Read on Twitter
With the caveat that delay ≠ total opposition, I was reminded in an interview today that Save Austin Now co-founder Cleo Petricek rose to semi-prominence as a critic of Austin homelessness policy when Council wanted to build a shelter near her South Austin neighborhood. https://twitter.com/MK6ATX/status/1354119350236684288
Petricek has since become one of the most vocal critics of the city's amended public camping ordinance.
But before that, she opposed a more viable way to reduce homelessness AND reduce the number of people camping in public – by fighting against a shelter in her backyard.
But before that, she opposed a more viable way to reduce homelessness AND reduce the number of people camping in public – by fighting against a shelter in her backyard.
More relevant to current Council discussion: how may people opposing a permanent supportive housing project would embrace a sanctioned encampment in their neighborhood? If CMs think they won't feel NIMBY pressure against those, then they should revise the 2019 SA shelter meetings
revisit, I mean, not revise.
Here's Cleo "public camping is ruining Austin" Petricek in 2019 using the very same process argument Kelly and supporters are deploying this week to potentially delay a vote on purchase of a motel to provide PSH units.
You can oppose public camping or PSH projects, but not both.
You can oppose public camping or PSH projects, but not both.
