Mayor Wilson spurns anti-shelter rally
Call to action draws overflow crowd in Pearl District
Rising antipathy toward homeless shelters in Northwest Portland was demonstrated by an overflow crowd at the Lucky Labrador on Monday night. Last month, 375 joined a Zoom call protest, and about 250 showed up in person to this event to share their anger over Mayor Keith Wilson’s decision to place a 200-bed overnight shelter without their input.
The event was billed as an opportunity to get answers from elected officials, but the mayor; city councilors Eric Zimmerman, Olivia Clark and Mitch Green; and Multnomah County Commissioner Meghan Moyer did not accept invitations sent to them five days earlier. The only elected official to appear was District 33 state Representative Shannon Jones Isadore.
Todd Zarnitz, president of the Northwest District Association, sponsor of the event, opened with a call to action.
“We are also the victims of clownish, performative group of electeds who refuse to open their eyes to reality and who refuse to show their faces in public when their constituents demand accountability and explanation for their actions,” he said. “Come to us with a real plan that isn't a fast-tracked and half-baked campaign promise.”
He was followed by Bruce Studer, president of the Pearl District Neighborhood Association, who announced an even-larger event to come—a July 28 rally at the Portland Center Stage.
Sharon Meieran, former county commissioner told the crowd she agreed with Zarnitz and Studer. In her terms in office, she said she was “rebuffed at every turn” when she proposed alternative solutions to the homeless crisis.
Wilson did not respond to Zarnitz’s invitation. Instead, he released a statement outlining planned efforts to control livability impacts on the surrounding neighborhood, while declaring that the shelter at 1435 NW Northrup St. will open in September.
Wilson has also given his support for a 75-bed Blanchet House women’s shelter three blocks away at Northwest 17th and Lovejoy streets that is planned to open in October.
As you reported, Mayor Wilson promises to "control livability impacts on the neighborhood," but we KNOW that that is not possible. I have testimony from residents around the shelters in neighborhoods (i.e., Clinton Triangle, Multnomah Village, and River District), and they tell us that the city is simply unable to keep up with the litter, loitering, drug-dealing, camping, prostitution, graffiti, and crime that ALWAYS and INEVITABLY trails the shelters. The nearby residents tell us it's exhausting to have to continually report issues to the authorities, only to be ignored. One neighborhood group has been unable to get ANY response to their complaints about the nearby shelter for 14 months! And since the shelter proposed for the Pearl is of the lowest-barrier, overnight-only format, its impacts will be even greater than those other shelters. Remember, despite GNAs (Good Neighbor Agreements) that promise to control camping around the site, the River District Navigation Center (just a few blocks away) has only been able to document 6.5 camp-free weeks on that shelter's perimeter over a period of 5 years, despite the city's promises! Crime and safety issues got so bad around the Old Town shelter that it had to be shuttered. This abject failure of policy and complete lack of communication with area residents gives clear cause for NW/Pearl residents to reject the proposed shelter and to insist on NEW directions -- recovery beds and services -- that 1) don't bail out big developers, 2) don't sacrifice working families' livability, and 3) actually make a real dent in the homeless crisis. As relayed by Vadim Mozyrsky and clear-eyed homeless experts: The cities that have been successful in addressing homelessness long-term, and particularly when coupled with drug addiction, have placed shelters in areas where they would have the least impact on residents and the economy. This not only benefits the city residents who are working and raising families, but also helps homeless individuals by placing them in environments conducive to recovery, away from drug dealing and other negative influences. Makes common sense, right? Or as Alan Evans of Bybee Lakes says, "If you take a sick person and just put them in a house, you get a sick house." If the Mayor proceeds with this ill-conceived and expensive plan, we'll not only get a sick house, but a sick NEIGHBORHOOD that will spiral into a deep decline, just at the moment when it’s starting to get back on its feet.
“We know what’s best for you” seems to be the prevailing attitude of City elected officials for as long as I can remember. Such arrogance and unwillingness to address the legitimate concerns of tax-paying local residents is appalling.