Homer is most assuredly not crazy. Besides the largely empty PacWest center, which Allan shows in his piece, the new Ritz Carlton building is literally a vertical ghost town. Essentially none of the condos have sold. Excellent piece last year in the New Yorker magazine about efforts like this underway in New York City. (Subscription may be required) Can Turning Office Towers Into Apartments Save Downtowns?https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/06/can-turning-office-towers-into-apartments-save-downtowns
So the “solution” is to take inappropriate buildings all over the city and slowly destroy them by putting large populations of mentally ill and drug-addicted individuals inside? Have we simply abandoned any hope that tourists might someday return and want to stay in these places? Are we just telling nearby businesses and residents, “too bad”? When you planted roots here, it may have been a luxury hotel — but now it’s a mismanaged shelter, and your property values and quality of life don’t matter?
If the goal is to cement Portland’s reputation as a homeless and drug mecca, this is the way to do it. Keep driving taxpayers and businesses out while allowing the street population — and all the dysfunction that come with it — to expand unchecked. And please spare us the wisdom of the so-called mastermind behind the Navigation Center. That shelter has been anything but a success, and everyone living nearby knows it.
What the state actually needs is serious, sustained investment in mental health institutions, treatment facilities, and the laws that support involuntary commitment when necessary. We need enforcement of existing laws, not permissive drug policies that normalize hard-drug use and the chaos it breeds. We need fewer taxes, less bureaucracy (and less corruption), so it’s actually possible to run a business here.
The real solution is to put residents and businesses — the very people who make this city function — back at the center of policy. Stop turning homelessness into Portland’s defining industry and start governing for the people who live, work, and invest here.
If that is done, I’d wager that a large part of the current issues start to take care of themselves.
I agree with this; it's just about my first reaction when I read about trying to turn downtown vacant property into housing. I thought that suggestion was as shortsighted as the one about turning the Expo Center (and, by association, the MAX yellow line) into a homeless encampment. But I realized it wasn't realistic. The most I hoped for was that the first floor or basement parking of vacant downtown buildings might be converted into navigation and day centers that could be used by anyone passing through town as a YMCA or YWCA used to be used. Face it: Portland has always suffered from a lack of public restrooms for decades. Every tourist could benefit and it might raise the profile of these places, once established. There would be affordable laundry or inexpensive clothing services available (with possible exceptions for desperate cases), storage lockers with strict storage time lengths, monitored restrooms which give a job to someone who needs one in the community (restocking supplies, cleaning, keeping order - tips allowed). There could be referrals to services, an onsite first aid clinic (minimum amenity in all sectors of the city, don't need to be in very navigation or day center). Refer out for food and there should be a suggested donation. People don't value and tend to abuse things they get for free 100% of the time. It also keeps them coming back, rather than striving to move out of their situation. The idea should be to keep people taken care of and moving along. Actual living space would be reservable for a week at a time with limited renewal UNLESS the person was a diagnosed "burn out" who was never going to be able to return to a normal, productive life or refused to quit using or abusing whatever has brought them down. We need to consider how to handle that crowd. They, and those who are unrepentent predators who are only here to feed off of the vulnerable or do as they please regardless of the harm they inflict should not be encouraged in the least. We must be reasonably compassionate, but should not be foolish. Let Portland be seen as a place where someone might get a hand up and useful, life-changing referral, but not where they can settle where they please, taking what they want, when they want, staying as long as they want without making a move to better themselves, and fouling the city and threatening its residents in the process. The entire idea could be managed by a joint tourism and rejuvenation council.
Sure--let's have the city or county rent spaces....from Homer! Of course, there's the question of who will minister to the feral in these high rise charnel houses...which was a problem in some of Homer's previous dips into the wacky world of "servicing" the homeless.
If you've been watching Kevin Dahlgren's brave reporting, many of the "homeless" feel perfectly at home on the streets. The hard core feckless will remain to clutter up various locations around town.
There was a time within human memory when there were very, very few feral on Portland's streets...until Charlie Hales got a bright idea and Ted Wheeler lost his nerve (if he ever had it). Might be interesting to revisit those halcyon days...and ask: what was different?
Here's another approach. There are numerous failed indoor malls throughout the United States that have been shuttered. Why not have the state/county/city purchase these malls, and convert them to one-stop 24 hour homeless/drug addiction/mental illness treatment centers? They would be very easy to segment by need. They could also be used to teach job skills to go back out into the community. I think it's far better use of real estate than putting homeless into high rise office towers.
You have noticed that no one is suggesting that the Lloyd Center or the Memorial Coliseum be turned over to the homeless but maybe they think it's better to double down on sacrificing a foundering inner west side than impact the district next to the proposed replacement for the Moda Center for the recently-sold Trailblazers and the heavily vaunted "restored" Albina district with its covered freeway plan. I don't ultimately think a plan like the one suggested by Homer would ever happen as long as the properties are owned by private citizens or conglomerates with business interests; they'd rather remain empty and hope for better days and a higher rental rate. I assume they are paying taxes on these properties even without income. The city would have to exercise eminent domain which would mean losing property tax income and paying the old owner "fair compensation". The city (and financially speaking, the citizens of Portland) would either become landlords or contract with separate agencies (probably from California) to manage the buildings for indeterminate amounts of time and mixed populations of burn-outs, predators, and people who want to reclaim a productive life, attracted by the lure of free or cheap housing not available to low-income workers in Portland. It could encourage an influx not unlike the hopefuls who flocked from Oklahoma to California in the 1930s. I'd think carefully about this before making a move.
I don't think eminent domain would come into it. A few landlords would be willing to receive rent or tax relief. And some may see value in ingratiating themselves with the mayor.
What's the difference between using vacant office buildings Downtown to house homeless people or using a vacant building at NW Northrup and 14th? Many people--and apparently including Mr. Williams--forget that MORE people live Downtown than in the Pearl District. The office buildings Downtown are so prominent, and apartment buildings usually have ground-floor office and retail, so people don't look up. According to at least one source, the three densest neighborhoods in Portland are (in order), Old Town-Chinatown, the Pearl, and Downtown--and the last two are neck-and-neck. So if you object to locating the 200-bed low-entry shelter in a high-density residential area, how can it be acceptable to locate it Downtown? For a little context, I am a long-past president of the neighborhood association for Downtown (late '70s/early '80s) and have lived in Northwest for almost 40 years.
Homer is most assuredly not crazy. Besides the largely empty PacWest center, which Allan shows in his piece, the new Ritz Carlton building is literally a vertical ghost town. Essentially none of the condos have sold. Excellent piece last year in the New Yorker magazine about efforts like this underway in New York City. (Subscription may be required) Can Turning Office Towers Into Apartments Save Downtowns?https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/05/06/can-turning-office-towers-into-apartments-save-downtowns
From your lips, to God’s ear….
So the “solution” is to take inappropriate buildings all over the city and slowly destroy them by putting large populations of mentally ill and drug-addicted individuals inside? Have we simply abandoned any hope that tourists might someday return and want to stay in these places? Are we just telling nearby businesses and residents, “too bad”? When you planted roots here, it may have been a luxury hotel — but now it’s a mismanaged shelter, and your property values and quality of life don’t matter?
If the goal is to cement Portland’s reputation as a homeless and drug mecca, this is the way to do it. Keep driving taxpayers and businesses out while allowing the street population — and all the dysfunction that come with it — to expand unchecked. And please spare us the wisdom of the so-called mastermind behind the Navigation Center. That shelter has been anything but a success, and everyone living nearby knows it.
What the state actually needs is serious, sustained investment in mental health institutions, treatment facilities, and the laws that support involuntary commitment when necessary. We need enforcement of existing laws, not permissive drug policies that normalize hard-drug use and the chaos it breeds. We need fewer taxes, less bureaucracy (and less corruption), so it’s actually possible to run a business here.
The real solution is to put residents and businesses — the very people who make this city function — back at the center of policy. Stop turning homelessness into Portland’s defining industry and start governing for the people who live, work, and invest here.
If that is done, I’d wager that a large part of the current issues start to take care of themselves.
I agree with this; it's just about my first reaction when I read about trying to turn downtown vacant property into housing. I thought that suggestion was as shortsighted as the one about turning the Expo Center (and, by association, the MAX yellow line) into a homeless encampment. But I realized it wasn't realistic. The most I hoped for was that the first floor or basement parking of vacant downtown buildings might be converted into navigation and day centers that could be used by anyone passing through town as a YMCA or YWCA used to be used. Face it: Portland has always suffered from a lack of public restrooms for decades. Every tourist could benefit and it might raise the profile of these places, once established. There would be affordable laundry or inexpensive clothing services available (with possible exceptions for desperate cases), storage lockers with strict storage time lengths, monitored restrooms which give a job to someone who needs one in the community (restocking supplies, cleaning, keeping order - tips allowed). There could be referrals to services, an onsite first aid clinic (minimum amenity in all sectors of the city, don't need to be in very navigation or day center). Refer out for food and there should be a suggested donation. People don't value and tend to abuse things they get for free 100% of the time. It also keeps them coming back, rather than striving to move out of their situation. The idea should be to keep people taken care of and moving along. Actual living space would be reservable for a week at a time with limited renewal UNLESS the person was a diagnosed "burn out" who was never going to be able to return to a normal, productive life or refused to quit using or abusing whatever has brought them down. We need to consider how to handle that crowd. They, and those who are unrepentent predators who are only here to feed off of the vulnerable or do as they please regardless of the harm they inflict should not be encouraged in the least. We must be reasonably compassionate, but should not be foolish. Let Portland be seen as a place where someone might get a hand up and useful, life-changing referral, but not where they can settle where they please, taking what they want, when they want, staying as long as they want without making a move to better themselves, and fouling the city and threatening its residents in the process. The entire idea could be managed by a joint tourism and rejuvenation council.
Stop turning homelessness into Portland’s defining industry and start governing for the people who live, work, and invest here.
A quotable quote. I'm gonna borrow that!
Sure--let's have the city or county rent spaces....from Homer! Of course, there's the question of who will minister to the feral in these high rise charnel houses...which was a problem in some of Homer's previous dips into the wacky world of "servicing" the homeless.
If you've been watching Kevin Dahlgren's brave reporting, many of the "homeless" feel perfectly at home on the streets. The hard core feckless will remain to clutter up various locations around town.
There was a time within human memory when there were very, very few feral on Portland's streets...until Charlie Hales got a bright idea and Ted Wheeler lost his nerve (if he ever had it). Might be interesting to revisit those halcyon days...and ask: what was different?
Here's another approach. There are numerous failed indoor malls throughout the United States that have been shuttered. Why not have the state/county/city purchase these malls, and convert them to one-stop 24 hour homeless/drug addiction/mental illness treatment centers? They would be very easy to segment by need. They could also be used to teach job skills to go back out into the community. I think it's far better use of real estate than putting homeless into high rise office towers.
You have noticed that no one is suggesting that the Lloyd Center or the Memorial Coliseum be turned over to the homeless but maybe they think it's better to double down on sacrificing a foundering inner west side than impact the district next to the proposed replacement for the Moda Center for the recently-sold Trailblazers and the heavily vaunted "restored" Albina district with its covered freeway plan. I don't ultimately think a plan like the one suggested by Homer would ever happen as long as the properties are owned by private citizens or conglomerates with business interests; they'd rather remain empty and hope for better days and a higher rental rate. I assume they are paying taxes on these properties even without income. The city would have to exercise eminent domain which would mean losing property tax income and paying the old owner "fair compensation". The city (and financially speaking, the citizens of Portland) would either become landlords or contract with separate agencies (probably from California) to manage the buildings for indeterminate amounts of time and mixed populations of burn-outs, predators, and people who want to reclaim a productive life, attracted by the lure of free or cheap housing not available to low-income workers in Portland. It could encourage an influx not unlike the hopefuls who flocked from Oklahoma to California in the 1930s. I'd think carefully about this before making a move.
The law of unintended consequences has a tendency to come back and bite.
I don't think eminent domain would come into it. A few landlords would be willing to receive rent or tax relief. And some may see value in ingratiating themselves with the mayor.
What's the difference between using vacant office buildings Downtown to house homeless people or using a vacant building at NW Northrup and 14th? Many people--and apparently including Mr. Williams--forget that MORE people live Downtown than in the Pearl District. The office buildings Downtown are so prominent, and apartment buildings usually have ground-floor office and retail, so people don't look up. According to at least one source, the three densest neighborhoods in Portland are (in order), Old Town-Chinatown, the Pearl, and Downtown--and the last two are neck-and-neck. So if you object to locating the 200-bed low-entry shelter in a high-density residential area, how can it be acceptable to locate it Downtown? For a little context, I am a long-past president of the neighborhood association for Downtown (late '70s/early '80s) and have lived in Northwest for almost 40 years.