Read on Twitter
Sorry for the multiple revisions--I want to get this right.
After 2.5 hours of the hearing (TBC tomorrow at 10) it's more clear to me than ever that the fight worth fighting is against involuntary transfers, not just NIMBYs.
After 2.5 hours of the hearing (TBC tomorrow at 10) it's more clear to me than ever that the fight worth fighting is against involuntary transfers, not just NIMBYs.
City law's argument is that shelter residents don't have standing to challenge their transfer unless they can prove irreparable harm will occur (a high bar). That means they can usually only challenge the transfer after it happens with all the disruption that brings.
at the end of the day, if the Lucerne litigants are granted standing, it could challenge that assumption (that homeless people can be moved at the whim of DHS with very limited exceptions.) That is major, and so much more important than anything else in play...
That the NIMBYs are controlling the narrative on this is no surprise, but we should be fighting for ALL transfers to be voluntary ONLY. Not at the discretion of DHS, not at the request of racist/classist neighbors, only when it makes sense for human beings who lack housing.
it is obvious from the hearing: some residents want to stay, some (maybe) want to move, everyone wants a home. Watching this get manipulated into grand arguments about who gets to decide where homeless people reside is bewildering. The answer, obviously, is: homeless people.
Anyway, this is just my very very biased outsider's opinion. Follow @UWSOpenHearts and activists like @homeless_hero and @lovingpawsmike for actual on the ground perspective and insights.
