13-hour series of meetings that included a contentious, four-hour public hearing and debate over a vote on putting a strong mayor form of government on the Nov. 5 ballot.

Official minutes of that meeting had not been released by the city at close of business Monday.

Any disagreement about precisely what council adopted is likely to be settled at the next meeting, scheduled for Sept. 3.

"Homelessness is not a crime," Santiago said. "I've got to have the legal right (to question or take anyone into custody). We can't just take people to somewhere they don't want to go. I can't do that. I won't do that.

"I think there are some misconceptions out there that police are going to go out there and scoop up the homeless. We want to make sure we're doing things the legal, proper way."

He said police policy prohibits not filing a charge for volunteering to accept services. "That's basically cutting a deal. It's basically coercion."

Runyan disputes that his plan is a crackdown. He emphasizes that the intention is to extend a helping hand to the homeless. But if they continue to break the law they would be arrested. "And when you get out of jail, you're going to the shelter unless you have provisions to have someone get you from Alvin S. Glenn (the county jail)."

Wilson said there is no commitment to redirect police.

"I'm not saying we're doing that," she said of Runyan's plan to divert nine officers to the city center and one to stand patrol at an access road to the shelter. "We're not budgeted to do that."

Wilson and Santiago are working on the financial and other implications of switching the shelter's mission into a centralized location for meals, transportation and as a drop-off site for released inmates.

Santiago said he will submit his suggested options to Wilson by the end of the week.

She said she will present her recommendations, including changing the contract with Christ Central Ministries to run a 24/7 shelter, at council's meeting next month.

Reach LeBlanc at (803) 771-8664.

Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/2013/08/19/2930011/columbias-plan-to-address-homelessness.html#storylink=cpy

Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I have been involved with helping the homeless for over a decade here in Jacksonville and let me tell you people do freakl out about them. I have the tire tracks up and down my back to prove it

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in a Jax 2025 spin off committee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Quote from: sheclown on August 27, 2013, 08:42:28 AM

QuoteSenator: Food Stamps Are Just Like Slavery

By Zack Beauchamp on August 26, 2013 at 1:39 pm

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) equated government programs that prevent people from dying of starvation with slavery in a new profile of his medical practice published today, revealing himself to hold a view of the role of government so limited as to nearly define the state out of existence.

Paul's philosophical excursus is buried in the midst of the too-friendly-for-parody article (it ends with a patient waxing poetic about how Paul "loves people"), but the words are unmistakably Randian. "As humans, yeah, we do have an obligation to give people water, to give people food, to give people health care," Paul allowed, "but it's not a right because once you conscript people and say, 'Oh, it's a right,' then really you're in charge, it's servitude, you're in charge of me and I'm supposed to do whatever you tell me to do."

The comments are an echo of his 2011 claim that accepting a human right to health care "means you believe in slavery," but the Senator's new variation on the theme is notable because it puts the reasoning behind the crazy in stark relief. Particularly, this line: "You don't have a right to anyone else's labor. Food's pretty important, do you have a right to the labor of the farmer?"

The basic idea is that if slavery means forcing people to do things, and saying people have a right to food means the government should require farmers to provide it to them, then a right to food means the enslavement of farmers. A moderately bright high school student could spot the leap of logic here: no one's forcing anyone to farm against their will. In a democratic-capitalist economy, people have a right to choose their career and, as it turns out, enough people end up being farmers that there's generally enough food to go around. A socially-accepted "right to food" merely means the government should pay for the provision of food to those who can't afford it. No stealing, and definitely no slavery.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/26/2525961/rand-paul-food-health-libertarianism-hayek/

Leap of logic?  In my high school I learned about taxes.  That's the money that governments require from those of us who are willing/able to pay through the threat (and use) of force.  So yes, anything that "government" does reallocates the labors of one citizen to another...by force.  The question asked here is what level of such reallocation acceptable?  What level is legal? 

What Paul was trying to say, IMHO, was that offering a meager existence without any expectation of gainful employment robs human beings of their dignity and more importantly their freedom of determining their own purpose in life.

We should balance the need to provide for others with the need to not only "want" others to stand on their own, but to "require" it whenever possible.

Seditious?  How so?  Other than the snarky "pink" comment, and saying that my comment is "seditious", do you have anything to offer this conversation?

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 10:20:33 AM
What Paul was trying to say, IMHO, was that offering a meager existence without any expectation of gainful employment robs human beings of their dignity and more importantly their freedom of determining their own purpose in life.

Not sure the point here, in the State of Florida you must be actively seeking employment in order to continue to recieve any food stamp benefits. The exceptions being if you are medically disabled, currently enrolled in an educational program, or actively participating in a government funded work program. And all of those exceptions do not receive the full benefits. Florida has actually been criticized by the liberal side because they have strict enforcement rules such as  when they discontinue your benefits immediately upon opening an investigation instead of waiting to determine if you actually are complying.

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 10:15:12 AM

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in the Jax 2025 subcommittee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Please do, because that is not what JSO presents to the public via its web site or even what that same Chief spoke on at a ShAdCo meeting last month.

(Edit) also keep in mind that Zone 1 is the entire area bordered by 95, the Trout River and the St Johns River. The majority of the crime in Zone 1 is in sector C (north of 20th street) and when you look at sector A (DT/LaVilla/Sports Complex less than 20% of those arrested have no address and less than 3% of those have no address when they appear in court (this is due to people not providing address when arrested and booked into the PTDF). It comes down to opportunity, those living on the street have a limited opportunity to commit a crime and those in the shelter programs lose the little they have (if you commit a crime while residing in any shelter in Jax you are banned from admittance for a period of 365 days), but if you have numbers showing otherwise I would be very interested to see them because that would imply someone is playing politics.

Quote from: sheclown on August 28, 2013, 09:18:41 AM
I have been involved with helping the homeless for over a decade here in Jacksonville and let me tell you people do freakl out about them. I have the tire tracks up and down my back to prove it

I guess it depends on perception. Some might say the preservationists freak out, others will say RAP freaks out, and yet there are those that say the Beaches freak out over city decisions. The bottom line, those are stereotypes that can be proven inaccurate by simply visiting the programs in Jax, walking the streets and then comparing the statistical data with that of other cities. Homelessness is not an epidemic in Jacksonville, yet those outside of the loop believe it is.

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 10:29:14 AM
so taxes are done at gunpoint?

Ummm, yes.  we are all forced to pay income taxes.  For those of us that are required to pay, the alternative is prison.  If you refuse to go to prison, you will be forced to go...at gunpoint if necessary. 

Didn't you know that?

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 10:32:28 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition

In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where the history of these legal codes has been traced, there is also a record of the change in the definition of the elements constituting sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within the study of state persecution.

The difference between sedition and treason consists primarily in the subjective ultimate object of the violation to the public peace. Sedition does not consist of levying war against a government nor of adhering to its enemies, giving enemies aid, and giving enemies comfort. Nor does it consist, in most representative democracies, of peaceful protest against a government, nor of attempting to change the government by democratic means (such as direct democracy or constitutional convention).

Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one's state. Sedition is encouraging one's fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one's country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.

You have quoted an explanation of the definition of sedition.   Can you explain specifically why you called my comments seditious?

^but it is still our individual choice. I have yet to see my accountant pull out a .357 and force me to file, though being that he weighs 90lbs soaken wet and has glasses like Hubble telescope that would be comical. Just because the consequences of a decision may be unsatisfactory, does that mean that we do not have the choice?

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 10:15:12 AM

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in the Jax 2025 subcommittee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Do you have info on recidivism from JSO? I once heard the director of the jail speak about the repeat offenders they get from the homeless population and the numbers are staggering. Basically there are about 10-25 really bad seeds that get arrested a ton and cost the city and JSO quite a bit of money yearly. I can't remember if the bad seeds get arrested 20 times a year or 20 times in their life, but it was definitely eye opening.

I've also heard it speculated that some of these bad seeds are dumped here by other cities, similar to what Simms posted in San Fran (although a different type of homeless).

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 10:37:42 AM

Quote from: sheclown on August 28, 2013, 09:18:41 AM
I have been involved with helping the homeless for over a decade here in Jacksonville and let me tell you people do freakl out about them. I have the tire tracks up and down my back to prove it

I guess it depends on perception. Some might say the preservationists freak out, others will say RAP freaks out, and yet there are those that say the Beaches freak out over city decisions. The bottom line, those are stereotypes that can be proven inaccurate by simply visiting the programs in Jax, walking the streets and then comparing the statistical data with that of other cities. Homelessness is not an epidemic in Jacksonville, yet those outside of the loop believe it is.

Wow.  You and I are having a tough time with this.  I'm not saying that the non-profits freak out about homelessness or the problem, I'm saying that people freak out when they see a homeless person, needlessly.  And that the homeless are made a target, unfairly.

I'm quite sure we are on the same side on this issue.

^ aaaah forgive me MY misinterpretation. That could very well be true, I have never witnessed that, but it does make sense. Scared of the boogie man or something. Sorry, that was my bad I was applying it to the conversation on this board, not people in general. Though, one would think after just about everyone cane close to losing their homes over the past 5 years, or at least began to wonder, that they would be more sympathetic. But that may be my naivety shining through LoL. We are good, and thank you for making me look at it from another angle

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 10:42:48 AM

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 10:41:19 AM

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 10:29:14 AM
so taxes are done at gunpoint?

Ummm, yes.  we are all forced to pay income taxes.  For those of us that are required to pay, the alternative is prison.  If you refuse to go to prison, you will be forced to go...at gunpoint if necessary. 

Didn't you know that?

Actually, please cite this law.  And don't conflate the issue with fraudulent returns.

USC, Title 26.  ;)

And now your explanation?

Once again, StephenDare!, you are wrong.  And your proclivity for exaggeration remains.  I have quoted the federal tax code for you, and now you are not able to explain your own claim of "sedition".  I await your apology.  :)

26 USC § 7203 - Willful failure to file return, supply information, or pay tax


Any person required under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, or required by this title or by regulations made under authority thereof to make a return, keep any records, or supply any information, who willfully fails to pay such estimated tax or tax, make such return, keep such records, or supply such information, at the time or times required by law or regulations, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $25,000 ($100,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. In the case of any person with respect to whom there is a failure to pay any estimated tax, this section shall not apply to such person with respect to such failure if there is no addition to tax under section 6654 or 6655 with respect to such failure. In the case of a willful violation of any provision of section 6050I, the first sentence of this section shall be applied by substituting "felony" for "misdemeanor" and "5 years" for "1 year".

___________________________________________________________________________________________

As usual, I have to do all of the work for you.  I await an apology and your explanation for your charge of "sedition".

I apologize to the original poster for StephenDare!'s insistence that we stray from the original subject. 

My original point stands as to the desire of many that we not provide disincentives to individual freedom.

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 11:41:34 AM

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 11:38:55 AM
USC 26, 7203

Any person required under this title to pay any estimated tax or tax, or required by this title or by regulations made under authority thereof to make a return, keep any records, or supply any information, who willfully fails to pay such estimated tax or tax, make such return, keep such records, or supply such information, at the time or times required by law or regulations, shall, in addition to other penalties provided by law, be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $25,000 ($100,000 in the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution. In the case of any person with respect to whom there is a failure to pay any estimated tax, this section shall not apply to such person with respect to such failure if there is no addition to tax under section 6654 or 6655 with respect to such failure. In the case of a willful violation of any provision of section 6050I, the first sentence of this section shall be applied by substituting "felony" for "misdemeanor" and "5 years" for "1 year".

___________________________________________________________________________________________

As usual, I have to do all of the work for you.  I await an apology and your explanation for your charge of "sedition".

you have done the work for me, thank you.  There is no death penalty for non payment of taxes.  This was a false statement. There is no provision for collecting taxes at the point of a gun.  That was a false statement.

Now the question is, which high school taught you otherwise?

That's cute.  And not unexpected.  I have proven my statement that we are forced to pay taxes at the threat of arrest.  The threat of arrest includes the use of force. 

I am sorry to see that you do not really wish to engage in discussion.  I had hoped that you would offer a real contribution to the discussion.  It is obvious to all that you can not explain your use of the word "seditious" in reference to my comments, and of course that we all are in fact , forced to pay our federal income taxes. 

I remain interested in any useful discussion, but simply refusing to acknowledge facts does not forward the conversation.

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 11:49:52 AM

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 11:45:46 AM
I apologize to the original poster for StephenDare!'s insistence that we stray from the original subject. 

My original point stands as to the desire of many that we not provide disincentives to individual freedom.

And I apologize that the homeless provided an entrance for seditious anti tax nonsense from Notnow.

Are we all blessed by the apologies now? ;)

I have made no "anti-tax" statements.  I simply pointed out that government taxes, by their very nature, are forced reallocation of resources from one individual citizen to another.   That fact can not be argued.  Where do you get "seditious" or "anti-tax" from that?   

Returning to the thread, I don't like these comparisons with past evils (slavery, Hitler, the civil war, etc.), they are detrimental to the discussion.  I do believe that a system which provides for BASIC needs while simultaneously providing incentives for self improvement and disincentives for failing to progress would help in our fight to prevent a permanent underclass.  There will always be a small percentage of citizens who will require a lifetime of varying amounts of assistance due to mental or physical disability, but  for those needing help by circumstance let's encourage and yes, insist on self determination.

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 12:19:29 PM
Returning to the thread, I don't like these comparisons with past evils (slavery, Hitler, the civil war, etc.), they are detrimental to the discussion.  I do believe that a system which provides for BASIC needs while simultaneously providing incentives for self improvement and disincentives for failing to progress would help in our fight to prevent a permanent underclass.  There will always be a small percentage of citizens who will require a lifetime of varying amounts of assistance due to mental or physical disability, but  for those needing help by circumstance let's encourage and yes, insist on self determination.

I'm not sure where someone made the comparison to Hitler, etc, but one thing I do know is that we need to be reminded of the past to help insure we do not make nor allow the same mistakes over and over again.  At least that is the goal.  Relocation camps like recently suggested for here in Jax and the idea now being floated in Columbia have a very checked past even when looking at things done in this country for what many thought were positive reasons.

Yes, the goal is that those who can, should help themselves as they are able to.  A hand up is what should be offered, they must take that hand and be willing to do the work that comes after. Some can and do, many simply can not and a few don't want to.

I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

Quote from: CityLife on August 28, 2013, 10:45:37 AM

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 10:15:12 AM

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in the Jax 2025 subcommittee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Do you have info on recidivism from JSO? I once heard the director of the jail speak about the repeat offenders they get from the homeless population and the numbers are staggering. Basically there are about 10-25 really bad seeds that get arrested a ton and cost the city and JSO quite a bit of money yearly. I can't remember if the bad seeds get arrested 20 times a year or 20 times in their life, but it was definitely eye opening.

I've also heard it speculated that some of these bad seeds are dumped here by other cities, similar to what Simms posted in San Fran (although a different type of homeless).

Since others have given stats that seem other than "staggering", I have to ask, what crimes are we talking about here?  Peeing in public? When we do background checks on the guys we deal with, the vast majority of "crimes" have to do with what many consider "social crimes".  In other words, peeing in public, public intoxication and basic loitering or trespassing. Driving without a license is in there too, after the prerequisite DUI.  Of course, there are lots of buying and doing drugs maybe the taking a six pack of beer or a loaf of bread in there as well.  Even if the repeat offenders are a "staggering" number by percentage, we are not talking about major crimes here.  Let's not go over the top with a "staggering" amount of bold type to create a "staggering" amount of hype.  Provide the facts and go from there.

Quote from: icarus on August 28, 2013, 01:27:21 PM
I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

There are programs and there are organizations that do it but in my experience, they cost way more than they should.  Frankly, if things like a modern rooming house was allowed and used, many more homeless could be helped. Unfortunately, the rooming house/ boarding house concept is much maligned these days and not understood by today's society.

Quote from: icarus on August 28, 2013, 01:27:21 PM
I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

That sounds like it is what we need icarus.  Are there any working examples?

Quote from: strider on August 28, 2013, 01:45:53 PM

Quote from: icarus on August 28, 2013, 01:27:21 PM
I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

There are programs and there are organizations that do it but in my experience, they cost way more than they should.  Frankly, if things like a modern rooming house was allowed and used, many more homeless could be helped. Unfortunately, the rooming house/ boarding house concept is much maligned these days and not understood by today's society.

Please explain what is not understood.

Quote from: strider on August 28, 2013, 01:41:12 PM

Quote from: CityLife on August 28, 2013, 10:45:37 AM

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 10:15:12 AM

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in the Jax 2025 subcommittee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Do you have info on recidivism from JSO? I once heard the director of the jail speak about the repeat offenders they get from the homeless population and the numbers are staggering. Basically there are about 10-25 really bad seeds that get arrested a ton and cost the city and JSO quite a bit of money yearly. I can't remember if the bad seeds get arrested 20 times a year or 20 times in their life, but it was definitely eye opening.

I've also heard it speculated that some of these bad seeds are dumped here by other cities, similar to what Simms posted in San Fran (although a different type of homeless).

Since others have given stats that seem other than "staggering", I have to ask, what crimes are we talking about here?  Peeing in public? When we do background checks on the guys we deal with, the vast majority of "crimes" have to do with what many consider "social crimes".  In other words, peeing in public, public intoxication and basic loitering or trespassing. Driving without a license is in there too, after the prerequisite DUI.  Of course, there are lots of buying and doing drugs maybe the taking a six pack of beer or a loaf of bread in there as well.  Even if the repeat offenders are a "staggering" number by percentage, we are not talking about major crimes here.  Let's not go over the top with a "staggering" amount of bold type to create a "staggering" amount of hype.  Provide the facts and go from there.

A lot of the crimes are misdemeanors (i.e. public urination, public intoxication).

JSO has been working hand and hand with several shelters and are currently rolling out a program to deal with the recidivism rate of the worst offenders.  Most of these offenders have mental or substance abuse problems that either have them kicked out of most shelters, or they are unwilling to be in shelters. 

The cost for processing an individual in the jail is roughly $870.  As you can imagine, any affect the new program will have on the reduction of processing will be very helpful.

Quote from: strider on August 28, 2013, 01:45:53 PM

Quote from: icarus on August 28, 2013, 01:27:21 PM
I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

There are programs and there are organizations that do it but in my experience, they cost way more than they should.  Frankly, if things like a modern rooming house was allowed and used, many more homeless could be helped. Unfortunately, the rooming house/ boarding house concept is much maligned these days and not understood by today's society.

There are great organizations that work with transitional housing.  While inventory of available housing is always an issue, it is not the main issue.  Jobs are the one thing holding back the transitional housing.  You can't move someone to housing if they are still suffering from the issues that pushed them into homelessness in the first place. 

Quote from: Bridges on August 28, 2013, 01:50:28 PM

Quote from: strider on August 28, 2013, 01:41:12 PM

Quote from: CityLife on August 28, 2013, 10:45:37 AM

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 10:15:12 AM

Quote from: JayBird on August 28, 2013, 08:36:43 AM
Gotcha  ;) but my response was more aimed at the latter comments. Those are actually stereotypes of 1970's homeless. As a matter of fact, in 8 years with Jacksonville not one person ever publicly stated that removing homeless would lessen crime or that homelessness contributes to crime, which you stated but I don't believe anyone here even mentioned that because it isn't a major factor. I don't feel anyone "freaks out" about the homeless more than any other cause. It is a problem, but its a problem everywhere. And those whom are attempting to help are not approaching it with a "fix everything" mentality, they approach it with a "if you would like help, I'm here" mentality.

****

Good find on that article, seems to be politics as usual. Nice to see Jacksonville isn't the only place with inept council-mayor-resident relations.

I've been participating in the Jax 2025 subcommittee to address homelessness. I can give you some of the stats used later, but a relatively small number of homeless people make up a disproportionately high percentage of crime in Downtown Jax. Chief Ayoub (Zone 1) is happy to speak about it with interested parties.

Do you have info on recidivism from JSO? I once heard the director of the jail speak about the repeat offenders they get from the homeless population and the numbers are staggering. Basically there are about 10-25 really bad seeds that get arrested a ton and cost the city and JSO quite a bit of money yearly. I can't remember if the bad seeds get arrested 20 times a year or 20 times in their life, but it was definitely eye opening.

I've also heard it speculated that some of these bad seeds are dumped here by other cities, similar to what Simms posted in San Fran (although a different type of homeless).

Since others have given stats that seem other than "staggering", I have to ask, what crimes are we talking about here?  Peeing in public? When we do background checks on the guys we deal with, the vast majority of "crimes" have to do with what many consider "social crimes".  In other words, peeing in public, public intoxication and basic loitering or trespassing. Driving without a license is in there too, after the prerequisite DUI.  Of course, there are lots of buying and doing drugs maybe the taking a six pack of beer or a loaf of bread in there as well.  Even if the repeat offenders are a "staggering" number by percentage, we are not talking about major crimes here.  Let's not go over the top with a "staggering" amount of bold type to create a "staggering" amount of hype.  Provide the facts and go from there.

A lot of the crimes are misdemeanors (i.e. public urination, public intoxication).

JSO has been working hand and hand with several shelters and are currently rolling out a program to deal with the recidivism rate of the worst offenders.  Most of these offenders have mental or substance abuse problems that either have them kicked out of most shelters, or they are unwilling to be in shelters. 

The cost for processing an individual in the jail is roughly $870.  As you can imagine, any affect the new program will have on the reduction of processing will be very helpful.

Yea obviously these aren't people committing serious crimes or they wouldn't be getting arrested 25 times a year or whatever it is. Mostly drunk and disorderly, assaults, petty theft, urinating in public type stuff. The "staggering" point that Strider didn't seem to quite catch was the cost JSO and the city have to pay to deal with the issue. Its not just the cost to process them at the jail, but also the hours JSO wastes arresting, transporting, and writing reports.

Strider, do you know these figures? Because if you don't, you can't exactly comment on whether or not they are staggering. Like I said, its been a few years since I heard the presentation from JSO, but everyone's jaw dropped in the room when they heard them (which is why I asked for them).  I believe it was in the million plus range, just for the worst 20 or so offenders, and I don't think that included medical care.

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 02:01:55 PM

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 12:04:47 PM

Quote from: stephendare on August 28, 2013, 11:49:52 AM

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 11:45:46 AM
I apologize to the original poster for StephenDare!'s insistence that we stray from the original subject. 

My original point stands as to the desire of many that we not provide disincentives to individual freedom.

And I apologize that the homeless provided an entrance for seditious anti tax nonsense from Notnow.

Are we all blessed by the apologies now? ;)

I have made no "anti-tax" statements.  I simply pointed out that government taxes, by their very nature, are forced reallocation of resources from one individual citizen to another.   That fact can not be argued.  Where do you get "seditious" or "anti-tax" from that?

yawn,  So does that make police forces the symbol and delivery system of totalitarianism, not now?

After all, who is holding all of the guns when these taxes are being force collected from the virtuous few?

Geez Dare!, get over it.  Personal attacks?  Really?  Forget about it if you just can't accept it.  Join in the conversation and listen to others for a change.  You don't always HAVE to be right you know.

Oh come on.  Why bring this up:

"yawn,  So does that make police forces the symbol and delivery system of totalitarianism, not now?

After all, who is holding all of the guns when these taxes are being force collected from the virtuous few?"

It is simply an attack on my profession and you know it. 

You are simply making up the rest of your argument.  None of your statement:

'You seem to think that there is only one way to view things in a democratic society.  The one in which you don't have to pay taxes, even though you use the services provided by those same tax dollars."

is true.  I have made no such claim.  None of my posts in this thread say any such thing. 

As for "logical conclusions", you have come to none.  My posts are simply stated.  I have no idea why you can not admit when you are wrong or why you feel the need to falsely state the views of others so that you can then proceed to counter your own misleading statements.  In the future, if you would quote which of my arguments (directly from my posts) that you are arguing against, perhaps you could stay on point. 

And what does that have to do with this discussion?

I am waiting for you to explain why you called my original comments "seditious".  Of course you can not.  My original comment that taxes are taken from citizens by force has been verified without question.  Your attempt to make my statement out to be "anti-tax" are without merit and you can not point out a quote which would prove your point.  You are simply "reaching" for something and arguing for the sake of argument...to the detriment of both the conversation and your credibility. 

Now, do you have something useful to add to this discussion or not?

Not to nitpick, but there are clearly two vastly different conversations going on here. Could someone please enlighten me to the guidelines that get some comments split off to their own thread by MJ moderators? Because I believe this tax conversation, though deserving discussion, has gotten to the point where it no longer belongs here. Thank you.

Don't worry about it.  I am through attempting to talk with StephenDare!.  I should have known better.  Please continue the thread. 

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 01:49:25 PM

Quote from: strider on August 28, 2013, 01:45:53 PM

Quote from: icarus on August 28, 2013, 01:27:21 PM
I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

There are programs and there are organizations that do it but in my experience, they cost way more than they should.  Frankly, if things like a modern rooming house was allowed and used, many more homeless could be helped. Unfortunately, the rooming house/ boarding house concept is much maligned these days and not understood by today's society.

Please explain what is not understood.

Speaking if such programs in Jacksonville, this released today from the T-U

QuoteChase has awarded a $20,000 grant to Ability Housing of Northeast Florida.

The grant was designated for the nonprofit's Villages Program, which develops and operates multi-family rental properties for the homeless, those at risk of homelessness and adults with a disability, according to a news release.

Ability Housing has developed the multi-family Mayfair Village Apartments, Renaissance Village Apartments and Oakland Terrace Apartments for a total of 195 units. In addition, the nonprofit has 60 single-family units that are reserved for adults with disabilities who wish to live independently and formerly homeless individuals.

"There remains a tremendous need in Northeast Florida for affordable rental housing," said Shannon Nazworth, executive director of Ability Housing. "We are extremely grateful to Chase for their assistance. This will help us to continue to identify, purchase and renovate communities and help families in crisis escape homelessness."

Last year, Chase gave more than $6 million to Florida nonprofits that support affordable housing, workforce development and accessible education.

http://m.jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400721/beth-cravey/2013-08-28/housing-program-homeless-disabled-gets-financial-boost (http://m.jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/400721/beth-cravey/2013-08-28/housing-program-homeless-disabled-gets-financial-boost)

For more information, go to abilityhousing.org.

Well, I am afraid i didn't do a very good job of explaining what I meant and I think it falls somewhere between what Strider is discussing and the housing proposed by Ability.

When looking at the problem, you unfortunately have to categorize the people in need:

1) Chronic homeless ( disabled, mental health issues, or etc.)
2) Those caught in a cycle .. periods of homelessness coupled with periods of not
3) Temporary (hopefully) homeless .. loss of job, loss of home(foreclosure), medical issues

Sulzbacher and Clara White do fantastic work but provide for the most part a one size fits all service.  I have seen other areas provide dorm style housing (adult only) combined with studio or small apartments for families in "transition."  These facilities are often the first step in the process and serve as an induction process to identify and classify for purposes of determining the best way(services) to help them move on. They often have residential in upper floors with services such as daycare and job placement on the lower floors.  The idea being able to provide the assistance especially to transitional families to get employment and get back on their feet.

The next step is non-clustered subsidized housing, i.e. not the fenced in compound and govt. style housing of yester years.  The idea being to provide only the subsidies and services to these families they require to fully integrate with the community.  There are plenty of case studies and experiences from other areas that show such a holistic approach is much more efficient but also greatly reduces the numbers of repeat homeless.

From a security and crime standpoint, it helps identify at those at risk and those individuals with lingering health or mental issues.  Treating the problem before it rears itself in the form of crime and or panhandling is always preferable.

The idea of segregation, camps or otherwise relocation of homeless is just another step down a road of failed policy.

the problem is that many of the organizations charged with affordable housing in Jacksonville are reluctant to build or otherwise lead housing projects of this type or to provide any rental housing such as Strider might be referring to.

City Life, the original "staggering" seemed to refer to the sheer numbers of people and crimes but then the last post and comment said it referred to the COST of processing and housing those offenders. Two different things and I will agree the costs involved could be surprising if not staggering.  But that is most likely the result of the system we have and perhaps just the way it is.  Unless something can be done on the other side, the enforcement of the "social" and petty crimes will always be higher than what we would like to imagine.  Things like day centers and better, more financially responsible programs should help with those costs though.

Quote from: NotNow on August 28, 2013, 01:49:25 PM

Quote from: strider on August 28, 2013, 01:45:53 PM

Quote from: icarus on August 28, 2013, 01:27:21 PM
I've done a lot of volunteer work with affordable housing and mixed income housing, i.e. mixing affordable/assisted housing units in with market rate.

I've always been disappointed that Jacksonville has not been more progressive in adopting a transitional model and the housing stock to go with it.  the idea being that we provide the care and assistance an individual needs now but have a system in place to transition them to being able to sustain themselves, i.e. education, job search, day care, etc.

There are programs and there are organizations that do it but in my experience, they cost way more than they should.  Frankly, if things like a modern rooming house was allowed and used, many more homeless could be helped. Unfortunately, the rooming house/ boarding house concept is much maligned these days and not understood by today's society.

Please explain what is not understood.

Mention rooming houses and most people immediately think of a slumlord operated, water only, rat infested dive lived in by drug addicts and the like.  They have forgotten or don't know that the rooming house and boarding house was once one of the few honorable businesses a single woman could own and operate.  In fact, Gloria's distant-great aunt that was the first woman to graduate from Wisconsin's state college made her living and put her daughter through college with a rooming house.  Single men once moved out on their own into boarding houses as they still then had someone to cook and often clean for them.  Besides, there were no McDonald's back then. And they often served as a surrogate family for many who had no one else or were new to a city.   As our society started wanting separate bathrooms and the like, rooming house lost favor.  Eventually, like the old neighborhoods they were in, they fell on bad times.  Today, I think a modern, low density rooming house could be a great substitute for the temporary housing often used today because a single room apartment is at a higher cost (federal guidelines may require it though).  However, you cannot open a new rooming house or boarding house anywhere in Jacksonville today and the ones that are still open are often under attack, sometimes for good reasons, but mostly just because the poorer among us use them. 

FREE TICKETS TO JACKSONVILLE ALL AROUND.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on August 28, 2013, 07:49:18 PM
FREE TICKETS TO JACKSONVILLE ALL AROUND.

I think those have already been handed out. lol  I know our local system is taxed already by some of our neighboring counties who don't provide services to the homeless.  ;)

Quote from: Ocklawaha on August 28, 2013, 07:49:18 PM
FREE TICKETS TO JACKSONVILLE ALL AROUND.

More than you know.

http://www.free-times.com/cover/no-direction-home (http://www.free-times.com/cover/no-direction-home)

Free Times is the 'Folio Weely' of Columbia and this article seems to be very balanced, and presents the different sides of the issue very well.   This is a key issue that a lot of cities grample with, Jax among them, and there are no easy answers.

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 08:55:25 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on August 28, 2013, 07:49:18 PM
FREE TICKETS TO JACKSONVILLE ALL AROUND.

More than you know.

Another misguided attempt to boost our tourism numbers...

QuotePapachristou v. Jacksonville, 405 U.S. 156 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case resulting in a Jacksonville vagrancy ordinance being declared unconstitutionally vague. The case was argued on December 8, 1971 and decided on February 24, 1972. The respondent was the city of Jacksonville, Florida.

Papachristou was one of eight defendants who were convicted for violating a Jacksonville, Florida vagrancy ordinance which forbade a large number of activities including "wandering or strolling around from place to place without any lawful purpose or object". The defendants were charged with several violations under the ordinance: being vagabonds, loitering, being common thieves, disorderly loitering, and resisting arrest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papachristou_v._Jacksonville

Quotewandering or strolling around from place to place without any lawful purpose or object

Thats what I do at lunch... lol

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 28, 2013, 08:55:25 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on August 28, 2013, 07:49:18 PM
FREE TICKETS TO JACKSONVILLE ALL AROUND.

More than you know.

This is a large part of the issue.  Earlier we have knowledgeable posters who state facts like our shelter system is operating at like 60% capacity, that crime is not the issue some would like to believe.  Putting one liners out there like the above is done only to incite rather than inform.  But from Bill Hoff, this a  common concept.

Our non-profit has been serving the alcohol and drug abuse recovery community for 26 years now.  The majority of the guys are legally homeless when they come to us.  In the last ten years, I have seen maybe 1% that were sent to Jacksonville by another area. And only one of those was actually given a ticket and put on a bus.  Not saying that it doesn't happen but that it is not the problem some would like others to believe.  The vast majority of those coming from out of town are doing so on their own.  Even that group may be 2 or 3 % of the guys at best.  Then when you talk to them, you find that many were from Jacksonville to start with, have been gone and are now coming back. Or that they have family here and hope to reconnect.

This one one group of facts.  The shelters may have a different set of numbers, but I would guess our experience is pretty normal. percentage wise at least.

Creating negative hype, like Bill Hoff likes to do, may promote certain agendas, but does very little to actually help solve the problems we face.

No Strider your numbers are accurate. As a matter of fact Sulzbacher and Trinity will not admit anyone who came from outside Duval County until they've been here 3 days. This was put into policy at both shelters (not affiliated with each other) in 2009 in order to prevent an influx from programs in NYC/LA/SF/DFW/ATL that were giving homeless free/discounted/subsidized Greyhound tickets. The fear was that those passing through Jax Greyhound station would use the shelters as a short term layover for 2-3 days before continuing their journeys.

After this conversation on the board yesterday I had some interesting talks last night. In the past 90 days 1 shelter resident from Sulzbacher was arrested for committing a crime (there were a total of 9 arrests, all the others were unrelated warrants from previous crimes), that is 1 out of 326 individual people provided care during that same time. With Sulzbacher being the largest and the city's primary homeless shelter, I think that is a good barometer of the DT homeless crime situation.

Officer Maria Schofield was on the admitting desk at the PTDF last night and according to her very few homeless are processed there. When they are, it is usually because the officer was showing compassion and allowing them to utilize a shower, eat a meal, and sleep on a mattress with the petty charges being dropped at first appearance in the morning. I do have a problem with that, it costs JSO about $76/night for such a service (in comparison the state spends about $40/day on a prisoner) and the shelters have much less operating costs (Sulzbacher figures $28/night for a sleepover client, Trinity pegs their operations at $19/night for "day-stay") which shows me that the homeless organizations need to work on changing the "shelter stigma" to save that money JSO is currently spending.

Quote from: JayBird on August 29, 2013, 09:49:47 AM

After this conversation on the board yesterday I had some interesting talks last night. In the past 90 days 1 shelter resident from Sulzbacher was arrested for committing a crime (there were a total of 9 arrests, all the others were unrelated warrants from previous crimes), that is 1 out of 326 individual people provided care during that same time. With Sulzbacher being the largest and the city's primary homeless shelter, I think that is a good barometer of the DT homeless crime situation.

What about the homeless that don't utilize the shelters?  Is it possible that they could account for more crime?

The only numbers I have for that are from FY2011 that shows 7 arrests of 4 different people whom were arrested within Sector A and did not have an address (this does not include anyone whose arrest was discharged at first appearance the following morning). I highly doubt that there was much of a boom since. In that same year, 43% of the arrests in that sector were public nuisance violations relating to or originating from the Bay Street entertainment area and the Landing. So, at least in 2011, Joe Blow relieving himself or smashing a bottle in the street was more of a threat than the homeless guy sleeping on a bus stop bench. Once again, I doubt a huge boom occurred since then and I'm sure current numbers are about the same.

Quote from: JayBird on August 29, 2013, 09:49:47 AM
After this conversation on the board yesterday I had some interesting talks last night. In the past 90 days 1 shelter resident from Sulzbacher was arrested for committing a crime (there were a total of 9 arrests, all the others were unrelated warrants from previous crimes), that is 1 out of 326 individual people provided care during that same time. With Sulzbacher being the largest and the city's primary homeless shelter, I think that is a good barometer of the DT homeless crime situation.

JayBird, you're a good poster, but this is ridiculous. Everyone knows that Sulzbacher is the cream of the crop of the DT shelters. You pretty much even said so in your first paragraph. They have stricter admission and retention standards than others. Of course they are going to have low arrest numbers. Its not even a remotely decent barometer of the homeless crime situation.

The segment of the homeless population that tends to commit crimes are generally either transients who are stopping through or ones with severe mental health problems that shelters won't take or that don't want to stay at a shelter. You won't find that information at our local shelters.

Clara White accepts all, they had 0 arrests in past 90 days. City Rescue accepts all, they have had 27 arrests as of Monday since June 1st. Only 9 of those were for crimes that were committed DT, 3 of those were committed on FSCJ DT campus. Trinity has had 8 clients arrested since January 1st, and 5 or 6 of those were from an incident at the landing in May. Even assuming these numbers are regular, that would be less than 150 arrests per year among a population of 1,857 (FY2012 number) individuals served at shelters and living on the street in DT/LaVilla/Sports Complex. That is less 1% of that specific population being arrested. 

(Note: Not challenging any post or being argumentative, just attempting to share what I know of the current situation to those whom have only heard horror stories. Much like the game of telephone, the more a story gets passed among the greater it changes. And I highly doubt that Jax is unique. I am sure the same statistics would apply in any city from NYC to Fresno, but somehow the majority of people feel that the homeless are huge criminal element, and the facts just don't support that.

Like George Carlin said: "they say to watch out for the quiet ones. I don't know about you, but when I'm at the bar and a guy starts screaming and smashes his bottle, I'm not going to be watching the guy in the corner reading a book.")

Good points. I think it comes in phases. As a culture we feel we have to remove what we don't like to see. 100 years ago all of these types and more were sent out to the country to live in asylums. As Columbia seems to be finding out now, after they enacted this measures, is that not only can they not do it but their own police chief refuses to do it. Part of the blame, and myself included in this, is that we as a society react to some situations out of fear before applying logic or even common sense to the problem. Sometimes, that same fear creates a problem that doesn't even exist.

exactly jaybird

Live and let live.

Provide toilets and sinks.

I told one guy I know( who likes to talk to himself rather loudly all of the time) "If you sing to yourself, no one will think you are crazy."

It is okay to see a poor person and not have to fix him.  Let him sit there and sing.  Or talk. 

We're all a little bit crazy, some of us just hide it better than others.

I will get the numbers I mentioned yesterday, but there's A LOT of misinformation being posted (numbers, what current policies are, etc).

I encourage everyone to attend the monthly ESCH meetings, meet with Chief Ayoub & Cook, and participate in Jax 2025 if they wish to be fully informed with factual information about this complicated issue.

Here's the number I mentioned I would get. In 2012, of the 73 individuals deemed 'chronic' misdemeanor offenders in Downtown, 43 of the chronic offenders were homeless. Chronic offenders made up 40% of all Downtown misdemeanors. Per JSO.

The chronic offender is the category of individual which the Sheriff advocated building a special release center for on the edge of town, as discharging them directly back into the same environment is not beneficial.

Quote from: Bill Hoff on August 29, 2013, 12:27:57 PM
I will get the numbers I mentioned yesterday, but there's A LOT of misinformation being posted (numbers, what current policies are, etc).

I encourage everyone to attend the monthly ESCH meetings, meet with Chief Ayoub & Cook, and participate in Jax 2025 if they wish to be fully informed with factual information about this complicated issue.

Frankly Bill, as I have most often seen misinformation put out by you and SPAR Council, I tend to believe the information put out by Jaybird and some others is indeed factual.  Better than most, I know exactly how information can be manipulated to serve one purpose or an opposite one. I know what side of things you seem to be on and find it difficult to trust in what you say.  I put out factual information based on real experience.  What do you have? A number put out by the sheriff's office advocating a relocation camp for the homeless.   Are these the "staggering " numbers someone else talked about? Also, what about the issue of others sending their homeless here?  Got numbers for them as well?

^ I believe you are talking about two separate things, or at least I am. Though ESCH is a great service, and Miss Dawn has made huge strides since taking over and achieved a lot, they primarily concentrate on the "next-step" after the shelters. Those that have a job or someone ofsupporting themselves at least partially and are ready to move on from a transitional environment. They also focus on the grant/education side, which is needed, but they don't deal with the direct care services provided to those on the street which this thread applies to and which Columbia and other cities are trying to resolve.

Also, there is a difference between arrests and incidents. The incidents in Sector A (you cannot have fair discussion if you include all of Zone 1) far outnumber the arrests. This is anywhere in the city though. However, it is disproportionally for the homeless DT by far. I believe the incidents relating to homeless is somewhere around 70% of all incidents reported in Sector A. But there is a reason for that, Everytime a situation/altercation/snafu/disturbance occurs every shelter has the policy to contact JSO because first and foremost is the safety of the employees/volunteers/other residents. This is a directive at EVERY shelter in Jax. (I have copies of each shelters operating procedures if you'd like to look.) So that does draw a disproportionate amount of JSO's resources for their patrol.  But the actual commission of crimes in the areas of these shelters is not disproportionate as some may believe, which I tried to relate with those quick stats that were obtained last night (which I will also provide all contacts for so you could verify) and what that same Chief presented back in July, so I think the devil here is in the details.

Keep in mind that when creating reports such as Jax2025, ESCH, Catholic Charities, Lutheran Social Services and even CRM are required to do, each has its own intended mission. They are not lying in their facts, but they do need to skew those facts to fit their objective. The competition for resources is just too stiff to not do so. When I first started writing for grants, I was educated with the adage of "think of it as painting a picture, you aren't painting the whole forest, you are just painting those trees which will attract the wildlife you seek."

[Edit:Heck I even skewed the numbers here by not including anyone arrested where charges were dropped the next morning because if the court of law didn't see fit to follow through why should I adjudge them guilty and artificially inflate numbers to create a problem that doesn't exist?]

As for the policies mentioned being wrong, I would question whomever presented such information to you as not only do I know them by heart (I aided in writing some of them) but those specific policies about admittance are very true as I spend time filling in at the night watch for Sulzbacher and Trinity on some weekends. So if someone is misrepresenting how the city shelters are operated, that should probably be brought to the attention of whichever agency was doing the research

I'll PM you one example.