At the end of the day, the mayor gave little to no real consideration to the placement of this shelter. He ran on a promise to end unsheltered homelessness—but promises mean nothing without a thoughtful, workable plan. This is reactive policy with no real vision or care regarding what the fallout will be, something we unfortunately have grown very used to tolerating (to our ongoing detriment) in this city.
The term *NIMBY* has become a blunt weapon in Portland, used to discredit legitimate concerns. It’s not unreasonable to expect safe, livable neighborhoods. Wanting basic order is not a lack of compassion—it’s a call for accountability. There’s a line between compassion and enabling, and this city crossed it long ago. If our current leaders can’t see that, they aren’t the right people for these jobs.
Well said! Having garnered our votes, Mayor Wilson has betrayed us by ignoring the codified pledge to seek neighborhood input. He jeopardizes the future of a neighborhood already suffering from diminishing property values, fleeing businesses and the vestiges of drug use: garbage, shoplifting, syringes, graffiti, and human waste. It is the residents who clean this up - not the city. Unpoliced but heavily taxed, we shoulder the costs of NWCC who responds to our security concerns and serviced the unhoused. Mayor Wilson, the future of the Pearl rests in your hands - and it doesn’t look good.
NWCC refers to Northwest Community Conservancy, a nonprofit underwritten by private donations and voluntary assessments on homeowners of many Pearl condominiums.
Mayor Wilson—who portrayed himself as a man of the people when he was campaigning—apparently has no desire to actually listen to we the people. His quantity-over-quality warehousing approach to homelessness (“1200 beds!”) doesn’t address any of the underlying causes (e.g. drug addiction, mental illness, physical disability, joblessness) of this growing urban issue. And criticizing those who would protect their already challenged neighborhood from a city-imposed influx of often drug-using, littering, begging and/or mentally unstable people as “NIMBY” adds insult to injury. As someone who's lived in the Pearl District for 25 years, I strongly object to Wilson's irrational and unwelcome plan for our neighborhood.
You nailed it, Naomi. Once again voters were fooled by another candidate, misled by the platitudes that now-Mayor Wilson spewed during his campaign. He was not my first choice but I was willing to give him a chance; I am clearly disappointed by his willful callousness for and disregard of our neighborhoods and its residents. The deterioration of Portland continues under his watch.
Mr. Mayor, can I trust you when 200 homeless people, many who have mental issues or are drug addicts, are all expelled at onto the street at 6:00 am without any wraparound services?
* Where will they go as they flood the nearby neighborhoods all at once?
* Where will they go to the bathroom? (We already clean feces and urine from our sidewalks building entrances every day)
* Where will they get food? How will they pay for it?
* Where will the drug users get their drugs?
* For those who brought their meth and fentanyl into the shelter, how soon will they take some hits after leaving?
* Will the harm reduction folks to be there on one side of the street and the drug sellers on the opposite side
* Will hundreds of more tents move into the surrounding area so folks have a place to go nearby?
* Who will be actively monitoring the situation each day?
* When problems arise, how quickly will Street Response or the police respond? What actions can they take? Have you developed specific action and response scenarios?
* After six months of this, what are your specific criteria for claiming success or admitting failure?
Finally, when will you stop enacting decisions that have already been made while pretending to get our input?
Dan, highly unlikely that the mayor will even read Allan's post or everyone's comments. He has not responded to my letter that I sent early last week, before it was published here. His willful disregard for our neighborhoods and residents blatantly demonstrates how little he cares for the voters who put their trust in him. I'd love to recall him.
Indeed! You summed up the issues that frame the lack of citizen involvement. Lack of trust!
Will the govt. trust me when I decide not to pay salaries- i.e. taxes, that support decision makers who do not trust me enough to paricipate in decisions that effect me, my safety, my quality of life? To say nothing about the people who need help the most?
Wilson was a last-minute creation of the town's legacy media--nice guy, no surprises, will listen to his betters. And he's not a loose cannon like Rene.
He's dumb as a stump about homelessness and its root causes--but he's all-in on creating new bureaucracies and "service" organizations that suck up tax dollars. The hard-core feral on our streets will probably not allow themselves to be herded into overnight dormitories (Kevin Dahlgren's reporting makes that clear), but the people doing the "servicing" will get steady paychecks and that's all that matters. Bonus: the cartels will have a steady supply of customers in one place. Everyone wins!
Well done piece - hit the nail on the head of what I continue to wrestle with. I don’t think those that use the sole argument of their property values helps shake the NIMBY perception but there also doesn’t seem to be areas in the middle for opinions to sit, which just perpetuates the national political realm that we all try to do better than. I don’t disagree with the statements that people living on the streets are people too and we need to show them compassion, but I see that we are not showing compassion for them or the city as a whole for continuing the rinse-and-repeat methods of managing these issues and congregate shelters are no different. These people have been essentially kidnapped by their mental illness, regardless of whether it is organic or drug-induced, and until we free them from their kidnapper the solution to just put a roof over their head overnight is not a solution. Mayor Wilson’s op ed in Newsweek indicated his shelter experience was far different than what reality is - if all shelters had women with beautiful voices singing them to sleep every neighborhood would be clamoring to have one.
Neighborhoods where people live and are out cleaning and fixing things that the city hasn’t stepped up to do have the right to be a stakeholder when the mayor wants to make a significant change to the neighborhood. Plain and simple.
I was on the NWDA call and was struck by the comments that we have don’t have a shelter problem, we have an addiction problem. The mayor said that they chose two locations in the NW because of the 1100 tents cleared, but did they stop to determine why this is the case? Is this because of the empty storefronts that allow drug deals and usage to go on unchecked? Is it the proximity to the 405 where the city knows is an easy on and off ramp for the dealers? Is it easy access to multiple stores where you can shoplift without consequences?
Instead of a no barrier congregate shelter if the mayor chose these locations for treatment centers I believe there would be far more backing. Otherwise I see this as another version of Measure 110’s missteps - just make it easier for people to continue to use and not have the resources to truly help them…and the city as a whole.
I feel we are caught in Mayor Wilson’s bold campaign promise and he will do whatever it takes to give himself the gold star for doing what he said he would do. We were looking for a fresh start in leadership with real solutions, not a bold promise that would be fulfilled regardless of the cost. That cost will be a continued gap in the pain-to-pay ratio, which has law-abiding tax-paying citizens go elsewhere. This isn’t a fatalistic view but is reality. If Mayor Wilson wants to do right by the city he needs to involve those that are knee deep in reality.
Well said, every word. Thank you. If only the mayor and his staff, and our city councilors, would read yours and others' words and heed them. But, as I stated in another comment, his callous disregard of our neighborhoods and residents is so blatant. He has betrayed the voters and our city.
At the end of the day, the mayor gave little to no real consideration to the placement of this shelter. He ran on a promise to end unsheltered homelessness—but promises mean nothing without a thoughtful, workable plan. This is reactive policy with no real vision or care regarding what the fallout will be, something we unfortunately have grown very used to tolerating (to our ongoing detriment) in this city.
The term *NIMBY* has become a blunt weapon in Portland, used to discredit legitimate concerns. It’s not unreasonable to expect safe, livable neighborhoods. Wanting basic order is not a lack of compassion—it’s a call for accountability. There’s a line between compassion and enabling, and this city crossed it long ago. If our current leaders can’t see that, they aren’t the right people for these jobs.
Well said! Having garnered our votes, Mayor Wilson has betrayed us by ignoring the codified pledge to seek neighborhood input. He jeopardizes the future of a neighborhood already suffering from diminishing property values, fleeing businesses and the vestiges of drug use: garbage, shoplifting, syringes, graffiti, and human waste. It is the residents who clean this up - not the city. Unpoliced but heavily taxed, we shoulder the costs of NWCC who responds to our security concerns and serviced the unhoused. Mayor Wilson, the future of the Pearl rests in your hands - and it doesn’t look good.
NWCC refers to Northwest Community Conservancy, a nonprofit underwritten by private donations and voluntary assessments on homeowners of many Pearl condominiums.
Mayor Wilson—who portrayed himself as a man of the people when he was campaigning—apparently has no desire to actually listen to we the people. His quantity-over-quality warehousing approach to homelessness (“1200 beds!”) doesn’t address any of the underlying causes (e.g. drug addiction, mental illness, physical disability, joblessness) of this growing urban issue. And criticizing those who would protect their already challenged neighborhood from a city-imposed influx of often drug-using, littering, begging and/or mentally unstable people as “NIMBY” adds insult to injury. As someone who's lived in the Pearl District for 25 years, I strongly object to Wilson's irrational and unwelcome plan for our neighborhood.
You nailed it, Naomi. Once again voters were fooled by another candidate, misled by the platitudes that now-Mayor Wilson spewed during his campaign. He was not my first choice but I was willing to give him a chance; I am clearly disappointed by his willful callousness for and disregard of our neighborhoods and its residents. The deterioration of Portland continues under his watch.
Mr. Mayor, can I trust you when 200 homeless people, many who have mental issues or are drug addicts, are all expelled at onto the street at 6:00 am without any wraparound services?
* Where will they go as they flood the nearby neighborhoods all at once?
* Where will they go to the bathroom? (We already clean feces and urine from our sidewalks building entrances every day)
* Where will they get food? How will they pay for it?
* Where will the drug users get their drugs?
* For those who brought their meth and fentanyl into the shelter, how soon will they take some hits after leaving?
* Will the harm reduction folks to be there on one side of the street and the drug sellers on the opposite side
* Will hundreds of more tents move into the surrounding area so folks have a place to go nearby?
* Who will be actively monitoring the situation each day?
* When problems arise, how quickly will Street Response or the police respond? What actions can they take? Have you developed specific action and response scenarios?
* After six months of this, what are your specific criteria for claiming success or admitting failure?
Finally, when will you stop enacting decisions that have already been made while pretending to get our input?
Dan, highly unlikely that the mayor will even read Allan's post or everyone's comments. He has not responded to my letter that I sent early last week, before it was published here. His willful disregard for our neighborhoods and residents blatantly demonstrates how little he cares for the voters who put their trust in him. I'd love to recall him.
Indeed! You summed up the issues that frame the lack of citizen involvement. Lack of trust!
Will the govt. trust me when I decide not to pay salaries- i.e. taxes, that support decision makers who do not trust me enough to paricipate in decisions that effect me, my safety, my quality of life? To say nothing about the people who need help the most?
Wilson was a last-minute creation of the town's legacy media--nice guy, no surprises, will listen to his betters. And he's not a loose cannon like Rene.
He's dumb as a stump about homelessness and its root causes--but he's all-in on creating new bureaucracies and "service" organizations that suck up tax dollars. The hard-core feral on our streets will probably not allow themselves to be herded into overnight dormitories (Kevin Dahlgren's reporting makes that clear), but the people doing the "servicing" will get steady paychecks and that's all that matters. Bonus: the cartels will have a steady supply of customers in one place. Everyone wins!
Well done piece - hit the nail on the head of what I continue to wrestle with. I don’t think those that use the sole argument of their property values helps shake the NIMBY perception but there also doesn’t seem to be areas in the middle for opinions to sit, which just perpetuates the national political realm that we all try to do better than. I don’t disagree with the statements that people living on the streets are people too and we need to show them compassion, but I see that we are not showing compassion for them or the city as a whole for continuing the rinse-and-repeat methods of managing these issues and congregate shelters are no different. These people have been essentially kidnapped by their mental illness, regardless of whether it is organic or drug-induced, and until we free them from their kidnapper the solution to just put a roof over their head overnight is not a solution. Mayor Wilson’s op ed in Newsweek indicated his shelter experience was far different than what reality is - if all shelters had women with beautiful voices singing them to sleep every neighborhood would be clamoring to have one.
Neighborhoods where people live and are out cleaning and fixing things that the city hasn’t stepped up to do have the right to be a stakeholder when the mayor wants to make a significant change to the neighborhood. Plain and simple.
I was on the NWDA call and was struck by the comments that we have don’t have a shelter problem, we have an addiction problem. The mayor said that they chose two locations in the NW because of the 1100 tents cleared, but did they stop to determine why this is the case? Is this because of the empty storefronts that allow drug deals and usage to go on unchecked? Is it the proximity to the 405 where the city knows is an easy on and off ramp for the dealers? Is it easy access to multiple stores where you can shoplift without consequences?
Instead of a no barrier congregate shelter if the mayor chose these locations for treatment centers I believe there would be far more backing. Otherwise I see this as another version of Measure 110’s missteps - just make it easier for people to continue to use and not have the resources to truly help them…and the city as a whole.
I feel we are caught in Mayor Wilson’s bold campaign promise and he will do whatever it takes to give himself the gold star for doing what he said he would do. We were looking for a fresh start in leadership with real solutions, not a bold promise that would be fulfilled regardless of the cost. That cost will be a continued gap in the pain-to-pay ratio, which has law-abiding tax-paying citizens go elsewhere. This isn’t a fatalistic view but is reality. If Mayor Wilson wants to do right by the city he needs to involve those that are knee deep in reality.
Well said, every word. Thank you. If only the mayor and his staff, and our city councilors, would read yours and others' words and heed them. But, as I stated in another comment, his callous disregard of our neighborhoods and residents is so blatant. He has betrayed the voters and our city.
Right On! And thank you for saying it so well!!
Janet Schaefer