CityView Portal
| We are sorry but no more comments are being taken for this case |
| Return to CityView Portal |
| Submitted comments will appear below after staff approval. | |
|---|---|
| Hugh Brown III | 8/9/2010 9:35:42 AM |
| I support the concept but not the location. Homeless shelters and halfway houses should be in a high income neighborhoods. Maybe that would get people to find solutions social problems. | |
| Sarana Schell | 8/9/2010 9:29:35 AM |
| I live in Fairview and I support the Karluk Inn. We already have many chronic inebriates in Fairview - I'd rather have as many as possible in supervised housing than at risk of death on the streets from hypothermia, violence or a passing car on dark, icy streets. Too many homeless have already died this year. I appreciate the work the organizers have done to address the valid concerns raised about the project. Now I'd love to be part of a community that steps up and helps address the problems of alcohol addiction and homelessness. | |
| brandy pennington | 8/9/2010 8:55:16 AM |
| The muni has already spent milllions of dollars trying to clean up fairview. I do not understand why they would want to regress. Can you please tell me what the chances of this karluk mannor house beign approved? THANK YOU for your time Kindly, Brandy P | |
| Mark Erickson | 8/9/2010 8:02:48 AM |
| I wish to voice my support for Karluk Manor. This will not only save lives but also save the city substantial resources that would otherwise be spent on emergency room visits, hospitalization, incarceration and legal costs. This fiscal benefits of this approach have been well researched (see M Larimer et al, 2009, J American Med Asso v 301 pp1349). Sincerely, Mark Erickson | |
| Gail Tharpe-Lucero | 7/29/2010 7:59:57 AM |
| A bit of my background to begin. I work to provide health services and support to those who are experiencing homelessness in Juneau. I am a member of the Juneau Homeless Coalition and the National Health Care for the Homeless Council. These opportunities have given me intimate insight in to the difficulties helping to transition people from dispair to hope. The Housing First model has proven to be successful to provide a support system to change peoples lives and help them become productive citizens. I strongly support the Housing First Concept along with the case management support systems that it provides to change peoples lives and reduce the impact on communities that results from the increasing number of people who are now experiencing homelessness. Karluk Manor has the potential to change the face of Anchorage in positive and meaningful ways. If you need more specifics about successes in programs such as the one Karluk Manor is proposing visit the website www.nhch.org. That is the National Health Care for the Homeless Council's website. This organization is a group of direct service provider and administrator that are innovaters that work with those in dispair to provide resources that increase the likelihood of success with programs such as Karluk Manor's Housing First proposal. Giving people Hope and Stability with Compassion is what our community members, our local governments, and our state governments should be about. Our federal leaders are now working to lead the way by working with organizations such as the National Health Care for the Homeless Council to obtain the knowledge and expertise to make it happen. Thank you for taking the time to read this document. I hope you will support the Housing First Project in Anchorage, Kaluk Manor. Sincerely Gail Tharpe-Lucero, PA-C | |
| Penny Kirkland | 7/26/2010 2:49:46 PM |
| Call it Karluk Manor, or whatever you want.... its just a bad idea!!! | |
| Edna Frankle | 7/26/2010 2:48:11 PM |
| My husband and I have lived in Anchorage for 53 years. The deaths of the homeless alcholics are nothing new, we just hear about it more due to the media. Our tax money would be much better spent taking care of the homeless families in Anchorage. Help those who help themselves! | |
| Carolina Stacey | 7/26/2010 2:43:51 PM |
| There are many questions that we as the Fairview community have asked our politicians, city official and Rural Cap. Now we are asking you; the members of the Patting and Zoning committee; to put our Fairview community First. It seems like we have heard little or nothing about the negative impacts Karluk Manor will have on our business and residents. Rural Cap paints a rosy picture of great success; and we know their intentions are good; but unfortunately more is needed than just words to make their good intentions become actions that will benefit our community. Rural Cap always talks about how great it is for these 40 some inebriate homeless individuals to have a place they can call home. The question is: How did this 40 plus individuals become more important than the hundreds that already call Fairview their home. People like me, who work, pay taxes, raise families and let’s face it people who contribute to our Community. Why are we not concern with the social consequences and the negative impacts a facility like his one will have around our families and businesses that have called Fairview home for many years. Rural Cap concentrates their efforts in providing services for the needy but they focus their efforts solely on those they serve and often forget the negative impacts these individuals bring to the rest of society. They need to serve the needy but also they need to look at the greater picture and serve our city as a whole. You as part of the Zoning and Planning committee must understand the question and decision at hand. You are deciding if a facility like this one meets the requirements to grant their conditional use and if their request for variance is necessary. As the Planning and Zoning committee you may only approve the conditional use if the commission finds that ALL of the following 4 standards are satisfied: 1. How will the proposed conditional use for Karluk Manor furthers the goals and policies of the comprehensive development plan and conforms to the comprehensive development plan in the manner required by AMC 21.05 2. How will the proposed conditional use for Karluk Manor conforms to the standards for the use in this title and regulations promulgated under this title. 3. How will the proposed conditional use for Karluk Manor will be compatible with existing and planned land uses in the surrounding neighborhood and with their intent of use district. 4. How will the proposed conditional use for Karluk Manor will NOT have a negative impact on the items listed below: a. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic circulation and safety. b. The Demand for and availability of public services and facilities. c. Noise, air, water or other forms of environmental pollution d. The maintenance of compatible and efficient development patterns and land use intensities. I would like to address several points that in my opinion are often misrepresented by Rural Cap in their attempt to charm supporters and politician. Some of these points are directly part of the conditional use standards and some are not but are important enough that I feel I need to bring them to your attention. A fact that Rural Cap likes to bring up often is the number of deaths our city has experience in the last couple of years. Many of the homeless drinkers that passed away the past few years bringing this whole “Homeless Taskforce” into existence did not die from hypothermia or from being without a home. They died due to health complications due to alcohol related issues. Their health has been affected by the many years of alcohol abuse and if they continue this cycle a roof over their heads will not stop the dying. 1811 Eastlake has a nick name on the streets of Seattle. It’s called the “Death House” because in the first eight months of being open six of its residents died from alcohol related deaths. The fire department responded 148 times in these same 8 months, every one of these 148 visits were for medical assistance. Statistically RURAL CAP says it will save the city money in the short term, but as the people that are housed in these apartments are allowed to continue to drink their bodies will continue to deteriorate from alcohol related illnesses and substance abuse and thus require more medical care in the future. What is the estimated cost of health care for these individuals in the long run??? Margaret King a manager from 1811 Eastlake was quoted in the New York Times saying that resident’s health problems were already driving up medical cost, this is in 2006 after 8 months from opening. WE need to hear the good and bad about the Seattle Experiment. Not only the good. I am not even going to bring up the differences in budget and robust services that Seattle offers and has access to; that will not be offer in Karluk Manor. I understand that with their low budget they could not afford nor could they provide such services and I also understand that the conditional use limits this services too, so we won’t go into that. Another point that has been largely under played by Rural Cap is the traffic in both 5th and 6th avenue. Rural cap has continuously mentioned that there will not be additional pedestrian traffic from the traffic that the old Red Roof Inn was generating. However most tourists either rent a vehicle or use taxi services. The residents of Karluk Manor will not be using vehicles as many do not have driver’s licenses or they will be on foot as they depend on public transportation. When Rural Cap says there will not be an increase in pedestrian traffic they are misrepresenting and underestimating the needs of the population they will be serving. They support their statement mentioning that the pervious use of Red Roof Inn created the same level of pedestrian traffic as Karluk Manor will be creating and they quote the Traffic Department stating that they do not believe that the site will result in any significant increase in pedestrian traffic or safety issues. They believe the proposed use is likely to reduce traffic volumes from the previous use of the site. I have personally talked with Justin Doll one of the traffic supervisors from APD who has mentioned how 5th avenue and Karluk is the most ticketed red-light in town. This is a major safety concern for these inebriated homeless individuals. This is without mentioning all the vehicle to vehicle collisions that both 5th and 6th avenue have. Rural Cap has gone on record mentioning that over the past 11 years there have only been 2 pedestrian accidents on those corners. I have witnessed 2 accidents in the past few years alone that involved pedestrians. I am sure everyone remembers the homeless individual that was run by an 18-wheeler on 6th avenue and there was another accident on 5th avenue where a customer leaving the Lucky Wishbone was hit but an SUV as she was crossing the intersection on 5th. Those 2 accidents come to mind of the many that occur in those intersections. It would be irresponsible to house inebriate individuals in a location that could put their lives at risk. I would like to know who will be responsible if one of their tenants gets kill while crossing these intersections. Will it be Rural Cap or will it be the city??? There many other points I could address but I am witness of the testimony that many other members of our community made on July 19th, 2010. So I won’t burden you with unnecessary text. I will however touch one more point that is important to me. Policy 62 from the Anchorage Comprehensive Plan 2020 states: Distribute throughout the Municipality residential facilities that are supported by government agencies and operated for health, social services, or correctional purposes. Karluk Manor will be supported by various government agencies and will be operated for both health and social service purposes. Adding one more facility offering such services in a neighborhood that is already burden with highly disproportionate quantities of public services for the very same population they will be servicing is not in the cities plan. Instead is poor planning. The Planning and Zoning staff report has confirmed that the location of this facility will result in an overburden to this community and does not comply with Policy 62 of our Anchorage Comprehensive Plan 2020. I am satisfied and believe in the committee to do the right thing. To follow the rules that are set upon you to make this decision and to not be influence by social service providers whom have constantly asked you to be compassionate and allow this facility to become a reality. Vote No on the conditional use permit. | |
| Eric Lervaag | 7/26/2010 2:41:20 PM |
| I am opposed to this project on every level! The sight is only one of many things wrong with it! | |
| Steve Yancy | 7/26/2010 2:37:24 PM |
| I do not support Karluk Manor! | |
| Heidi Heinrich | 7/26/2010 2:22:38 PM |
| In discussions of the proposed Karluk Manor it is consistently compared to the 1811 Eastlake project in Seattle. Unfortunately there are some glaring differences not being discussed. The Seattle example is located in a higher end area of Seattle not in an area already plagued by inebriated people, sleep of shelters, detox centers, soup kitchens, and the city jails. The demographics of the inhabitants of 1811 Eastlake are very different then those of the proposed Karluk Manor. Over 60% of those living in the Seattle facility are older white males, generally solo drinkers. In Anchorage that will not be the case. Here the demographics of our homeless chronic inebriates are not solo drinkers. Our camps and corners are full of groups in which drinking is a social activity. Those of us who have lived and worked in Fairview for any length of time know this. The residents of Karluk Manor would be these same groups we see gathered on the corners. Corners like 5th and Ingra, where the Carrs and Oaken Keg stores are located. Who doesn’t reach over and lock their car door when they catch the red light there? The owner, George Brown and the management of the Lucky Wishbone are concerned. We are concerned the corner of 5th and Karluk will soon have the same reputation. With our restaurant located directly across the street from this facility how can you possibly assure us that our business will not suffer? We are a family restaurant, a business that has been part of this community since 1955. That’s 55 years of welcoming Alaskan families, 55 years of employing Alaska’s youth. How can we assure our customers and our employees that the family atmosphere of the Lucky Wishbone will not be affected by the wet house called Karluk Manor. We are very aware of the plans to house the 55 worst offenders of the CSP system. The children of Fairview already are at a greater risk then in any other area of Anchorage. They deal with the violence of those involved in drug trafficing. Now, are we going to add this new danger to their lives. This project will put unpredictable chronic alchoholics well within the 500 foot area surrounding the children’s park. These zones are set by our city council to protect our children. Again I would ask you, why are these people being put before the people that live and work in Fairview? Would you want your young son or daughter living, playing, or working next to this housing facility? During the public hearing last Monday evening Mrs. Yoshimura mentioned a facility in her neighborhood that she hadn’t realized was there. I would like to ask Mrs. Yoshimura, and all the members of this commission, to really think about whether or not a facility the size of Karluk Manor, housing the same homeless chronic inebriates would go unnoticed in their neighborhood. And how would your neighbors view your support of such a project? And please, while thinking this question over remember the social service facilities already existing in Fairview that I’m pretty sure do not exist in this great a number in any other neighborhood in Anchorage. Please say no to the special use permit related to this project! We of the Fairview community are very opposed to this facility and what it will mean for our neighborhood. We are counting on you to stop this from going forward. Thank you, HEIDI J. HEINRICH GENERAL MANAGER LUCKY WISHBONE 1033 EAST 5TH AVE. ANCHORAGE, AK. 99501 | |
| Roberta Winn | 7/26/2010 11:58:56 AM |
| I am already scare to visit the Lions Park by myself I always go with my husband when we walk the dogs. If this project goes we ewill have no where to take our dogs, even with my husband we will not frequent this park anymore. | |
| Maria Gonzales | 7/26/2010 11:57:27 AM |
| Our Fairview Park is already being used by these homeless drunks. And now we are going to allow a home that will house 48 individuals who will meet with their friends and use this park in the same way they have been doing. Rural cap can not mantain the park clean... say not. | |
| Tamara Musgruve | 7/26/2010 11:54:50 AM |
| 500 feet from a park is in my onpinion not enough distance. And now Rural cap wants it lowered???? just because they offer to clean it up and mantain it does not buy them a pass to request such varience. Say no!!! | |
| Jack O Perry | 7/26/2010 11:53:21 AM |
| I do not support the location. Say No to Rural cap. | |
| Lucas Mellozy | 7/26/2010 11:52:44 AM |
| I want to help the homeless but not at the expense of a neighborhood that is already struguling. Find a new location away from a recidential area where our youth will not be exposed to such social problems. | |
| Matt Mojorrow | 7/26/2010 11:49:52 AM |
| Please follow the advaice of your staff report and say not to Rural Cap too many problems. | |
| Melissa Mundel | 7/26/2010 11:48:58 AM |
| I do not support Kurlak Monor's location. Is poor city planning nd it will cost the fairview community the safety of their children. | |
| Liza Molino | 7/26/2010 11:47:52 AM |
| Kurlak Manor is a temporaty solution to a permenent problem. Fairview already has enough problems. I encorage you to go visit the Lions Park and spend a few hours looking around and you will see why Fariview can not take onto another social program of this size in their neighborhood. | |
| Mark Oden | 7/26/2010 11:46:09 AM |
| I do not support Karluk Manor. Find a new location. | |
| Jason Spinnel | 7/26/2010 11:45:22 AM |
| I do not support Karluk Manor. I am sick of hearing how housing first is the greatest thing… THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION HERE!!! Your job as a platting and zoning member is decide whether this location is correct and if there is enough evidence to support that the location will benefit the area. | |
| Heidi P. Mendoza | 7/26/2010 11:44:52 AM |
| I can not understand why everyone continues to play the “heart felt card”. This is business and we need to address it from a business stand point of view. Will the location of Karluk Manor benefit the city??? NO. Will it make our neighborhoods better? NO. Will it fit within our Anchorage comprehensive plan 2020? NO. We need to make sure to look at this issue not only as a way to help the inebriate homeless but we need to look at how this will help our city. Karluk Manor needs a new location. | |
| Martha Boita | 7/26/2010 11:44:22 AM |
| After hearing that visitors at Karluk Manor will be kicked out at 8 pm every night into the streets I changed my mind about supporting Karluk Manor. I was also shocked to find out that between the hours of 8 pm and 9 am there will only be 2 staff members available to assist these 48 individuals. If there are any problems and one employee has to attend to it the other individual will be left alone to deal with any additional problem that might come up. Really that is unfeasible. Low planning and in my opinion Rural Cap is trying to pull a fast one on you. | |
| Mia Miller | 7/26/2010 11:43:48 AM |
| If this world was only made of good intentions Rural Cap would deserve a metal. But unfortunately the reality is that Rural cap is underfunded and is trying to do a job that will required more than what they can offer. Is like when you have a 16 year old son who wants a car. Do you let them drive a car that will leave him behind and will create because he only had $500 to purchase something or do you tell him to wait until they have found a better car that is mechanically sound and that will provide the right solution to his needs. The answer is obvious. Rural cap needs to do this project right from the beginning without cutting corners. Please hold them to that and ask them to find the right location. | |
| Ray Cole | 7/23/2010 2:22:15 PM |
| Other cities that have tried this approach for dealing with chronic alcoholics have had have had remarkable success. Housing these people has reduced problems on the street and resulted in less time and funds being spent for police and emergency services. They also saw a marked decrease in unpaid ER services. Give them housing, get them off the street and save money. It's a win win situation. | |
| Rebecca Schmidt | 7/21/2010 6:46:44 PM |
| I am very strongly against the Karluk Manor project - the very name is a joke. Manor - as in a nice place to live or nice manner of behavior - those very things would become hard to find for inhabitants of this neighborhood. Alaska Rural CAP proposing a no treatment no attempt at sobriety free crash pad to the worst drunks from around Anchorage and plopping it where we also have over flow from the city jail and sleep off center as well as plenty of liquor stores is a recipe for a magnet situation where the problem gets only worse and worse. The very idea is a way to reward the dregs of society and punish those responsible citizens of Fairview by making their neighborhood worth less and less in property values resulting in a lower tax base and less revenue for the city - oh and lets not forget the effect on tourism but I'll get to that. On the way to work yesterday there was a homeless drunk sleeping on the corner of Karluk and 17th. The project would only make that a more common sight. I often see the homeless just crash out on the grass of the home accross the street from me. Giving them a free pass to party it up on tax payers dollars in Karluk "manor" is not the answer. Karluk "manor" will be the homeless frat house of Anchorage every day and night and the problem will spill over into our community more and more by Rural cap "herding more drunks in." If a solution was truely being saught they should try treatment programs and removing these individuals to a safe place where they won't be put in the situation of immediately running into another drunk once they step out the door if by chance they wanted to stop the drinking what odds would they have of continuing with that urge in the kind of environment proposed by Rural CAP at Karluk "manor"? If people think it will only effect Fairview they are wrong. Our tourists will also be faced with the wandering drunks overflowing into the streets of downtown as they shop for trinkets to take home and as part of the story they tell to their friends of Alaska it will be about the large number foul smelling inebriates wandering the streets they had to dodge due to pan handling that goes hand and hand with this type of situation. Please do not harm my neighborhood or Anchorage with this ill thought out project. All of us - inebriates and homeowners alike - deserve a better solution than this! I do support the proposal to turn the location into a manager training facility for people coming in from the bush areas of Alaska - giving them training is far more beneficial to the residents of Alaska as a whole rather than using the structure as the closet Anchorage throws it's inebriates into and hopes they'll stay in - THEY WON'T- and it's a lousy attempt at solving the problem. | |
| Kim Moss | 7/20/2010 1:38:24 PM |
| No Karluk Manor! | |
| Kathy Lum | 7/20/2010 10:55:02 AM |
| Here's what seems missing in the decision making process for this housing: A) Data showing that in similar neighborhoods with similar homeless the intended indicators improve. For example: LOWER Emergency Room visits from homeless LESS inebriates on the streets? DECREASED Crime? DECREASED deaths of homeless? Anything else? B) Meetings with the homeless to ask them how to solve the community problem. (Give them ideas based on other models that have helped solve issues.) Would they stay at a place where they cannot drink on premises? Thank you , Kathy Lum | |
| Joan Antonson | 7/20/2010 7:53:34 AM |
| My concern is similar to many others. I object to the proposed location of Karluk Manor. It's between two of the busiest streets in Anchorage--not a good residential site. | |
| Mary Hallinan | 7/19/2010 7:22:35 PM |
| Opening a housing facility that allow inebriates to continue drinking while being housed by the community is not a solution for our homeless population but would encourage and enable them to continue already inappropriate and dangerous behavior. I think this concept of housing is unsafe for both homeless and the community. Instead of creating an additional burden to Fairview, we should close the liquor store located at 1340 Gambell St. | |
| John Hallinan, Sr. | 7/19/2010 7:05:32 PM |
| I am greatly concerned by the current Karluk Manor initiative - it simply does not make sense to make alcoholic / homeless people more comfortable in an environment where alcoholism and homelessness are at high levels. The current initiative serves to enable such behavior rather than curb it. Other simple and no-cost initiatives like closing the Carrs liquor outlet on Gambell would have an obvious and positive impact on the problem. Bottom line: I do not support this initiative, it is poorly thought out and involves inappropriate use of Public funds. | |
| Linda Bedal | 7/19/2010 4:47:53 PM |
| Whatever happens, the taxpayer will have to pay the price, but I do not approve of this particular idea. The problem with the drunken street people is difficult and needs a solution, but this is not it. Very unfair to the neighborhood businesses and their property values and much too enabling of the alcoholics themselves. | |
| Glenn Gellert | 7/19/2010 4:37:47 PM |
| I am a property owner in the Fairview Manor neighborhood and a 47 year resident of Anchorage, and I can not recall the inebriate problem being so bad. We need to try something different and the Karluk Manor proposal is well thought out and has a good chance of helping battle this problem. The Karluk Manor location is not perfect, but which location would be better? In my experience as an affordable housing developer, people complain no matter what, when it comes to a change in their neighborhood. The fact is its impractical to spend $8 to $9 million developing a new Housing First facility elsewhere. What's the alternative at this particular location? It should be remembered that the Red Roof has had a long history of being a problem property that looked bad and had some unsavory tenants. Could Karluk Manor possibly be much worse? There is a competing proposal for salmon processor employee housing, but who's to say what the tenant mix will be in that facility, and what kind of physical improvements to the building can we count on if that alternative were pursued? The fact is that Rural Cap has proven to be a good neighbor and good operator with a solid track record. After this facility is physically rehabilitated, it will be maintained better than it ever has in the past, and we'll have a shot at improving the inebriate problem in Anchorage. | |
| Lisa Dirks | 7/19/2010 1:40:24 PM |
| I am in support of Karluk Manor. Housing First is an evidence-based practice that is one of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)best-practices for providers working with homeless. In order for a program to be deemed as evidence-based, it must go through a rigorous research process that shows program effects are significant. SAMHSA would not be supportive of a model if it did not show effects. Without stable housing, it becomes difficult for one to focus on improving or maintaining other areas of need in life. Providing shelter increases the chances that one will look to seek out other services available to them that may get them to a point of self-efficacy. The Karluk Manor Housing First program is about more than just providing free housing to chronic homeless alcoholics, it is about providing an opportunity for success that can be nearly impossible to achieve without the stability that housing can provide. | |
| Frank Combs | 7/19/2010 1:09:33 PM |
| Downtown Anchorage is already struggling with a large transient population. The establishment of a large facility housing a large concentration people with ongoing substance abuse problems will overwhelm the area citizens and businesses with crime. Establish smaller facilities in different areas around town to minimize the danger and make situation easier to control. All Anchorage citizens and neighborhoods share the responsibility of dealing with and solving the cities problems. | |
| aaron hanson | 7/19/2010 12:22:53 PM |
| I support this project this is an economically viable means of improving our community addressing a significant problem that just cant be ignored or overlooked or minimized thank you | |
| alisa guzman | 7/19/2010 12:09:24 PM |
| The constant stream of inebriates flowing between the sleep-off center, Beans Cafe, and ST. Francis to their respective destinations, are already a challenge for local business' and their employees. We're often faced with someone drunk, wandering into the lobby, wanting to "hang out & chat". We have people try to lock themselves in the bathroom and do drugs. We've got people passing out in the street outside, falling or vomiting on our personal vehicles. We've even found a nude assault victim in our parking lot in the morning. It's already difficult enough to keep business flowing with the amount of wandering inebriates in this neighborhood. We don't need to add any more. After investing so much time and money into Fairview, it's disheartening that some would willingly drag the neighborhood down. | |
| Constance Jones | 7/19/2010 10:38:12 AM |
| I want to express my strong support of the effort to create the shelter at the old Red Roof Inn. Please pass 2010-007. While I understand neighborhood concerns, I believe that we could put off this promising program forever, based on neighborhood concerns in this and other parts of Anchorage. I have looked at the comparable models in other cities and I believe this program offers our best chance to provide real help to homeless individuals who have a concommitant diagnosis of alcohol addiction. As a former Director of the Department that included Parks and Recreation (1989-1998), I support John Rodda's position that this program could actually solve some of the problems for nearby parks. Thank you for the opportunity to comment | |
| Don Bradford | 7/19/2010 10:18:29 AM |
| I cannot believe that we are talking about providing free houseing, food, ect--- for a bunch of the drunks and bums in town. I have worked all my life for a roof over my head and food to put on my table. They should be required to do the same or starve. They choose that lifestyle. Let them recieve the benefit of it and stop enableing them! I am NOT in favor of this project... | |
| Brian Brubaker | 7/19/2010 9:23:35 AM |
| The location of this project is bad. Worse would be denying this project because of the location and not going forward with a different location as soon as possible. I recommend south Anchorage. Maybe Hillside. | |
| Barbara Franks | 7/19/2010 9:09:20 AM |
| For the past 13 years I have worked with suicide prevention awareness, and in traveling throughout Alaska, there are a lot of people reaching out for help. It is projects like this one that would make a tremendous difference. This is a step in the right direction, let the people know they are not alone and most important that people are trying to find ways to meet those needs. Thank you. / Barb | |
| mark blair | 7/19/2010 8:26:12 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Russell Webb | 7/19/2010 7:19:36 AM |
| I support and urge the Planning Commission to approve the application of Karluk Manor. The citizens and business of Anchorage are united in their view that homelessness causes enormous problems in our community and that the costs, both human and financial, to our entire community require that the community take action. The proposal for Karluk Manor will help achieve the goals of both the community's Comprehensive Plan and the Strategic Action Plan on Chronic Public Inebriates and Related Issues. It directly addresses one of the most pressing needs in our community through the creation of housing for the community's most difficult and troublesome group of homeless persons using a model with proven effectiveness in reducing the adverse impacts of homelessness and public inebriation. Rural CAP has submitted a thorough and reasonable plan for Karluk Manor that fully complies with the requirements for zoning approval. I urge the Commission to act favorably on this appliction to assist the community in addressing one of it's most troubling and difficult problems. Thank you for considering my comments. | |
| Chris Constant | 7/19/2010 4:13:11 AM |
| NOTHING I WRITE ABOUT KARLUK MANOR IS TRUE, BUT IT IS EXACTLY HOW THINGS ARE! The saga of the Karluk Manor project is about to conclude. Supporters of the Karluk Manor project have effectively framed members of the neighborhood as ignorant, uncaring, and even responsible for the deaths of anymore homeless people should the project fail simply by pointing to the “No Red Nose Inn” signs and Fairview no longer matters, despite the facts. Here is the shorthand: Discredit your opponents by painting them as unethical, immoral, and worse. That is a pretty shady tactic! If the residents of Fairview were to use this tactic, the debate might look like this: The most eloquent and outspoken individual levying the charges that Fairview residents are ignorant, uncaring, and worse is Jeff Jessee, CEO of the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority (The Trust). In this situation, Mr. Jessee must also be assumed to represent Alaska Housing Finance Corporation, as both the so called Trust and AHFC have both of their logos plastered across the Request for Qualifications that awarded money to RurAL CAP. The trust is an incredibly powerful and vastly wealthy quasi-governmental institution that in the case of the Karluk Manor Project, served as a partner with the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation in awarding funding to RurAL CAP; a partnership that may be significant. While Jessee may be on the leading edge of the debate as a funding partner, project advocate, and personal financial beneficiary (the Trust pays his salary), he is not the lone voice in the community making these arguments. In fact, these characterizations issue forth from a panorama of nonprofit leaders who have ordered their staff to advocate on behalf of the Karluk Manor project using every social media tool available to them. This army of nonprofit workers has been organized by stealthy hands into a campaign based on half truths and innuendo to push the Karluk Manor through at any cost. The ends justify the means. Mr. Jessee’s testimony follows a familiar script. In the interest of efficiency, I will limit the narrative to only one example of the appearance of impropriety. The more one digs, it seems the muddier the water becomes. HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Jeff Jessee was the most senior Government official to speak at a recent special meeting of the Anchorage Housing And Neighborhood Development (HAND) Commission, Thursday, July 15th. The meeting was called for a special order of business to reconsider a motion on behalf of RurAL CAP that failed to pass back in May. The motion asked the commission to reconsider a failed resolution of support asked for by RurAL CAP for the Karluk Manor project and came out of nowhere, just two business days before the Planning and Zoning Commission is set to decide on a conditional use permit application. The approval of that conditional use permit would allow the creation of a 48 bed institutional apartment complex to house chronic inebriate Alaskans. A mere 16 business hours before the Planning and Zoning Commission meets, a special meeting for reconsideration of the failed motion was called. Here is a question. How the hell did that happen? For those not familiar with arcane parliamentary process, the only way a motion to reconsider can be made is if a member of the majority on the previous vote makes the motion. Basically, someone who voted with the majority must have changed his mind for the vote to occur. Now there are all kinds of rules and law about ethics and meeting notices, and conflicts of interest both real and perceived. There are clear rules on the propriety of making votes in Municipal government. But those rules only apply if people observe them. Those rules clearly weren’t followed in this case. How did it evolve? Gabe Layman, Senior Manager of Business & Legal Affairs for Cook Inlet Housing Authority (CIHA) (another extremely powerful quasi-governmental institution.) stated at the special meeting that he was the one to ask for the opportunity to make the motion to reconsider. That sounds legitimate. Citizen Layman has the right to change his mind. Maybe it would have been wiser and less suspicious had it occurred long before the impending deadline. But one must be willing to give the benefit of the doubt. But an important question must be asked. Is he capable of participating on the Commission as Citizen Layman or do the parallel interests of his employer color his ability to make a fair decision? Is there a conflict of interest? Well, Layman didn’t disclose any conflict. Another member of the commission did declare that she has a direct financial stake in the success or failure of the Karluk Manor project, and thus the resolution before the Commission. Her name is Melinda Freemon, the Anchorage Services Director for RurAL CAP, the very entity whose resolution is on the special meeting agenda for reconsideration. One would think the Commission would assume Ms. Freemon has too much of a conflict but that was not the case. But before they addressed the question of Ms. Freemon’s conflict, the commission voted on the motion to reconsider. Melinda Freemon voted on the business of RurAL CAP from her chair as a public commission. If the record doesn’t reflect it, fraud is afoot. Later in the meeting, Freemon abstained from voting, but the fix was already in. You don’t call a special meeting for reconsideration unless you know you have the votes. Some twisted form of logic convinced the HAND Commission that it was okay for Freemon to vote on the question of whether to reconsider, but not appropriate to vote to support RurAL CAP’s Resolution. They are two sides of the same question. Where is the public notice for the vote supporting RurAL CAP’s resolution? I guarantee you won’t find it. Either way you have to ask the question: Is she capable of participating on the Commission as Citizen Freemon or do the parallel interests of her employer color her ability to make a fair decision? Is there a conflict of interest? While Freemon declared her conflict of interest, she didn’t do so until after she voted on the matter that was published in the public notice. One might ask why does this matter? Why did the Mayor recommend that the Commission not vote on the resolution, but rather, wait for ample public notice and a 14 day waiting period? The Chair of the Commission stated that was the case at the beginning of the meeting. A quick review of the RurAL CAP website demonstrates that Mr. Layman’s employer, CIHA, is a working partner of Ms. Freemon’s employer, RurAL Cap (at least until they delete it). The term partner is legally and common sensibly implies shared financial interests. If Ms. Freemon had a clear conflict, did Mr. Layman have a duty to disclose this partnership? I guess that depends on a few factors. The factors might include the legal standard and the applicable ethics rules and laws. The level of interaction the two entities have. The level of interaction the two individuals share in their professional lives. Two other key factors: Will this project involve HUD money? Does the Commission have a hand in distributing Federal HUD dollars? First, let’s discuss the Code of Ethics controlling in this case. The standard Municipal code of ethics only guides financial dealings. It does require that Commission members disclose their financial interests. Commissioners Freemon and Layman have not filed their legally required financial disclosure forms while other members have complied. While the Municipal Code of Ethics leaves all else to the members of the commission to decide and specifically allows for the appearance of conflict if no conflict exists, the HAND Commission is held to the higher standard. The rules adopted by the HAND Commission require commissioners to declare their conflicts and not participate in votes if only the appearance of impropriety exists. It is speculated that this is required because the HAND Commission is responsible for making recommendations on the allocation of HUD funding to specific projects in the municipality. Let me repeat: HAND COMMISSION RECOMMENDS ALLOCATION OF HUD FUNDING TO SPECIFIC PROJECTS. Hand hits forehead. What? Okay, let me paint a clearer picture. Representatives of RurAL CAP and CIHA serve on the Commission that determines the specific projects funded using HUD money. Rural CAP and CIHA employees have served on the commission that drafted the 2010 Housing and Community Development Plan directing HUD funding. RurAL CAP has a resolution in front of the HAND Commission that is needed to help push the Municipal Planning and Zoning Commission into supporting their project and the key staff from that project sits on and votes on the motion to reconsider. And an Executive level staff member from Cook Inlet Housing Authority makes the motion of reconsideration on behalf of his company’s business partner RurAL CAP and yet he doesn’t declare a conflict. And let’s not forget about Jeff Jessee, Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority. You know. They guy leading the charge painting the residents of Fairview as ignorant and uncaring. Imagine a political cartoon. In the frame, you see two people sitting around a table with bags of money. The bags are labeled HUD. One person is standing with a proposal in her hand. She is labeled “RurAL CAP”. The other person, labeled “Cook Inlet Housing Authority” hands the bags of HUD money to a man labeled “Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority(AMHTA)/Alaska Housing Finance Corporation.” The man labeled AMHTA is simultaneously handing the HUD money to the woman labeled “RurAL CAP.” These people appear to be colluding to direct Federal funds to their own institutional employers, and thus themselves, abusing the tools of power granted to the citizens of Anchorage. The public seats on the Housing And Neighborhood Design Commission are meant for natural people. Not corporate people. (To the slow, that is a reference to Citizens United.) So would you consider, when taken all together, there might be the appearance of the existence of impropriety? If the opponents of the Karluk Manor project were to use the same tactics as the proponents, perhaps the media would be telling the story just described. This is a cautionary tale. EVERYONE HAS THE BEST INTENTIONS Let me be clear. I believe that every player in this situation is working for the good of the community and is acting in good faith, although possibly with bad judgment. Kind of like the well intentioned people who printed those awful “Red Nose Inn” signs. I will now declare my allegiances that some might label a conflict. I am an elected member of the Fairview Community Council. I came to the council because of this issue. My professional background is in the nonprofit social services arena in Anchorage. And I am opposed to the Karluk Manor project on many reasonable grounds. I will dispatch any notion that the Fairview Community Council supports or endorses the “Red Nose” signs. It is simply not the case. These signs harm, not help Fairview’s honest and well thought opposition. But it must be noted that the individuals responsible for making the signs have experienced extraordinary and enduring hardship from the overwhelming weight of the homeless community currently concentrated in Fairview. Examples include having CSP on speed dial, shepherding extremely sick individuals to available services, and scooping human shit from personal doorways. The situation has been getting worse year after year, with no end in sight. Promises made. Promises broken. Promises made. Promises broken. The City’s answer: another homeless services provider. And another. And another. This is a threat to peoples’ lives and livelihoods. Any compassionate person would understand someone’s emotions could cause them to act less than civilly under these conditions. Now that we have dispensed with the spin and bias from both sides, let us consider the facts. One voice that has been painfully squelched in the community debate about the costs and benefits of the Karluk Manor project to house 48 chronic inebriate chronic homeless citizens of Anchorage in the Fairview neighborhood is the voice of the Fairview community. Real people. With the exception of the Municipality of Anchorage’s Planning Department. MUNICIPAL PLANNING PROFESSIONALS OUTLINE FLAWS OF KARLUK MANOR PROJECT No better argument can be made against supporting the conditional use permit request than the Staff Report prepared by the professional planners at the Municipal Planning Department. They are the first public entity to recognize the valid concerns of local businesses and neighbors in Fairview. The Planning Department report (Planning and Zoning 2010-077) distributed last week states that: • It appears that the site selection criteria appear to be weighted more by cost of the site and of upgrades than other considerations. (The lowest cost solution is the one they chose) • The facility, to be appropriate for this use, would have to be leveled and built from scratch, • Traffic patterns at this location are too dangerous. (Sandwiched between two highways) • There are a highly disproportionate number of homeless related support services in Fairview and Downtown. • It is more appropriate to move this target resident population away from existing movement routes of the homeless population outside of the downtown area, • The Department finds that the dispersment throughout the community of this use outweighs the availability of inexpensive property for the use Their report concludes: There is no disagreement that this program targets the most vulnerable population of homeless and provides for a method to alleviate the pressures of emergency and community services, as well as providing a long term solution for effective housing and care for this population. However the department does not find this an appropriate site to reduce conflicting impacts of the chronic homeless alcoholics and local businesses and residents. The Department recommends denial of the above captioned conditional use for severe alcohol dependent housing. CONCLUSIONS Will we witness the grassroots revitalization of a historic, thriving, beautiful, vibrant community driven by its informed, understanding, and compassionate residents and businesses. The City Planning Department is unequivocal. It is time for the elected government to take a stand on behalf of the citizens of Fairview. Will Fairview be engineered by massively wealthy nonprofits like RurAL CAP and powerful quasi-governmental institutions like Cook Inlet Housing Authority or the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority, leveraging their employees into a lobbying force using social networks, forming Fairview into an experimental social services ghetto? All evidence demonstrates that the current service providers already lack the resources to manage their beneficiaries and keep their promises. The additional burden will only increase the problems. The future’s at stake. | |
| Wayne Stolt | 7/18/2010 11:23:29 PM |
| July 18 2010 Wayne Stolt Comments: Ref to KarlukManor. We wish to go on record as being opposed to the conditional use and zoning variance allowing the Red Roof Inn to be used for chronic inebriates. (signed) Wayne Stolt, property manager with power of attorney for: Debra Stolt Krichko, owner of 4 parcels of property within 300 yards of the Red Roof Inn. and (signed) Wayne Stolt, property manager and Member Manager of Stolt Investments LLC, owner of 7 parcels of property within 200 yards of the Red Roof Inn. | |
| Wayne Stolt | 7/18/2010 10:55:29 PM |
| Annette LaMarche Alleva | 7/18/2010 11:33:59 AM |
| I speak as one who is battle weary from deaing with the agencies and individuals who threaten the quiet enjoyment of my home, the safety of my neighborhood and the conduct of my business--all in Fairview and within blocks of major social service agencies--some right next door. Others, more eloquent, knowledgeable and experienced with the many issues surrouding hte chronic inebriate population have stated their objections to the location of this "wet house." I only wish to add my name to those who strongly oppose the granting of a conditional use permit to the Karluk Manor project. I am tired of the emotional rhetoric of the supposedly well-intentioned, woefully ignorant, mostly self-serving employees of agencies suporting such ill-conceived ventures in the name of misguided humanitarianism, while accusing those who oppose it as mean-spirited nimbys. | |
| Annette LaMarche Alleva | 7/18/2010 11:22:05 AM |
| I speak as one who has become battle weary dealing with the agencies and individuals who threaten the quiet enjoyment of my home, the safety of my neighborhood, and the conduct of my business--all in Fairview and within blocks of major social service agencies--some right next door. Others, more eloquent, knowledgeable and experienced with the many issues surrounding the chronic inebriate population have stated their concerns and objections to the location of this "wet" house. I only wish to add my name to those who strongly oppose the granting of a conditional use permit to the Karluk Manor project. I am tired of the emotional rhetoric of the perhaps well-intentioned, woefully ignorant, self-serving employees of agencies supporting such ill-conceived ventures in the name of misguided humanitarianism, while accusing those who oppose it as mean-spirited nimbys. | |
| nancy suhrbur | 7/17/2010 11:34:36 PM |
| I believe that Karluk Manor should be approved. There are many chronic inebrients who need help to begin to have a better life. These are fellow human beings wo have an illness. They deserve our compassion & assistance. As for comments that there are already too many social services in Fairview, we must consider that services need to be available where people can access them. Many of the people who would be served by Karluk Manor get around by walking or riding public transportation. There are fears that this would bring more troubled people into the neighborhood of Fairview when the reality is that there are already chronic inebrients in the area. Please give them a chance to have housing first as well as other needed services. Imagine if this were your son or daughter or mother or father or brother or sister and provide them with the hope of a new service possibility. If it works we will have fewer chronic inebrients & can then offer the service to more people. Please help them. | |
| Helen Howarth | 7/17/2010 6:40:43 PM |
| I received a flyer in the mail today encouraging me to oppose the Karluk Manor project. Instead of heeding the position espoused on the mailer, I am writing in SUPPORT OF KARLUK MANOR. I believe Karluk Manor and other housing initiatives like it to be in the best interest of our community. It is a pity that fear drives so much of our public discourse. Responsible parties will articulate concerns, push for mitigation and leave hysteria at the door. In response to the mailer: Our children will never be safe until our community addresses core social issues like alcholism, drug abuse, under-employment, poverty and other inequities. Chronic inebriates are everywhere and anywhere. A better use can be identified for nearly everything. The pressing issue is how will Anchorage address its chronic inebriate problem?The public toll of chronic inebriates has been studied and from what I have heard, Karluk Manor represents a best practice solution. The question should be "is there a better location for Karluk Manor?" I doubt there is any place in Anchorage that will be immune from a NIMBY response. I encourage you to support Karluk Manor. | |
| Glen Campbell | 7/17/2010 3:56:44 PM |
| Have live in the fairview for over 50 years,I am a property owner and tax payer, My wife and I are not in favor of this zoning variance | |
| Annette LaMarche Alleva | 7/17/2010 2:35:36 PM |
| It is with the weariness of one who has endured many battles in my neighborhood with those who threaten both the quiet enjoyment of my home, the safety of my neighborhood and the daily conduct of my business, that I ask the commission to not grant the variance to enable the project known as Karluk Manor to proceed. Many more eloquent than I am, with far more facts, figures, and experience with the inebriate population, have stated their views, mostly against a facility, whose need is not necessarily disputed, but whose location is decidedly disastrous. I wish only to add my name to the list of those opposing Karluk Manor--and to salvage some sense of peace and control in my life--a sense continually threatened by the well-meaning, well-intentioned but woefully under-informed supporters of this facility. | |
| kim skinner | 7/17/2010 12:57:30 PM |
| I live on the corner of 9th and Ingra. My teen age daughter has been attacked twice by drunks in our neighborhood. Three to five nights a week during the summer I hear them yelling at each other on the street in the middle of the night, including yelling at local dogs who bark at them. I have found drunks passsed out in the middle of the alley, falling down and making a hazard of themselves in the middle of 9th street. I have found them sleeping in my trash hutch, sleeping under and at one point in vehicles in my drive way, and on several occations they have tried to build camps under my deck. We are awash with vagrants in this neighborhood and unlike council members we can't afford to move to a better neighborhood and don't have the luxury of sending our drunks to a poorer neighborhood. And now you want to send more drunks? Maybe you want to see them kill my autistic daughter this time instead of just attacking her? you think because we are poor that we don't deserve to be safe? maybe you are getting some money out of this deal and you just don't give a shit about the people who have to live in this neighborhood. Take your drunks some where else, we don't want them and our children don't deserve to be put in more danger by and bunch of people who don't care and just want to shove their problem off on us. | |
| Valerie Baffone | 7/16/2010 4:57:03 PM |
| I am in very strong support of the Karluk Manor housing project. We have very serious problems in Anchorage with our homeless and effects not just on them but on the health and safety of our city at large. I beleive the Karluk Manor project would be a big step in the right direction to making Anchorage a better city in which to live and to visit. Thank you. | |
| Hubert Gellert | 7/16/2010 4:22:40 PM |
| I have received material from Stopkarlukmanor. What is the proof that Fairview Lions Park "is used by the unsuperised children of parents who are on public assistance"? Also, what local business is planning the alternative use Stopkarlukmanor states? I think these foks are lying to stop a good project. | |
| Kate McGrain | 7/16/2010 3:08:01 PM |
| Looking at the barest facts, Karluk Manor may appear bad. But think about it, providing a place to house the chronic inebriates - getting people off the streets. I would argue this would make the streets safer. Chronic inebriates and homeless individuals walk the streets throughout the Mountain View and downtown areas of anchorage. Karluk Manor will give people a place to stay. a roof. and some stability that can help encourage a move up from alcoholism, unemployment and homelessness. We/the city/the homeless need to have somewhere to start. Karluk Manor is a first step. | |
| Jo Friday | 7/16/2010 2:06:04 PM |
| Anchorage needs housing for homeless and for chronic inebriates, where centralized services can be provided. If this is the best solution to that need, I support it. | |
| Wadeen Hepworth | 7/16/2010 12:18:17 PM |
| I am angry that Rural Cap is pushing Karluk Manor for drunks. If you want to provide housing do so for the youth of the foster care system that have no place to go after 18. The drunks have had their chance at life some even receiving treatment 3 or 4 times. Find space in Mayor Dan Sullivan's neighborhood for housing drunks or David Hardenbergh's neighborhood or any of the city council member neighborhoods. Everyone pushing this move don't want it in their neighborhoods but are happy to have it in Fairview. How about putting the housing on property next to the Native Heritage buildings. You are lowering the value of our homes and neighborhood by this move. Find a big warehouse in south Anchorage, curtain off spaces and put the drunks there and have David Hardenbergh visit them each day to see how they are doing. Care about the youth of our community - give them a good start in life so they don't become drumks on the street. This situation with camps and housing for drumks is getting out of hand and I don't want my taxes used to save them. Save our young people instead. | |
| Patricia Jackson | 7/16/2010 11:12:24 AM |
| I stronly oppose the suggested location for Karluk Manor, it will not blend or enhance the surrounding area. There is no common space for the residents, as the balconies face a busy street. Walking will be a problem. It is not located in an area where a grocery store is easily within walking distance, as most clients will not have a car and if they do where will they park. No Parks close. It is a commercial area with swiftly moving traffice not residential. | |
| Francy Bennett | 7/15/2010 2:03:20 PM |
| Karluk Manor is a good solution to many issues surrounding Anchorage's homeless that is primed and ready to be undertaken. Please allow the Karluk Manor Housing First model to bring its benefits to our community as soon as possible by supporting its approval. | |
| Kelly Laipenieks | 7/15/2010 12:41:52 PM |
| Please respect the recommendations of the Mayor's Homless Team and support Karluk Manor. As a taxpayer that is concerned about the fiscal responsibility of this city and state, I urge you to make a decision that is cost effective for your constituents. And as other cities has seen, the Housing First model is both cost effective and successful and will result in less of our comrads dying on the streets of Anchorage. | |
| Cathy Kincaid | 7/15/2010 12:30:37 PM |
| I have MS and use a walker too, so I'm not planning to come to the meeting tonight. I'ts too soon after work and I'll be tired, but I want to get my two cents in about Karluk Manor. I wholeheartedly support this project and really want it put through. I think it's one wonderfully viable solution to our problem in taking care of a number of our homeless citizens. I have read about the success it has been elsewhere and would love to see it help make Anchorage one of the best forward moving cities in the country. | |
| June Cordasci | 7/15/2010 9:45:15 AM |
| My husband and I work with the Outreach Ministry at our church, St. Anthony's in Anchorage. We strongly feel that getting people into a safe environment will put them on the road to a more stabilizing life. And we feel that there will be less people dying on our streets. We are very committed to helping people achieve a better life. Thank you for what you are doing. | |
| Dana Covens | 7/13/2010 12:55:31 PM |
| It's about time! I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Paul Benson | 7/12/2010 5:09:17 PM |
| It seems to me that most people in Anchorage oppose this facility and yet the non-profit and faith based sectors of our economy are able to generate a lot of comment as compared with the community at large which may be satisfied with the knowledge that this facility would not be located in their neighborhood. I urge the board not to view this issue as a popularity contest. Over the years the neighborhood of Fairview has seen a host of services move in that serve the needs of the homeless, including the homeless chronic inebriate. And while many of the homeless find housing and or a means to transition back into productive life, the location of Brother Francis Shelter, Beans Cafe, and the Sleep off Shelter have had the effect of concentrating the nodes of activity for much of the homeless inebriate population into Fairview and the immediate surrounding neighborhoods. It seems this concentration of homeless inebriates in Fairview will continue as long as these facilities remain concentrated in that neighborhood and the underlying causes for chronic alcoholism are not adequately addressed. It seems Policy 62 of the Comp Plan is already being challenged by allowing such a concentration of services and institutions into such proximity to each other. In addition to a host of other challenges this neighborhood faces from the impacts of the noise, traffic, and pollution generated from its crowded streets and the routine violations of Aircraft operating at Merrill Field, the difficulty of securing municipal and state funds for infrastructure or facility improvements the residents of Fairview view this concentration of services and the resulting increasing concentration of the homeless inebriate into their neighborhood as a growing impediment to the quiet enjoyment of their lives and property. Their lives are disrupted in some cases on a daily basis by this population. And in a low income neighborhood like Fairview it is difficult to muster political support to overcome or mitigate the challenges faced by its’ residents from these overflow impacts. This is what the Comp Plan seeks to avoid by scattering services throughout the city. There is no adequate source of funding currently made available at the State level to deal with the underlying causes of alcoholism or to mitigate its negative impacts to our communities nor is there a real desire evidenced by policy makers to even address the problem. So as Anchorage increasingly becomes the place where people from across the state go when alcoholism robs them of their lives, Fairview increasingly becomes the place for these people and others from Anchorage to go in order to receive the bread, meat and shelter to sustain their lives. And those that are picked up when they are found unconscious in the street or become a threat to themselves or others are brought to Fairview and released from the Sleep Off Center into Fairview when they regain a sense of sobriety. Is it the intention of city policy makers to facilitate the transformation of Fairview into a social service district? Does this serve the Comp Plan, does this make Fairview a more vital neighborhood for all its’ residents? As I learn more about the reality of how this facility is to be managed I am more concerned, not less about the overflow impacts to the Fairview Community beyond the immediate vicinity of the facility. Some have argued that the proposed facility at 6th and Karluk would provide some relief for the neighborhood of Fairview by targeting those most often picked up by CSP in that Neighborhood. It is conceivable that this could be possible; the problem is that the Management Plan seems to encourage offsite drinking, lacks an effective means to monitor off-site behavior and is permissive to rule breaking. House rules are too restrictive and seem designed to strictly curtail group drinking. Visiting hours are overly restrictive and the facility will only allow one guest per room and a total of 10 for the entire facility at any one time during visiting hours. Any safety issues associated with additional guests could be mitigated with extra staffing and it would seem that these rules are designed to cut costs to the facility despite the obvious consequences. Once the facility is full and a guest arrives for Jim, Jim has the option of spurning his friend or leaving the facility. Staff will not ensure that Jim leaves his alcohol in his domicile thereby facilitating that Jim will more easily be able to share what he has off-site with his friend(s). He knows that he only need travel a few blocks, possibly to Fairview Lions Park or a neighboring ally to safely share what he has with his friends. Whether by accident or design the facility appears to be understaffed by 2 or 3 full-time positions, consequently the Management Plan requires policing of the code of conduct for off-site behavior beyond the immediate vicinity of the project to be shouldered by the neighborhood and APD. Even with two staff on duty it seems likely that this level of manpower is inadequate to do more than call APD or CSP in most instances if or when a complaint from the neighborhood materializes. Unfortunately the expectation that the neighborhood would provide an effective reporting mechanism to police the code of conduct is unrealistic, insulting and unfair not to mention irresponsible. A low income neighborhood with a low rate of home ownership where residents are already burdened with stress and lack a sense of investment should not be asked or expected to do the work of any understaffed facility. It is more likely that behavior will go unreported as is often the case now resulting in a perpetuation of the status quo. When at last an individual is identified as breaking the Code of Conduct off-site it is then up to case managers to decide if rule breaking is a function of substance abuse and if so what options are to be considered to address the behavior. There is no mandate for treatment for those whose rule breaking behavior is driven by substance abuse nor is there a mechanism which would force a client into a secure treatment facility, should one exist. There is much leeway given to how rule breaking behavior off-site is to be managed and is likely to be a drawn out process in with the needs of the client and the limitations of the program, not the needs of the neighborhood as the central focus for resolving these issues. In the end, a facility set up as a last hope for the hard to house will be hard pressed to evict even the most chronic offenders. And supposing they are evicted, how does this serve the program, the client, the neighborhood or the City? In order to have the greatest opportunity for success from the neighborhood and client perspective it is evident that a wet house facility at this location must provide an environment which allows for group drinking on site either in client rooms or in the public spaces so that this behavior does not spill over into the neighborhood. Longer visiting hours and fewer restrictions on visitation are necessary. Visitors should be allowed to bring alcohol on site and should not be turned away if intoxicated but allowed to enter the safety of the facility. Residents must not be permitted to take alcohol off-site and procedures should be in place to ensure this. It is preferable that staff purchase alcohol for residents to add greater control over the management of alcohol and limiting its’ use to onsite only. In the absence of discretion given to P&Z the City should require a MOU be completed with the applicant, the city and neighboring councils for facilities of this type so that strict consequences are in place to ensure that the permit is in jeopardy if off site impacts are not managed to the benefit of the neighborhood . A review of the permit should be done annually for the first 3-5 years and biannually after that as these types of facilities need to be held to a high standard for performance. Proximity to "services” will lead to not just one but all of these facilities to be based in Fairview if by services one is referring to the BFS, Beans Cafe, the Sleep- off Center or RurAL CAP HQ. To the contrary I don't feel this locations proximity to those services boasts great advantages to the functioning of Karluk Manor. For health care services it seems the Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center is leaving Fairview within the next year or so for a location closer to mid-town . The Native Hospital and Providence are located in the U-Med district as well as professional offices for the bulk of Anchorages medical and mental health community, only Alaska Regional and the VA would remain in what one could call proximity. With proper staffing it seems entirely reasonable to expect that staff could provide transportation for visits with case managers and mental health professionals when needed or if desired as it will for shopping trips. It also seems likely that these providers could and would come on site as well. Proximity to employment might be a consideration but if memory serves me the areas of town with the greatest number of jobs or experiencing the fastest rates of employment growth are Mid-town and South Anchorage business districts, not Downtown. Access to public transit is as good in these areas of town as it is in the Downtown area. With proper staffing there should always be someone on staff that could respond to the otherwise unmet transportation needs of an individual. But realistically speaking employment is unlikely for any of the residents beyond those jobs provided by RurAL CAP. I suggest people look at the Karluk Manor Management Plan with a critical eye as to how it might encourage outside drinking. Look for language which is permissive or vague and would allow for repeated violations of the terms of their lease or the code of conduct, Factor into that the difficulty of enforcement of the rules off-site as this is on the shoulders of the neighborhood and will in all likelihood, because of inadequate staffing, require the involvement of APD in order to verify that that the behavior witnessed is from a program participant. Also consider the consequences of eviction, what happens to a client unable to remain housed at the facility. I think there will be tremendous pressure to retain residents despite repeated or habitual rule breaking behavior. I feel it would better to create an atmosphere and develop a set of rules that would encourage on site drinking and allow for the outdoor common area ( with some modifications ie outdoor heaters or possibly in an indoor common area in the winter) to be used for group drinking with guests. There should be no limitation to the number of visitors and visiting hours should fall more in line with bar hours. Inebriated visitor should be allowed on-site and visitors should be allowed to bring drink in but residents and guests should be prohibited from bringing drink offsite. Hopefully having safe and comfortable housing will eventually allow for individuals to make a change in their lifestyle but I think it would be prudent to manage the facility in a way that would not encourage, facilitate or be permissive to rule breaking. I am a supporter of the housing first model, but we should caution against using a cookie cutter approach in its implementation. Not enough consideration has been given for how to best implement the model at this site. Unfortunately this location is deeply flawed. It is my view that the project will create additional obstacles to revitalization in Fairview if not properly managed and it seems that in order to design and manage the facility correctly would incur renovation costs and operational expenses beyond the scope of available funding. In the end I would assert that this facility represents an addition to the already existing supportive housing and support services and institutions in the Downtown/Fairview area by non-profits, and governmental agencies which serve and/or manage this unique population of individuals and to others falling into the category of the hard to house population that it is in conflict with the spirit if not the letter, of the Anchorage Comp Plan. A plan, which wisely seeks to limit the potential negative impacts any one neighborhood might face from a concentration of services and institutions into any one part of town. The location would appear to go against the Comp Plan and if my concerns are correct it will most likely negatively impact Revitalization efforts in the low income neighborhood of Fairview and may also serve to further weaken the east Downtown business district. | |
| Jeffrey Tyson | 7/12/2010 2:34:17 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor | |
| Amanda Matthews | 7/12/2010 12:25:12 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor!!!! | |
| MILDRED HEINRICH | 7/12/2010 8:46:38 AM |
| IN REGARD TO THE KARLUK MANOR PROPOSAL: PLEASE FIND A NEW LOCATION FOR THE PROPOSED PROJECT. I DO NOT SUPPORT USING TAXPAYER MONEYS TO HOUSE CRONIC INEBRIATES IN THIS WAY. A MORE SUBURBAN LOCATION WITH A SEPARATE AREA WITH A COVERED FIRE PIT AREA AND BENCHES WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THE TYPE OF SOCIAL DRINKER ANCHORAGE HAS. SOMEONE ON STAFF COULD MONITER THE ACTIVITY AND SEE THAT EACH INTOXICANT WAS SAFELY IN THEIR ROOM. FAIRVIEW ALREADY HOUSES ENOUGH FACILITIES FOR THESE FOLKS. THESE FACILITIES ARE NOT MEETING THE NEEDS AS THE INEBRIATES ARE LOOKING FOR PLACES WHERE THEY CAN DRINK TOGETHER NOT JUST SLEEP OFF A DRUNK. PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW THE NECESSARY ZONING NEEDED TO COMPOUND FAIRVIEW AND ANCHORAGE'S CRONIC INEBRIATE PROBLEM.RURALCAP NEEDS TO FIND A DIFFERENT LOCATION. THANK YOU | |
| Lisa Vukasin | 7/10/2010 12:14:53 PM |
| I am in support of Karluk Manor and feel that the place now has a purpose. When I firt heard about this I felt that it would be a benefit to many individuals. I was uncomfortable with the signs that people put up against this and e-mailed assembly member and the mayor. I do understand why the felt they needed to be close to other services like the soup kitchen and Beans Cafe. Food, shelter-top two items to help those individuals began to make positive changes in their lives. I hope that those who are trying to make a difference in this community do not get shut down for their efforts. Thank you Lisa Vukasin | |
| Kalen Saxton | 7/9/2010 11:45:24 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor and Housing First. I am a daily bus rider. I sit next to people who have been drinking while I am waiting at the Transfer Station and on the bus. I believe they have been drinking because they smell of alcohol, and are overly conversational when they don't know me. Some also have mental health issues and are overly agressive, shouting, shaking fists, swearing, pacing. Sometimes they are removed from the bus, or not allowed to get on a bus. Sometimes seats on the bus are urinated on or someone throws up. The bus driver calls in to get another bus. This is a public transportation system that many of us depend on to get to work, church, and other activities. Some of these bus riders and transit station habituees are part of the 400 chronic inebriates who are homeless in Anchorage. I support the Karluk Manor for people I see on a daily basis. | |
| Rachel Morse | 7/9/2010 10:42:36 PM |
| I work in Fairview and I support Karluk Manor. Housing First works. There are many reasons to believe Housing First can be successful at Karluk Manor. People continue to die on our streets and in our woods. We need a solution now. Karluk Manor can save lives. Karluk Manor can save money. Open Karluk Manor. | |
| laura Siebert | 7/9/2010 8:14:37 PM |
| I worked in Fairview for over 30 years and believe this is the wrong location for this type of facility. | |
| jill bates | 7/9/2010 8:12:54 PM |
| no karluk manor | |
| Heather Harris | 7/9/2010 7:17:46 PM |
| I want to support Karluk Manor. I am a compassionate person living in Fairview. I am a strong supporter of Housing First and concerned about this project in particular. I commend Rural Cap’s commitment to attending council meetings, holding public hearings and opening their housing programs to myself and neighbors. I believe in Rural Caps work with this population and believe there are the best positioned to head up such a project. There have been many issues brought up by the community council and addressed by Rural Cap. There have been 2 issues that have been brought to question in public forums and one on one settings that I do not believe have yet been addressed. 1) The community has brought up concerns that this will increase the number of chronic inebriates in the neighborhood. Which we were told this is already where the chronic inebriates are thus why Fairview is the correct location. Ken, with Rural Cap stated 70-80% of Rural Cap’s outreach time is spent in Fairview. I would like to hear how Rural Cap will be choosing the residents of Karluk Manor to include 70-80% derived from the Fairview neighborhood. This would help me to believe inebriates we are already seeing in Fairview will not just be added to. 2) There is a feeling of Rural Cap courting the community. I would like to see a plan to continue their communication with the community including how issues in the future will be addressed. I feel when these issues are addressed I would support Karluk Manor. | |
| Diane Mathisen | 7/9/2010 6:16:20 PM |
| I support having a Housing First project in Anchorage on the scale proposed in this case. The proposed location is viable and available. Building a project at another location may be a good idea but it will take years to develop and this population needs services sooner. I support Karluk Manor now. | |
| Paul Cornils | 7/9/2010 5:48:37 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. Housing First is a model that has shown that it can improve lives and heal people. This project isn't giving people a warm place to drink, its about giving them a warm place to live and chance to find the value in themselves. The outcry over this project says a lot about our community and should give us all pause to reflect to about what our values really are and what we are teaching our children about the value of a human being. | |
| Piper Cartland | 7/9/2010 5:20:39 PM |
| I wholeheartedly support Karluk Manor. Fairview, please give it a try! In cities like Seattle with similar struggles of homelessness and alcoholism, places like the planned Karluk Manor have proven to be a wonderful solution for the city, the local neighborhood, and the people who need the help. I understand the need to keep Fairview a clean, desirable place to live and work, but the homelessness and alcoholism is already there. Karluk Manor has the potential to give help to the ones who most need it, getting them off the roads, out of parks and backyards, and providing a clean, safe place for them to rebuild their lives. Thank you. | |
| Debbie Potenzini | 7/9/2010 5:04:49 PM |
| I totally support Karluk Manor. Not only would it provide homes, but I would think the businesses and neighbors would welcome the help in their community. It makes sense that if the chronic alcoholic homeless people are already there, that the community should embrace the assistance in coping with them. The 24-hour staffing and supervision that will be provided should be viewed as a resource to the Fairview Community. | |
| Geoffrey Humphreys | 7/9/2010 4:57:33 PM |
| There's really a lot to be said concerning this project. I have little doubt that some people will disagree with some of the statements here, but this information is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I also have little doubt that the board will give little credence to Fairview's concerns with regards to this project in our city, but failure to address Fairview's concerns by permitting this project to go forward will not silence the voices of those who oppose wet houses, and the blood of the chronic inebriates who will die on the streets outside of Karluk Manor will add to the growing weight of evidence against Karluk Manor. The propensity score matching procedure used in the widely-cited JAMA backing the municipal ordinance intended to establish a permit process for wet housing in Anchorage is highly problematic. In theory, propensity score matching can work about as well as experimental design--if the particular propensity score calculation procedure matches the process by which the actual assignment is made. Propensity scores can ordinarily be calculated only by induction and thus are subject to statistical assumptions and variation. Propensity score calculations thus almost invariably fail to meet the criteria of ceteris parabis, though they may be suitable for one purpose or another. In the words of Harvard professor Gary King, with regards to propensity score matching, "It works about a third of the time." In this particular instance, social workers at 1811 Eastlake assigned individuals to the treatment on a first-come-first-serve basis. The propensity score calculation was based on the assumption that the social workers discriminated on the basis of race, income, and other factors not necessarily related to actual criteria for admission. Though no evidence was given to indicate that this approach produced unsuitable results, the possibility that their approach induced biased selection has not been ruled out, and though the presence of significantly different p-values among baseline covariates necessarily indicates bias across treatment and control groups, a lack of significant p-values among disparate covariates used for propensity score calculation is not a sufficient criteria for discounting the possibility. Propensity score matching procedures do not meet medical standards for determining the efficacy of a treatment on disease, although they have increasing application in public health, where controlled experiments are often impossible. Hopefully, these statements help to shed some light on propensity score adjustments for individuals who have not been trained in their use. Assuming for the moment that the propensity score matching procedure was suitable for the task (a questionable assumption, though necessary for accepting their results), estimates in the JAMA article were biased, and confidence intervals were overstated. Simply stated, Poisson GEE estimates are biased, statistically inefficient, and statistically insufficient. They are often praised for their property of asymptotic consistency, meaning that if the underlying distribution is Poisson, Poisson GEE procedures will correctly determine the parameters of a Poisson distribution given limitless quantities of data. In addition, the distribution of chronic inebriate activities is not Poisson; the true distribution is more akin to that of a Polya (Dirichlet-multinomial) process with serial correlation. Furthermore, the JAMA article made no accounting for seasonal factors. Of course, despite the weaknesses in their models, the evidence does suggest a higher likelihood of cost savings in Seattle, i.e. 1811 Eastlake more likely did likely reduce the costs of chronic inebriates than not. It is clear that a reasonable expectation of the total savings is smaller than that expressed in the JAMA article, and the range of likely values is larger than expressed, i.e. savings are credibly less certain than suggested by the authors' presentation. In addition, the service costs and patterns of public inebriates in Anchorage differs quite a bit. Savings to service providers are somewhat more likely than not, but they not guaranteed. In addition, a project like Karluk Manor is not without cost, and several million dollars have already been allocated for the project. In terms of market values, the funds allocated for Karluk Manor already exceed the cost of renting apartments for each of the individuals intended to be housed there for the next ten years. It is unlikely that the cost savings to service providers will exceed the costs paid by the state and the federal government, not to mention the Red Roof Inn, as well as others who may dedicate funds to the project in the future. The JAMA researchers' simple demonstration of reductions in alcohol abuse over time without comparison to an untreated population in no way proves that Housing First actually causes those reductions. By way of example, if you take a sugar pill (or a vial of snake oil) for a cold, after a week, your cold will go away. That doesn't mean the sugar pill had an effect on your cold, nor does it indicate that the disappearance of the cold is simple regression to the mean. The source of bimodality in alcohol consumption was not explained in the article and is amenable to misinterpretation. Gender, false reporting, physical addiction, and combinations of these factors can induce bimodality in Housing First treatment groups. Effects on real estate prices are not known for certain. There have been a variety of models produced, most of which are quite unbiased with the right data. Several of these models have made claims of causality with little justification, and they are unfortunately highly amenable to misinterpretation, even by their own authors. This is due largely to broad application of the term "effect" in the modeling literature; in the literature, an "effect" may mean an effect on a model, an expected effect of an event, or a phenomenon which is actually caused by another known and observable and/or controllable phenomenon. It is pretty reasonable to suppose that removing a property from the market will cause other property prices to rise c.p. (simple supply and demand), and it is reasonable to suppose that continued foreclosures elsewhere in the U.S. may have some impact on the availability of out-of-state investment for purchasing properties here. It is rather unlikely the effects on real estate values will produce a relevant impact. Several business owners and executives in the immediate vicinity feel that transforming the Red Roof Inn into severe chronic inebriate housing will have a negative effect on their business profits. It is not unreasonable to suppose an expectation, over the life of Karluk Manor, of a net loss of a few hundred thousand dollars, in today's dollars, in business profits to businesses currently in the immediate area of the Red Roof Inn. This is a figure which amounts to an average loss of somewhat less than $1000 per business per year. It should be clear that this expectation has a fairly large margin of error; the net effect in the immediate vicinity may very well be positive or more deeply negative, and not all businesses will be affected proportionately or with their consent. The Housing First concept itself is in clear violation of Fairview's community standards. Quite simply, the overwhelming majority of Fairviewers oppose allowing chronic inebriates access to alcohol. Modern medicine provides techniques for removing chemical dependencies on alcohol without requiring continued intoxication. Somewhat surprisingly, few in Fairview are opposed to allowing institutions to give the mentally ill free housing in their neighborhood. Many have grave concerns about housing inebriated mentally ill individuals in the middle of a six-lane thoroughfare. No study on Housing First has ever found compelling evidence that it reduces alcohol use. While significant reductions in alcohol use have been observed in Housing First populations, the evidence simply does not support the notion that Housing First played a significant causal factor in reductions in alcohol use. A study conducted by Pathways to Housing in New York City, using a real, controlled, experimental design, failed to find any significant differences in alcohol abuse between Housing First participants and controls. While that finding was not beyond criticism, and indeed, the individuals who made the finding questioned its veracity, no evidence meeting c.p. or random assignment criteria has been demonstrated to the contrary at this point. I interviewed several business owners and executives in the area surrounding the Red Roof Inn for a presentation delivered to the Fairview Community Council. It was considerably more difficult to get individuals to consent to interviews following the erection of the "No Red Nose Inn" signs, but prior to widespread viewing of the signs, several business owners and representatives did offer their input. When asked individually and under terms of anonymity if they had any comments regarding the proposal, about half offered comments. Those who offered comments replied as follows: "keep out the addicts" "everyone needs to work for a living" "help those who help themselves" "ridiculous idea" "put it on Hillside" "location is not a strong consideration? "it will affect business. it's bad for neighborhood" "not in Fairview" Those who supported the project appeared somewhat less likely to offer comments than those who opposed it. The majority opposed the project. A majority, but certainly not all, believed that the monetary impact on their businesses would be negative; the magnitude of most estimates numbered in the tens to low hundreds of thousands of dollars. One high outlier numbered in the millions of dollars. Some believed that the impact on their businesses would be negligible. A reasonable expectation of the present value, based on the interviews, is that the net impact of the project on other businesses currently in the vicinity of the Red Roof Inn is a few hundred thousand dollars in lost profits, distributed over the businesses over the life of the project. This is not as large a figure as it seems; it amounts to an average of less than a thousand dollars per business per year. This expectation has a very large margin of error; the impact could be more deeply negative or could even be positive. In addition, it is unlikely that all businesses in the vicinity will be impacted proportionately, and it is likely that the project will positively impact some businesses. In short, the project violates community standards. The project is more likely than not to cause nearby businesses lost profits without their consent. Moreover, if the proposed Karluk Manor project is completed, at its present location between 5th and 6th avenues, inevitably, mentally ill chronic inebriates will die in car accidents on 5th and 6th Avenues. | |
| Diana Weber | 7/9/2010 4:48:39 PM |
| I have visited the 1811 Eastlake "housing first" project in Seattle, similar to the one proposed for Fairview but bigger. The businesses in the neighborhood of the 1811 Eastlake are very supportive of the facility BECAUSE it "cleans up" the area and keeps their neighborhood looking more attractive. I think the Karluk Manor will go a long way towards doing the same thing in Fairview. The chronic inebriates are there already. | |
| Andrea Schmook | 7/9/2010 4:48:08 PM |
| I just want to support Karluk Manor as a first step in the solution of some very vulnerable people that, frankly, some residents of Anchorage are too high and mighty to care about. "Housing First" is a step in the right direction to help people begin to help themselves. People can't begin to work toward recovery when they don't have a roof over their heads, food in their stomachs, or clothes on their backs. One of my spiritual principles is "whatever you do for the least of them, you do for Me." When we as a community begin to meet the basic needs of people who are vulnerable, then we help our community thrive. Anchorage can be known as a great community to live and work and play and raise our children because we care about our citizens--all of our citizens. Please support Karluk Manor now. | |
| Hosanna Lahaie_Lee | 7/9/2010 4:45:29 PM |
| Most businesses and corporations start out taking risks before they become successful,yes? I support Karluk Manor. Fairview please say yes to this risk! People lives depend on it. All god's children deserve a chance. Housing First is about "Hope,Faith,Love and a new beginning for our most vulnerable peoples. I had been homeless, with a child, back in the 80's. Shelter, safety,food,a place for bathing, and trauma informed recovery services brought me from hell, to a home, and making 40,000 a year! Having people believe in my capacity to heal, programs like CODA, Al-anon and other peer driven services created the ladder for me to climb from severe abuse. It then became my job to pay it forward-"love my brother and neighbor as myself", and I am the luckiest,richest, woman because of the people I have mentored, getting them off the streets and hooked up to recovery options. Their number one requests is for a place to clean up and call their own-housing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Living outside is another layer of trauma on top of the unhealed woundedness that resides inside. People drink to numb out their latest rape, battering, or their shame at having a mental illness, PTSD, etc. Make a difference instead of saying "not in my backyard". Mentor a homeless family,person.Listen to their story, past, and the dreams they had for themselves. "Priceless" Who they are -are not just "inebriates". | |
| Melissa Gallegos-Rodriguez | 7/9/2010 4:37:22 PM |
| I am writing to express my strong support for the Karluk Manor project and RurAL CAP's conditional use permit. I've lived in Fairview off and on for the last 26 years. I grew up in this neighborhood and purchased a home in the neighborhood to raise our family. Our property is located near the Senior Center and the rear and side of our home is Municipal park land. All winter we've had multiple active homeless camps located on both sides of our house. Folks icefish, cut wood, have campfires, trek through trails they've created and litter. We frequently have folks emerge from the woods or some mornings, we wake to find them sleeping on our front lawn. This winter we had a shooting incident in the Senior Center parking lot. Multiple police arrived and searched the wooded area. They reported a couple of large campsites about 30 ft into the woods next to our house and although there was a camper armed with a loaded handgun, he wasn’t the shooter because the weapon hadn't been discharged. My children can't safely play outside in our fenced in yard, especially when we’ve got armed homeless folks squatting on city land next to our house. I say enough is enough! Not in my backyard! It’s time for a solution. The Karluk Manor is the most viable one I've heard yet and RurAL CAP is the most experienced provider we've got in terms of their track record working with the population, their consistent leadership, and the community engagement work they've done over the years. They're honest and are diligent about being good neighbors. I've seen it first hand in Mt. View. We have a crisis in our community. We've had a record number of homeless deaths over the last couple of years. When I was working with the homeless chronic public inebriate population over 16 years ago, the population was estimated to be 150. Now, we've got over 400 in Anchorage and the individuals are getting younger and younger. We can't afford to let this opportunity pass us by. If we do, we'll continue to see the number of homeless folks increase as well as the number of deaths. We'll also continue to see the number of homeless camps multiply...many in plain sight, on the greenbelts where citizens go to enjoy the outdoors and near homes where young kids play. I challenge any one opposed to the project to drive through Mt. View and observe the location of RurAL CAP's Homeward Bound Project (where over 35 individuals reside) as well as their 12 affordable housing projects (70 housing units) and see how many people are staggering around intoxicated in the street or how many people are standing on street corners panhandling or loitering near the properties. Once you complete this challenge and have your worse fears confirmed then by all means voice your opposition, but to do so without complete information is doing your community, your neighbors, and this city a huge disservice. Thank you to RurAL CAP's staff for their hard work, perseverance, and dedication to engaging in meaningful dialogue with our neighborhood. Our neighborhood needs a solution! | |
| Samuel Bair | 7/9/2010 4:33:13 PM |
| I am in support of Karluck Manor as a Fairview resident. People with alcohol and other substance abuse/mental illness problems and who are homeless need housing first, so that they can stabilize enough to recover. I would rather that the people who I see on a daily basis have somewhere to go to hang their hat. | |
| Genevieve & Mark Paniptchuk & Havner | 7/9/2010 4:00:14 PM |
| We are in support of the Karluk Manor project. Too many bad things are happening to street people - not only deaths, but beatings and rape. We are trying to get help and better ourselves, get off the streets and become productive citizens once again. Please help us help ourselves. | |
| Heidi Hill | 7/9/2010 3:49:30 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor! | |
| Em MItchell | 7/9/2010 3:27:43 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. Too many people are crying NIMBY, yet the homeless are already there. If you give them a place to go, a roof over their heads, 24 hour surveillance, meals, and reminders every day to speak with case workers, is this worse than what is already happening? You CANNOT compare human beings to junk cars and boats. You can't "give them to someone else" just because you are tired of having them in your back yard. You have to help solve the problem, not just move it out of your sight. Please. Allow Karluk Manor to proceed. Give these people a chance at life. Thank you. | |
| Ashley Anderson | 7/9/2010 3:19:10 PM |
| I do not support the location of Karluk Manor. The neighborhood is a low down neighborhood that will not benefit from having a wet house. Place it in an industrial area where it will not affect families. | |
| Rachel Morse | 7/9/2010 3:17:18 PM |
| I work in Fairview and I support Karluk Manor. Housing First works. There are many reasons to believe Housing First can be successful at Karluk Manor and will have a positive impact for Fairview and for Anchorage. 23 people have died on the streets of Anchorage, we have to do something now. This project provides an opportunity to take action. Save lives. Save money. Open Karluk Manor. | |
| Paul Cornils | 7/9/2010 3:11:31 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. Housing First is a model that has shown that it can improve lives and heal people. This project isn't giving people a warm place to drink, its about giving them a warm place to live and chance to find the value in themselves. The outcry over this project says a lot about our community and should give us all pause to reflect to about what our values really are and what we are teaching our children about the value of a human being. | |
| Annie Prevost | 7/9/2010 3:02:02 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor! | |
| Suzanne Fairbanks | 7/9/2010 2:50:23 PM |
| Housing is the first essential step in the recovery process. Statics clearly show the impact stable housing has on humans with substance and mental illnesses. Karluk Manor is not designed to provide a place for individuals to continue being ill-- it's a place where help and assistance are provided and people get better. The overall cost to society is greatly reduced by helping people recover-- not by sending them into the street as a NIMBY. It's for financial reasons as well as basic human reasons that this facility should come to fruition. | |
| Jerry Hollowell | 7/9/2010 2:46:32 PM |
| I am once again frustrated by the "do-gooders" putting grant money and tax money towards illogical ideas. Housing chronic inebriates when the shelters for families are full to compacity is a miss use of these assets. Do not grant the conditional work permit to Rural CAP. | |
| Suzanne Fairbanks | 7/9/2010 2:45:38 PM |
| The first step to getting people in recovery is to stablize their living situation. Karluk Manor is an extremely essential step in treating the root cause of many other issues-- substance abuse and mental illness. The statics clearly demonstrate the positive benefits of housing stability-- the price in human toll and financial toll to our community is far greater if this population is underserved. Karluk Manor will help us have a better financial result as well as it's just the proper human thing to do. | |
| Francine Harbour | 7/9/2010 2:44:50 PM |
| I am the president of NAMI Anchorage, the Anchorage affiliate of the National Alliance on Mental Illness. We are a large non-profit organization made up of many consumers and families affected by mental illness. Our members know all to well the difficulties, and often-times impossiblity, of obtaining affordable, appropriate housing. We very much support Karluk House. Much of the focus of the opposition is one chronic alcoholism of the intended residents. What people involved with the mentally ill know is that most alcoholics/addicts are untreated individuals with mental illness. The conservative estimate for the incidence of substance abuse and mental illness is 50%. Practitioners in the field know the incidence is more like 80-90%. Yet it is too often believed that people affected by mental illness or addiction deserve their fate, even if that means homelessness, imprisonment, or death. Karluk Manor would provide one of the most important factors in breaking the cycle of mental illness to addiction to homelessness: supported housing that gives the affilicted a safe place to recover. The expression "Housing First" is absolutely right. The best treatment in the world will not work if the person trying to recover does not have a clean, safe, supportive, affordable place to live. The intended residents of Karluk Manor do not deserve their fate. They are ill people and they deserve treatment, housing, respect, and compassion. We strongly urge the decision-makers in this process to support Karluk Manor. The best way to "not have these people in our backyards" is to help them get well and stay well, and safe, afforable housing IS first. Sincerely yours, Francine Harbour President, NAMI Anchorage | |
| R. Stott | 7/9/2010 2:40:22 PM |
| The old Red Roof Inn is not the right location tfor the housing first complex. Please reconcider this idea. | |
| Dale Kelley | 7/9/2010 1:53:46 PM |
| While no one of "sound mind" supports uncontrolled drinking as a preferred life style, there will be people in our midst who are inebriates, and always will be. These people are at all income levels - in their own homes already .. or are on the streets. They are already in Fairview, in the wider downtown area, on the hillside,etc... If Karluk Manor provides the safety and opportunity for some to "turn their lives around", I support this effort 100%. It is a disgrace for a community to shun those who are suffering from this disease of alcoholism and willfully allows them to die on the streets. Karluk Manor may not be the only answer, but it is the answer right now, right here, to what Anchorage needs to show itself - as well as the rest of the state/country - that we do not have hearts of stone. | |
| Sloan Seiden | 7/9/2010 1:26:52 PM |
| I've lived in Fairview for 8 years, and I've watched the neighborhood grow more stable. One serious problem has been the gathering of homeless inebriates at Ingra and 13th. Increasing the population of homeless inebriates who already gather near Ingra & 5th simply doesn't make sense. It is only increases the danger for ALL local residents. Fairview should have the chance to continue stabilizing--it is NOT be treated as a dumping ground of any kind. And how can anyone think it's safe to put people with such problems in the middle of one of the busiest intersections in town? No to Karluk Manor--for all our sakes. | |
| Marc Bourdon | 7/9/2010 12:41:23 PM |
| I do not support Karluk Manor. As a Fairview resident, I know we already have more than our share of the social burden here. Problems should not be centralized and there are other neighborhoods to do this in. There are safety concerns with the busy roads and a park that will become even less usable when all the drunks go there to drink when they cannot have a party in their rooms. Good idea. Bad location. Put it in Hillside. | |
| Christopher Constant | 7/9/2010 12:31:50 PM |
| Christopher Constant 324 East 9th Avenue Anchorage AK July 9, 2010 Opposition to Karluk Manor I live in Fairview and serve on the community council. I have spent greater than a decade working with individuals who experience substance dependence, mental illness, and other co-occurring disorders. I oppose approval of Conditional Use Permit 2010-077 for RurAL CAP’s proposed Karluk Manor project on several grounds. First, this is the first request for a conditional use permit under this part of the Municipal code. The requested conditional use is a 600% increase over the established level approved by the Assembly. It is located in a residential neighborhood nearly unanimously opposed to the project and is well within 500’ of a highly used neighborhood park. The project is experimental in nature and its risks are much higher than its valies. Further, the scale of the project is in direct defiance of the long standing community agreement that people must be served as individuals in home based facilities and not institutionalized. Instead, RurAL CAP’s stated plan will create a huge de facto institution without any professional/licensed clinical support support for its residents. Further, RurAL CAPs required public outreach can only be characterized as mendacious. RurAL CAP has lied to the community all along. When caught lying, they have stated they are changing their plans, but no changes are reflected in any official documents, especially their request for a conditional use.For these reasons, I oppose this project. DETAIL: Alaska Deinstitutionalizes Care Over Past 3 Decades In 1975, the State Department of Health and Social Services produced its first policy document entitled De-Institutionalization Action Plan, adopting the recommendations which have become the basis of the creation of community based services. The result of this process was the demand to close Harborview Developmental Center, the State’s largest institutional facility, where individuals with developmental disabilities we warehoused away from homes, families, and communities. This began the path where Alaska became the national leader in community based services resulting from de-institutionalization. Alaska now ranks first in the country in terms of the percent of people with developmental disabilities (99 percent) residing in publicly funded home settings for six or fewer persons. In 1987, initiated by the Alaska Mental Health Trust (the Trust), a collaboration formed between multiple beneficiary groups which now includes people with chronic alcoholism, people with mental illness, people with developmental disabilities, and people with Alzheimer’s disease. This collaboration and merger of beneficiary groups came under the purview of as well as the guiding principles of the Trust. In 1999, the State of Alaska began implementing the API Replacement Project (formerly API 2000 Project) aimed at downsizing the State’s largest remaining institutional facility from over 100 down to 72 beds, with the collateral development of community based support services. These community based support services were intended to support the individuals displaced from API, with services based on the guiding principles established in the de-institutionalization plan from 1975 and more recently, serving Trust beneficiaries. So for the past 35 years, small human scaled community based housing has been the hard fought trend in supporting individuals experiencing developmental disabilities, mental illness, or chronic inebriation. Until now. Karluk Manor is not modeled after Seattle’s Project RurAL CAP is proposing a RADICAL reversal of the hard work of generations of Alaskans to eliminate institutions that warehouse our neighbors, friends, and families and now propose to create one of the largest institutional facilities in Alaska. This institution is being called Karluk Manor. Proponents claim this is no institution. Res ipsa loquitor. They quibble that it is a housing project based on the Housing First model from Seattle, named 1811 Eastlake. On close inspection, the “Housing First” program proposed by RurAL CAP fails to implement the key service that makes the Seattle project effective. It is called “Active Engagement” or “Assertive Outreach”. RurAL CAP claims they are modeling their program on 1811 Eastlake. difference. The Eastlake project, serving 72 individuals ,has comparable technical and residential staff, but they employ 5 Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSW) to actively engage with their residents. An LCSW is professionally trained and qualified to help people become engaged and end the cycle of homelessness. Compare the wealth of support at the Eastlake project with Karluk Manor and you will find a startling difference. RurAL CAP claims their 10 staff members at the site will perform the key function of engagement with the 48 proposed residents. These workers possess no professional credentials. When asked about this, Project Director Melinda Freemon claimed the municipal code prevents RurAL CAP from hiring “case managers” and that she herself possesses a professional license and it should suffice. Further, she claimed that Eastlake is 72 beds. Implying that 48 beds is tiny in relation to Seattle. Look at RurAL CAP’s management plan and locate the 5 LCSWs? Or, to be fair, since Karluk Manor is proposed at 2/3 the size of Eastlike, where are the 3 LCSWs? Oh, that’s right. Melinda Freemon is going to do it all. And if the Municipal code restricts any case management, then the code needs to change before they establish this institution. As a resident of Fairview, I am afraid of this institution being created in my neighborhood. RurAL CAP Proposes 48 Bed Facility to Institutionalize The Homeless Nobody is disputing the need to house the homeless. I am even in support of wet housing. But RurAL CAP’s proposal doesn’t add up. Ms. Freemon, who manages ALL of RurAL CAP’s Anchorage programs believes her professional licenses are equal to 5 full time LCSWs. Somehow, along with all of her PR, Program, and Management duties, she can insure active engagement is effectively implemented? Wow. Either she is Wonder Woman or she is misleading when she claims that Karluk Manor can do anything but institutionalize 43 humans into Alaska’s first new human warehouse in 35 years. Which is the likely reality? I believe the only honest answer RurAL CAP has made is that they are forcing this on Fairview because the building is cheap. The cheapest solution is rarely the best. What is the solution? The only solution in accord with the hard fought trend of deinstitutionalization that won’t harm residential communities and that doesn’t include substantial onsite clinical staff (LCSWs) to manage active engagement is to scale down projects to a human scale. This means these facilities should be in residential homes with 6 to 8 residents. Homes. HOMES. . I recognize this solution is not the cheapest solution. But it is the only humane solution. I know what is not the solution: a 48 bed experimental institution in a residential neighborhood with no licensed clinical staff, opposed nearly unanimously by local residents, and in direct opposition to all precedent for the past 4 decades. Yet RurAl CAP is seeking a 600% increase above the Assembly established limit of 8 beds to 48, to create their experimental institution. Please deny RurAL CAPs request for a conditional use permit for Case #2010-077. | |
| Robyn Priest | 7/9/2010 12:30:30 PM |
| The Alaska Peer Support Consortium supports Karluk Manor. We are an organization that works with peer support providers throughout the state and have many stories of people who require such housing not being able to access it and living on the streets. Some of those dying as well. This type of housing has proven successful in other countries and is an essential requirement within our community; if we truly want to support those in need. The research shows that this type of housing does not detract from neighborhoods, does not increase violence (as some would say) and provides a safe environment for people to work on their own recovery. We hope that you will support this essential housing project. Robyn Priest Executive Director Alaska Peer Support Consortium | |
| Bruce Geraghty | 7/9/2010 12:27:47 PM |
| I strongly support the approval of the conditional use permit for Karluk Manor. My residence for the past 5 years is approximately 7 blocks south of the proposed housing project. I transit Karluk Street from 5th Avenue to 13th Avenue on an almost daily basis. Over the past 3 weeks I have been purposefully observing Karluk Lions Park use, and it appears to me that the Park is not used that much. The neighborhood children appear to prefer the higher quality playground in front of AHFC’s Park View Manor apartments at 9th and Karluk, and probably parents also prefer it since it is fenced and observable from apartment windows. Weather of course is a contributing factor to park use, and that has not been so good, but even the pavilion has not been in use regularly. I have witnesses only 4 occasions of individuals sleeping near secluding vegetation; 1 early morning incidence of a couple engaged in behavior that bordered on indecent; and 1 visit involved Community Service Patrol activity, but I arrived as they were departing. Transient groups, when present, tend to use the trees in the North West corner as their preferred gathering spot. Open consumption of alcoholic beverages, and/or littering has not been observed. Overall these groups tend to keep to themselves and treat the Park with respect. I suspect, based on dress, mannerisms’, presence of backpacks and other personal paraphernalia, that these are the candidate residents of Karluk Manor. I also recognize many of them as frequent loiterers at the corner of 13th Avenue and Gamble Street. I see no evidence that the proposed Karluk Manor will adversely affect current Park use; particularly given the management plan contained in the application for conditional use and the reputation and experience of the applicant RurAL CAP. What is most troubling to me is that this housing option needs a “conditional use permit” at all. Prior to the Municipality passing AO 2010-3, and in effect raising the bar for a disability housing business, the Karluk Manor project could have proceeded under the existing B-3 zoning without new condition. How AO 2010-3 equates to a “reasonable accommodation” escapes common sense. It reminds me of an old story about a stranger who asks a local for directions and gets the cheerful reply; “If I wanted to go there, I wouldn’t start from here.” Please approve the conditional use permit. This is a well designed project based on proven best practices for this un-housed population within our community. Within 6 months of Karluk Manor operation my money is on the community asking why we didn’t do this sooner. | |
| 7/9/2010 11:54:48 AM | |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Cynthia Morris | 7/9/2010 11:31:09 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. I believe it is a great step towards finding a solution for our communities homeless residents. | |
| T. Frank Box | 7/9/2010 11:27:12 AM |
| Housing first, a Seattle program has been shown to produce serious improvement in chronic homeless alcoholics lives. Reducing the cost to the taxpayers and making communities safer. If you think about it, it makes sense dollars and cents. As a case manager and facilitator of a head injury support group, I have seen the financial and spiritual cost of chronic homelessness & I have seen people with a simple head injury falls through the cracks into chronic alcoholism & homelessness. I have seen homeless people get deliberately drunk so they would get picked up and have a place to spend the night. KARLUK MANOR would address this problem. I support it and urge you to do the same! Thank you. | |
| Ed Pearcy | 7/9/2010 11:25:18 AM |
| The karlic manor should not be located..between two busy 3 lane hyway..that may have to be widen in afew years..and then the place haveing to be relocated somewhere else in a few years...at a cost to the tasx payer. | |
| Sara Gavit | 7/9/2010 11:20:22 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. As a pastoral minister in a large, urban church here in mid-town, I minister to homeless inebriates daily. The Housing First initiative gives people the opportunity to receive care and services that are hard to access when living on the streets. Trauma -- whether in the form of military combat, physical/sexual/emotional abuse, or domestic violence -- lies at the root of the lives of those we serve. By providing the security of housing, sobriety can take hold. It is the first step. Successful recovery requires time, safety and a healing, supportive environment. Karluk Manor is that place. I've lost friends on the streets of this city. Two powerful women come to mind: Susan Trapp and Mary Lott. Alcohol was their "treatment" to dull the pain of the repeated trauma they experienced and it ultimately killed them. We now have the opportunity to offer a healthy way out of the addition cycle. It has worked in other cities -- let's try it here. | |
| Carol Pearcy | 7/9/2010 11:19:10 AM |
| I believe that the "Karlic Manor" would bring down the value of the location.. that so many businesses have work very hard to improve,for many years.. And also has any one thought of the safty of the homeless endividuals that would beusing this place. It should not be located between two very busy 3 lane hyway (6th & 7th) for the safty of our homeless. More planning and research should been done before jumping in..and putting our homeless in danger....and then blaming others if an accident should happen...please recondcider this location . | |
| Daniel King | 7/9/2010 11:17:19 AM |
| Who will be responsible when the first of the inebriates at Karluk Manor is run over crossing the street to get to the bar? When the first woman is raped in her Home"? Rural CAP? The city? That question has not been adequately answered for me. Until we have all the answers to proceed is folly! | |
| Melanie Thomas | 7/9/2010 11:13:31 AM |
| No more social services in Fairview! Our backyard is full! | |
| Crrystal Jeffords | 7/9/2010 11:05:54 AM |
| I work and live in Fairview, not by choice, by necessity. If I had my choice I would live some where that the city wouldn't even concider putting a place like Karluk Manor. Please don't make my neighborhood take on any more! | |
| Les Garcia | 7/9/2010 11:02:02 AM |
| No conditional use permit for Rural CAP. | |
| Joe Dell | 7/9/2010 11:00:28 AM |
| Karluk Manor....NO! | |
| Beth Woods | 7/9/2010 10:59:09 AM |
| I cannot support a project that allows these people to continue to drink! | |
| Caleb Hill | 7/9/2010 10:56:50 AM |
| Friends of mine live in Fairview, they have asked me to send you my opinion of the Karluk Manor. While I can support Housing First,I believe the project would be better suited to a community that supports it. In order for something like this to succeed it must be done correctly the first time. | |
| Robert Harrison | 7/9/2010 10:47:04 AM |
| Why can these services be place in neighborhoods like Southport, or Diamond area? How about in Hillside or in Campton Hills? Why do they always end up in the low income, low rent neighborhood? I know the answer… because the city officials all live in those neighborhoods and they would make sure to move it to o neighborhood like Fairview!!! And I am sure Rural Cap officials are their neighbors. NO Karluk Manor in Fairview. | |
| Michelle Gross | 7/9/2010 10:46:35 AM |
| There are many areas in town I avoid. Fairview is one of them. I am lucky enough to be able to afford to live somewhere else. Lucky enough to have the education I have.Lucky enough to not have to worry about Rural CAP putting a facility of this type in MY neighborhood. Speaking for those who are not so lucky.... find an industrial area far away from ANY neighborhood. | |
| Kristin Schmidt | 7/9/2010 10:43:24 AM |
| I strongly support Karluk Manor. As a former housing case manager, I saw numerous homeless individuals transition from life on the streets to life in their own homes. I have toured the Housing First facilities in Seattle and they are truly remarkable. I hope Anchorage will have the same success. Also, alcoholism is present amongst all ages, genders, ethnicities and income levels. It is not just a "homeless issue." | |
| Susan Oswald | 7/9/2010 10:41:28 AM |
| I do not support the proposed location of Karluk Manor. Has anybody been listening to the cries of the Fairview community??? Well I have and if they say NO, I understand why. I don’t live in Fairview but I wouldn’t want to, especially if they end up with a wet house in their area. I cannot imagine having my children around such behavior. Why can a facility like this be place in the outer limits of our city??? I say NO NO NO to Karluk Manor. | |
| Chuck and May Seabert | 7/9/2010 10:40:39 AM |
| My wife and I do not support the location of Karluk Manor. WHY: Too much traffic, too many services in our neighborhood and too close to our park. Say NO… is very poor planning from our city. | |
| Fletcher Monagan | 7/9/2010 10:39:32 AM |
| I am a reformed alcholic, sober for 23 years and counting. If an alcholic is not ready to sober up, a house over his head isn't going to do it. Each of us must take responsibility for our own actions, no one and nothing can do it for you. And certainly not a facility who's only intention is to allow the drinking to continue! | |
| Mike L Pearcy | 7/9/2010 10:31:21 AM |
| Many have said that Fairview lacks compassion for the homeless and inebriates. Many have accused Fairview of not being willing to lend a hand to the needy. But those individuals obviously have never lived in Fairview. WE are very compassionate; we are a neighborhood that helps its neighbors regardless of ALL of our social obstacles. WE believe that inebriate homeless need help but Fairview needs help too. Fairview is one of the most violent neighborhoods in town. As you many recall this is where one of our Anchorage Police Officers was shot. Please help us clean Fairview, we do not need a wet house in our doors. We need to protect and provide our Fairview families with a better neighborhood. Please help us!!! Are we less important than the homeless??? | |
| Josh Perry | 7/9/2010 10:30:58 AM |
| I DO NOT support Kurlak Manor!!! | |
| Carrie Bell | 7/9/2010 10:27:40 AM |
| We keep hearing this project will take the drunks off the streets of Fairview... what we are not hearing is how they got here. CSP picks drunks up from all over Anchorage and takes them to the sleep off center. In the morning they don't bus them back to where they were picked up, they just open the door and kick them out into our neighborhood. This is not just Fairviews problem, its time some other neighborhoods took on some of the issues! | |
| Doris Troyer | 7/9/2010 10:22:37 AM |
| Anchorage has a large population of homeless who are not chronic alcholics! Housing for the families with children should come before housing for the drunks! I personally have helped a family with three childrens living in their van this past winter. Those poor children going without homes, beds,and bathroom facilities.... Make Karluk Manor a place for these people. | |
| maria m crandel | 7/9/2010 10:18:23 AM |
| What ever happen to putting FAMILIES FIRST !!! Are we not concern with how a wet house will affect a low income neighborhood that already has more than its share of social services in their area??? Adding one more is not good planning from our City. And worst of all they will be located within a block from one of the few parks Fairview has for its children. Please say no to the conditional use. It’s your job to put our Fairview Families first!!! | |
| Nick Braugue | 7/9/2010 10:16:42 AM |
| No bunks for drunks! No Karluk Manor! | |
| Frank Summers | 7/9/2010 10:14:06 AM |
| When will the American people begin to expect more from our citizens. Once upon a time people had to work and earn everything they had. Now we are going to give homeless inebriates a home and believe they will take pride in it and change?Its time to quit giving, earning is what creates pride! | |
| Camilla Senter | 7/9/2010 10:13:35 AM |
| I do not support the location of Karluk Manor. As our first Housing first project Anchorage needs to make sure it is done right from the beginning. I expect the zoning and planning committee to do their job and analyze if this is within the vision of our city, and specifically Fairview. This location is poor urban planning. Say not to the conditional use that is being requested. | |
| Gloria Hume | 7/9/2010 10:06:46 AM |
| No Karluk Manor in Fairview! | |
| Janice Brown | 7/9/2010 10:05:44 AM |
| I have read the comments left by others over the past few weeks. I keep coming back to the idea that because the Fairview community does not support this location they lack compassion. This could not be further from the truth. We who live in this community must deal with issue's on a daily basis that most people won't deal with in a life time. We need a break... please find another location for this project in a neighborhood less over whelmed with problems. At the very least it will mean a greater chance that the project will succeed. | |
| Paul Kuntz | 7/9/2010 9:43:45 AM |
| I do not support the conditional use permit for Karluk Manor, and believe that if the planning and zoning commission does their job they won't either. | |
| Randy Bozelle | 7/9/2010 7:19:13 AM |
| I fully support Karluk Manor. Homelessness in a sub arctic environment is a brutal and desperate situation. Food, shelter and warmth are the basics of human needs. Having these needs met allows a person to begin to take the steps necessary to get health and start a new life. Karluk Manor would offer access to dedicated professionals offering counseling and guidance for individuals in a safe, comfortable facility. Circumstances of a persons life can create a homeless situation for anyone. Karluk Manor would be a stepping stone towards a better future for those in need and the community. | |
| S J. Klein | 7/9/2010 12:09:00 AM |
| I am strongly against Karluk Manor for the following reasons: 1- Traffic: Karluk Manor will result in an increase in inebriates walking one of the busiest road interchanges in Anchorage. The Highway to Highway traffic study has shown that this area is overburdened with traffic. It is an accident waiting to happen 2- Underresourced: The management plan for Karluk Manor fails to provide robust social services on site for its residents. I have discussed this issue with the author of the JAMA article they reference, and robust on-site services are a necessary part of the successful housing first model. The management plan submit does not follow the model, and thus will be an experiment which will have negative impacts on the residents and neighbors. 3- Distance to Park: Being less than 500' from Fairview Lions Park is an attraction for illegal behavior. Their plan is to react to problems, but the fact that there is no outdoor or common area where residents can drink means that there is going to be a problem in the parks nearby. The variance request for the 500' rule should be rejected. 4- Responsibility for residents and visitors: Spillover effects can be expected from visitors and residents of the facility, and the management plan is lacking in mitigation measures to prevent inebriate behaviors that would impact neighbors. 5- Policy 62: This neighborhood is already impacted by the Sleep-Off Center, Brother Francis, the Mental Health Web, Beans Cafe, and McKinnel House. A wet facility in the middle of this neighborhood unfairly concentrates residential services for chronic inebriates into too small an area, in violation of Policy 62 of the Anchorage Comprehensive Plan. 6- Bad Precedent: This project is being proposed because it is something they can do right away, however it fails to meet the minimal requirements of the Alcohol Dependent Housing land use for distances to parks, fails to address spillover effects in the neighborhood, and fails to meet the goals of Policy 62 of the Anchorage Comprehensive Plan. This sets a bad precedent for the first Alcohol Dependent Housing project to come before Planning and Zoning. Doing it right, in the right location, and with the right management plan should not be sacrificed for expedience. Fairview is littered with well-intentioned, under-resourced and poorly executed social service projects. We do not need another. | |
| Avenue Campala | 7/8/2010 10:59:25 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| karen larsen | 7/8/2010 9:58:56 PM |
| I am very supportive of the housing first model, but I think this is the wrong location for a project like this. There are several points are the responsibility of Planning and Zoning to consider: The Anchorage Comprehensive Plan specifically states that services should be spread across the city, and not in one particular neighborhood. While Rural CAP claims they have services all over the city, the intent of this part of the 2020 Plan is to avoid concentrating one type of service in one area. Assisted senior living or subsidized housing is not the same as Beans Cafe, Brother Francis, or the Sleep off Center - all of which are located in Fairview. While people who support Karluk Manor say the chronic inebriate popluation is in Fairview already, the reason the problem is focused here is the concentration of services that cater to inebriates. I think other communities can withstand the impact of a project like this far better than Fairview. The Assembly adopted an ordinance to place projects like this outside of 500 feet from any park, school, or day care. Why would this restriction be in the ordinance if the first project to go into review already gets a variance. What precedence does that set? If you constantly give variances, there was no point to the distance restriction in the first place, and they would not have put it in there. I think you need to set an example, and not always waive it. Secondly, I believe the size of this project warrants a higher bar for things like the distance to parks. The Alcohol Dependent Housing ordinance was modeled on ordinances across the country, all of which have a similar distance restriction. This is a much larger scale project than a 4plex unit housing first project, and will have a larger impact on the surrounding neighborhood, including parks. I think you really need to look at the impact of this number of people in giving them a variance on this point. Another issue is maintenance of the sidewalks along 5th and 6th around the proposed site. Last winter when this project was being talked about, I thought I would walk around this building to understand the walking situation. I think you really need to look at walking west on 5th on the south side of the street for two block. Basically, I ended up walking on the side of the road because these sidewalks are not maintained or plowed. If this project does go through, all around this area, and not just the north/south patterns of homeless people flow need to be looked at for proper snow removal. As for traffic, the RurAL Cap team says, there is not excessive traffic in this area. This is the exact opposite of what the Highway to Highway studies have shown. Those people have sited this area as the place in our state that has over burdened roads with traffic. This is the exact area where they want to alleviate traffic, and for the last year, this project has had more money dumped into studying this more than any other project in our state. I find it hard to believe that the amount of traffic next to this project is not excessive. I would like to see more people on staff. The fact that several days a week there is one person on-site in the late night/early morning hours. How is attending to a disturbance and someone watching cameras at the same time happen? I think a good question to ask is. How many staff to tenant ratio does 1811 Eastlake in Seattle have? The ratio is 19 paid staffer to 75 tenants. What is the ratio of the Karluk manner? It is woefully deficient. And they expect neighbors to call 911 or CSP when there are problems with residents? This is another example of how this project will add to the burden already borne by residents of Fairview. I think a project like this needs to be done right. Quite honestly, "let's give it the old college try" is not the right attitude for a project like this. | |
| Karen Larsen | 7/8/2010 9:46:48 PM |
| I am very supportive of the housing first model, but I think this is the wrong location for a project like this. There are several points that is the responsibility of Planning and Zoning to consider: The Anchorage Comprehensive Plan specifically states that services should be spread across the city, and not in one particular neighborhood. While Rural CAP claims they have services all over the city, the intent of this part of the 2020 Plan is to avoid concentrating one type of service in one area. Assisted senior living or subsidized housing is not the same as Beans Cafe, Brother Francis, or the Sleep off Center - all of which are located in Fairview. While people who support Karluk Manor say the chronic inebriate popluation is in Fairview already, the reason the problem is focused here is the concentration of services that cater to inebriates. I think other communities can withstand the impact of a project like this far better than Fairview. The Assembly adopted an ordinance to place projects like this outside of 500 feet from any park, school, or day care. Why would this restriction be in the ordinance if the first project to go into review already gets a variance. What precedence does that set? If you constantly give variances, there was no point to the distance restriction in the first place, and they would not have put it in there. I think you need to set an example, and not always waive it. Secondly, I believe the size of this project warrants a higher bar for things like the distance to parks. The Alcohol Dependent Housing ordinance was modeled on ordinances across the country, all of which have a similar distance restriction. This is a much larger scale project than a 4plex unit housing first project, and will have a larger impact on the surrounding neighborhood, including parks. I think you really need to look at the impact of this number of people in giving them a variance on this point. Another issue is maintenance of the sidewalks along 5th and 6th around the proposed site. Last winter when this project was being talked about, I thought I would walk around this building to understand the walking situation. I think you really need to look at walking west on 5th on the south side of the street for two block. Basically, I ended up walking on the side of the road because these sidewalks are not maintained or plowed. If this project does go through, all around this area, and not just the north/south patterns of homeless people flow need to be looked at for proper snow removal. As for traffic, the RurAL Cap team says, there is not excessive traffic in this area. This is the exact opposite of what the Highway to Highway studies have shown. Those people have sited this area as the place in our state that has over burdened roads with traffic. This is the exact area where they want to alleviate traffic, and for the last year, this project has had more money dumped into studying this more than any other project in our state. I find it hard to believe that the amount of traffic next to this project is not excessive. I would like to see more people on staff. The fact that several days a week there is one person on-site in the late night/early morning hours. How is attending to a disturbance and someone watching cameras at the same time happen? I think a good question to ask is. How many staff to tenant ratio does 1811 Eastlake in Seattle have? The ratio is 19 paid staffer to 75 tenants. What is the ratio of the Karluk manner? It is woefully deficient. And they expect neighbors to call 911 or CSP when there are problems with residents? This is another example of how this project will add to the burden already borne by residents of fairview. I think a project like this needs to be done right. Quite honestly, "let's give it the old college try" is not the right attitude for a project like this. It should be done right. | |
| Brie David | 7/8/2010 9:33:21 PM |
| The news keeps reporting; another homeless person found dead. The community needs to step up and support rural cape for coming forth with a solution that will save the state and taxpayers money and most of all have the potential to save lives. Lives of not only the person on the street, but possibly for someone in the ER that needs the time that may be taken away from them by consistent homeless customers. We have to start somewhere and Karluk Manor may be a big part of the solution. I say go for it. | |
| Rachel Morse | 7/8/2010 8:31:07 PM |
| I work in Fairview and I support Karluk Manor. 23 people have died on the streets of Anchorage. We need a solution now. RurAL CAP has stepped up. Housing First works. Housing First can be successful at Karluk Manor. Save lives. Save money. Open Karluk Manor. | |
| Zack Kirk | 7/8/2010 6:59:52 PM |
| I am in complete agreement that chronic inebriates need to be helped, and that lodging is just one of the many areas of support that the city should provide. However, if this project trully had the future tenants in mind, if they really wanted to help them recover, if they actually cared about these people they would not put them there. They would not cram 48 people into uncomfortably small rooms in a place located between two highways and right smack in the area where their problems are exacerbated, and with no services proposed except for the occasional shuttle van to take them all to the nearby liquor store to restock. No, if the municipality TRULLY cared about improving their condition, they would take the 48 individuals and place them in units throughout the city that could house up to 6 to 8 people. Then it would assign each unit a caseworker to help them repair their condition and reintegrate them into society. But then, this is Anchorage and that sounds like way too much work and money. "Let's just find the cheapest way to sweep this little problem under the rug, so we can pat ourselves on the back and say we did the right thing." I just feel bad for the people that this place is supposed to be helping. In effect the city,(no, we the citizens of this city) is telling them "here, congratulations you have a tiny hole to call your own. Now do whatever you want: get better, do drugs, drink till your sick, whatever. We would just prefer not to have to see you drunk or passed out or panhandling on the streets as we drive around town. In fact, we will even have a shuttle to take you from 'The Manor' to the liqour store to minimize your time in the public eye and speedily return you to your cell. No need to thank us." | |
| Burt Potter | 7/8/2010 4:44:25 PM |
| The briefing paper on this project talks of "pairing the housing with intensive(often times round the clock) case management". The fact sheet states "at least one staff member will be on duty at all times" How in the world can these two statements be used to describe the workings of Karluk Manor. It is highly unlikely that one staff member can do an "intensive" job at anything, much less 48 inebriates! | |
| Ben Kanohokula | 7/8/2010 4:39:42 PM |
| First let me say that I fully support Karluk Manor something has to be done. I have been working in the substance abuse field for over 10 years and have helped many individuals overcome their addiction. I would hope that more people would try to understand what this program is designed to do. First of all it is not about free rent or partying all the time. It about providing shelter to individuals that need shelter. After this first basic need is accomplished many of the additional concerns surrounding them can be addressed. Far to often we place conditions on people before we decide to help them. Ex: I will give you housing but you need to stop drinking first. I do not know how you will accomplish this but good luck. We have been trying this for years and it is not working. If you are tired of reading the news of senseless deaths of the homeless this is where we need to start. Placing 48 of the hardest to serve individuals in one place is also very economical as service providers can meet them in one area and address the needs they display. If you look up housing first across the country it is a proven solution to address the homeless crisis. We need affordable housing we need places that are willing to work with individuals at their pace. If you have a better idea I would like to hear about it until then let support a project that is willing to do something about this problem and stop looking at why it may not work but at why it will work. | |
| Sydney Crest | 7/8/2010 4:34:36 PM |
| I find it most telling that Mayor Sullivan himself does not support this location! | |
| Deeann Herrington | 7/8/2010 4:31:16 PM |
| Rural CAP has compared this facility to 1811 Eastlake in Seattle time and time again. However, listening to Kenny Scollen speak at the senior center last week I was shocked when he said there would be one, or two employees staffing the facility at all times. One, or two??? And they are assuring the Fairview community that they will have no security issues?!? Doesn't sound like common sense to me. | |
| Kimberly Fox | 7/8/2010 4:24:39 PM |
| Help those who help themselves! I have been taught that since I was a child! Without requiring drying out as a condition for living in these facilities, I cannot support them! | |
| Russel Meeks | 7/8/2010 4:22:37 PM |
| I do not support Karluk MANOR! | |
| Karen Ross | 7/8/2010 4:21:50 PM |
| I attended the Housing and Neighborhood Development meeting in June, and was very pleased that the commission listened to the views of the Fairview community. I am counting on the Planning and Zoning Commission to do the same! Fairview is a neighborhood already over burdened by social services. We are not NIMBY's, we just have too much in our backyard as it is! | |
| W. Hertzler | 7/8/2010 4:01:59 PM |
| I am frustrated beyond belief that this idea is even being concidered, let alone the location currently proposed! Once again I am reminded why our country is in the shape its in! | |
| Rebekah Luhrs | 7/8/2010 3:27:17 PM |
| It is time we approach the table with a clean slate and an open mind. We need to look at the Karluk Manor project in its entirety and evaluate it realistically, socially, and economically. It is time to face the human element involved in the project: Realistically: The Truth is that it is not going to solve our alcoholism or homelessness problems here in Anchorage. Honestly it will put only a small dent in to the much larger problem at hand. However it is a step. It is an innovative attempt to address an issue that so many of us turn our heads from when we pass street corners or walk by public benches. Socially: As individuals we are not responsible for the actions and situations of others, but as neighbors in this community we owe it to each other to have faith and hope in the possibility of second chances. Before we step up screaming “Not in my backyard!” we should take a second to recognize the fact that until we work together as a community to solve our problem, it will always be in our backyard whether we choose to make eye contact with it or not. The main issue here is not beer bottles littering the Fairview area and it is not an uncontrolled haven or a crash house for homeless drunks. It is about making our community safer, it is about finding ways to address a huge problem in a new way. Economically: RurAL CAP has stepped up to address the issue and has worked to leverage funding, to find partners and to collaborate with successful projects that have worked elsewhere. In the end, they project saving the city hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on CSA, emergency and crime related incidents. They have invested in this project as they have in so many others across the state with the hopes to empower people and provide them with a safe and healthy environment. Through providing this safe housing with established responsibilities and guidelines they are offering people the first step to shifting back into a structured lifestyle and a chance to break free from a vicious cycle most of us will never fully understand or experience. It is time that we recognizing the human element involved here and that as a community it is in our best interest realistically, socially, and economically to support the Karluk Manor. | |
| Debbie Stojak | 7/8/2010 3:22:17 PM |
| The conditional use permit for Karluk Manor should be denied for the following reasons: 1)Unfortunatley, good data on the demographics of the residential population that will be closest to this faciltiy are not available and/or have not been made available. Unlike the majority of individuals that have provided comments, I am intimately familar with the demographics of this area and I feel certain that there is a very high concentration of children under the age of 15 that reside near Fairview Lions Park relative to other areas in Anchorage. This is particularly true because of the proximity to the Park View Manor and in general, the high density popultion in fairview. The criteria used by RuralCap in locating this facility ONLY considered what the location could do for its facility and not visa versa. In Fairview, we have a high concentration of children who already suffer the consequences of a low-income, social service environment. I think it is only honest to admit that there exists a risk of negative consequences from the proposed Karluk Manor and that risk should be farther from such a high concentration of children. 2) The potential residents of Karluk Manor demand robust social services. Other than the lofty services descrbied by RuralCap from the onsite Resident Service Provider, Rural Cap is not offering any internal services. This is an absolute necessity for recovery for these individuals. 3) I am not convinced, unlike the majority of commentators, that placing an individual in a 200 square foot room smack in the middle of two highways, in a neighorhood with a high concentration of non-recovering alcoholics, and paying their rent for the forseeable future, promises the dignity or respite needed for successful recovery. 4) The Commission should be concerned with increasing its tax base within its core and discouraging the current exodus of families, business, etc. to the valley. Concentrating social services in one area is a sure way to lower property values and decrease the tax base. 5) The comments accusing Fariview residents of NIMYism are insulting and misguided and the inherent irony is hard to swallow for individuals who work so hard to improve Anchorage's urban core. 6) Please see Allen Kemplen's comment again; I agree, the conditional use permit does not comport with the Comprehensive Plan. | |
| Kevin Schaffer | 7/8/2010 2:56:06 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Shawn Knudeson | 7/8/2010 2:21:21 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Mari Gallion | 7/8/2010 1:00:49 PM |
| I know from personal experience dealing with friends and family members who struggle with substance abuse that sometimes, the abuse is a reaction to their current circumstances. For example, I know Vietnam veterans who shot heroin every day that they were in Vietnam, yet have never been so much as slightly tempted upon their return to the US. Why? Because it's what they had to do in order to deal with their current circumstances. If we give people shelter, they may not abuse the substances. We may not like or understand them, but these are human beings who deserve a chance. And honestly, we cannot assume that chronic innebirates are any more dangerous than you average passer-by. As a matter of fact, they are about a million times more obvious, and are thus easy to avoid. In conclusion, the Red Roof Inn has not been a legitimate housing option for tousists in years: I have driven tour buses, and it has never been a pick-up site for me. So why not put it to approrpaite use, housing people who need it? | |
| Nancy Kanitz | 7/8/2010 1:00:33 PM |
| I support the address on Karluk Street. | |
| Charlie Ess | 7/8/2010 12:33:06 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor in the same vein that I support any program that attempts to serve the underprivileged. My experience with folks caught in the throes of alcoholism--or any other addiction for that matter--is that they all want to quit. As a citizen who watches them falter I feel the burden to support new approaches, and Karluk has been modeled after other successful programs. I say we go for Karluk. | |
| Janice Weiblewicz | 7/8/2010 11:04:02 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. Instead of putting pressure on local businesses, I believe it will relieve them of people who have no place to go. Why is it that the people who are against this seem to pull their excuses out of the air with no statistical support? That tells me the objections are based on emotion, not common sense. | |
| Sharon Cartee | 7/8/2010 9:44:20 AM |
| The old Red Roof Inn should not be allowed to be used as an alchohol dependent housing. | |
| Donna Millwood | 7/8/2010 9:42:21 AM |
| Totally against 2010-077!!!! I am a 67 year resident of Anchorage. | |
| Judy Marsh | 7/8/2010 9:38:34 AM |
| I have lived in Anchorage for over 50 years and I have been going to the Lucky Wishbone almost since it opened. I believe this would be bad for their family atmosphere and I should not contend with a drunk house across the street! | |
| Sue Easterly | 7/8/2010 9:34:53 AM |
| The old Red Roof should not be used as a treatment or the housing alcholol dependent people. The corner is too busy for their safety and would probably be a nuisance to the surrounding businesses. I have been a resident of Anchorage for over 50 years and do not want to see this sort of facility in this area. | |
| Suzie Mayer | 7/8/2010 9:31:17 AM |
| I feel housing for drunks is a very bad idea. Especially when they can continue to drink in this new housing. That is just plain stupid. It would be totally different if they were reformed alcholics trying to get a new start in life.But, to give drunks free housing is not where i want my tax dollars to go. I should also let you know that I vote! | |
| Raymond Nesbett | 7/8/2010 9:29:37 AM |
| To Purchase the property, without informing the public, and before teh required municipal permits and approvals were obtain, lacks good faith and demostrates the arogance of the petitioner. The entired process of this approval is tainted by the behaivior of Rural Cap. The petition should be denied. | |
| Mark Erickson | 7/8/2010 8:06:05 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. It will undoubtedly save lives and improve Anchorage for all. | |
| Pat Corkery | 7/8/2010 7:07:20 AM |
| There is good, solid science behind the concept of "Housing First". What's more, it is the responsible and compassionate thing to do. | |
| Allen Kemplen | 7/7/2010 8:12:50 PM |
| Dear Commission Members, In the community conversations associated with crafting of the Anchorage Bowl Comprehensive Plan, there emerged a prevailing agreement that we should avoid some of the known urban problems seen in metropolitan areas. One of the more objectionable urban ills was the creation of a "Skid Row." This is why the Comp Plan incorporated a policy of having support services decentralized throughout the urban area. Skid Row - noun, a city district frequented by vagrants and alcoholics and addicts. Establishing a wet house for 48 of the approximately 250 chronic public inebriates two blocks from the city sleep-off center and institutional support services conflicts with the Comp Plan. The City Sleep-Off Center receives inebriates from all over and, once they are deemed sober, releases them out the front door. Karluk Manor will become a magnet for these individuals as they visit friends residing at the facility. It is highly probable there will be increased pedestrian traffic between Karluk Manor, other social support facilities and the nearest liquor stores. Even if adequate funds are available for a robust property and site management regime, the adjacent blocks will experience an increase in the number of vagrants and inebriates. Public spaces will witness accelerated wear and tear due to the volume of vagrants and inebriates. Fairview Lions Park, as the nearest open public space with amenities will be especially hard hit. The vagrants and inebriates will have a significant visible impact at the eastern gateway to the urban core. Karluk Manor will be one of the anchor tenants of an expanding skid row at the entrance to our City The approval of a conditional use for Karluk Manor with its resultant negative externalities runs counter to the goals of the Downtown Plan and the draft Fairview Community Plan. The proposed Conditional Use runs counter to the policies of the Anchorage Comprehensive Plan. The request for a Conditional Use Permit should be denied. | |
| Janet Clark | 7/7/2010 7:46:21 PM |
| I have watched with interest the Karluk Manor issue. I decided to put my two cents in..... I really have to say I can't support this project. The idea of putting the 48 worst cases in town in one building is not a good idea. Do these people realize there is a bar right across the street? Making no effort to sober up the tenants....not a good idea!! | |
| Russell Gratrix | 7/7/2010 7:35:17 PM |
| Reading letter after letter it doesn'tsuprise me to see how many are from other social service organizations. Was a blanket email sent out saying send a letter in support?!? The people you need to be listening to are the ones that live in the neighborhood that will be directly effected Fairview! | |
| Brock Mcnabb | 7/7/2010 7:31:30 PM |
| Say no to Karluk Manor and yes to Fairview! | |
| Tommy Parks | 7/7/2010 7:27:17 PM |
| Can you say enabling!!! No to Karluk Manor! | |
| Sarah Kruse | 7/7/2010 7:22:24 PM |
| A housing unit for inebriates between two of the busiest streets in Anchorage.....logical? NOT!! | |
| Jerry Brown | 7/7/2010 7:18:54 PM |
| The HAND commission did their job and put the neighborhood of Fairview first. Planning and Zoning please do yours and keep Karluk Manor out of Fairview!!! | |
| Jake Noble | 7/7/2010 7:16:12 PM |
| Getting the drunks off the street without counceling them to quit drinking is an effort in futility! Do it right, or don't do it at all! | |
| Kyla Hardesty | 7/7/2010 7:13:12 PM |
| I have many issues with Rural CAP and how this whole business of Karluk Manor has gone. They have snuck around every step of the way claiming to have the best interests of Fairview in mind. Every step of the way they have barged ahead despite how this community feels about the project. Shame on them, this is not in the best interest of our neighborhood! | |
| Jo Lind | 7/7/2010 7:07:44 PM |
| Just ssy no to the petition for Karluk Manor. The 500 feet is set for a reason1! | |
| T. Snoddy | 7/7/2010 7:04:53 PM |
| I still am having trouble with the concept of a wet house.... and the idea that yo9u want to put it in Fairview??? What are the folks at rural cap thinking! | |
| Michael Rucinski | 7/7/2010 7:04:49 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. It is about time we had a different approach to homelessness in Anchorage. The location is near other services and in a commercial area. No location is perfect and no neighborhood wants this type of project. However, something needs to be done. | |
| Holly Wahlen | 7/7/2010 7:02:51 PM |
| I say NO to Karluk Manor!!! | |
| Tatiana Michlin | 7/7/2010 5:06:34 PM |
| I do think that saving lives is the imperative here. If it will save lives - even one life - then it will be worth it. If it will make life safer for even one person it will be worth it. | |
| Misty Gann | 7/7/2010 4:40:20 PM |
| I Support Karluk Manor! | |
| David Pash | 7/7/2010 4:06:26 PM |
| I would just like to say that a place like Karluk Manor can save lives. And if just one life is saved from this project, don't you think that getting this project going is worth any and all headaches that may arise? No one can put a price tag or an expiration date on someone elses life. And I hope that I may expire in a safe housing instead of on the streets of Anchorage. | |
| Tracy Barbee | 7/7/2010 3:19:32 PM |
| I am the Executive Director of the Alaska Mental Health Consumer Web, a recovery based drop-in center, located in the Fairview neighborhood of Anchorage. A majority of our participants are homeless and we see the issues they face every day. I, and the organization as a whole, support the Karluk Manor (and Housing First) for many reasons: 1. The Housing First Model (Karluk Manor) saves people’s lives by allowing them the stability to address more than just their basic human needs. Once in a stable housing situation, people often address their substance abuse issues, personal issues, financial issues, etc. This has been proven effective by the Housing First model in other states. 2. Placing those burdened with a substance abuse issue in a stable housing situation saves communities a tremendous amount of money. While not in a stable housing situation, people with substance abuse issues tie up emergency and community services such as the Emergency Rooms at hospitals, the Anchorage Police Department, Community Sleep-off, the Community Service Patrol vans, etc. These services cost the taxpayer significantly more than facilities such as Karluck Manor. Again – this has been proven by other states using the Housing First model. 3. I have heard many of our participants say that they did not start drinking heavily until they were homeless. They drink to escape the daily horror of their lives. Once appropriately housed – they have the opportunity to concentrate on becoming productive citizens. 4. Much of the housing opportunities Anchorage already has in place require total sobriety. Although these services are wonderful and a God-send to many, fighting an addiction for some requires more than one try. Becoming clean and sober takes time, and often it takes many attempts. A facility such as the Karluk Manor will offer those who are working on sobriety the chance to keep working – even if they have a misstep. If we really want to offer people the opportunity to recover, the Karluk Manor is a necessity. Whether you analyze the Karluk Manor project from a humanistic view, or from the stand point of a financial manager – Karluk Manor makes sense. And it’s the right thing to do. Please help pass the ordinance to allow the Karluk Manor to become an Anchorage reality. | |
| Wanda Conley | 7/7/2010 11:52:32 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Vera Workman | 7/7/2010 9:44:35 AM |
| I fully support Karluk Manor So everyone would have a safe place to stay.And there will be less people dying on the streets. | |
| pamela parmley | 7/7/2010 9:38:14 AM |
| I Pamela Parmley stay at Homewardbound and I support Karluk Manor | |
| deborah nathan | 7/7/2010 9:36:06 AM |
| i SUPPORT KARLUK MANOR | |
| Laura Setuk | 7/7/2010 9:32:49 AM |
| I would like to say that I support the Karluk Manor and I've came to this decision by looking at the POSITIVES and not just the NEGATIVES.It sounds like a bad idea to most but if they step back and did what I did they will see what I've seen about the project. | |
| Summer LeFebvre | 7/7/2010 5:12:08 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. This housing first project is being run by an agency with a great track record RuALCap and Homeward Bound. I would support in my neighborhood as well. To me it is a matter of what works, is economically responsible AND keeps people from passing away in public parks. What we are doing now is not enough. | |
| Shirley Randal | 7/6/2010 8:33:41 PM |
| I support Karlak Manor at the Red Roof Inn. It is long overdue that we do something in Anchorage to help our homeless people. | |
| Janice Wyland | 7/6/2010 5:28:36 PM |
| As a former resident of Anchorage and much experience with drug and alcohol rehab, I support the concept of Karluk Manor. This project is a big step-up for those who need help to improve their life. If any protestor thinks homelessness could not happen in their family, they are sadly disillusioned. | |
| Annette Erickson | 7/6/2010 2:48:13 PM |
| This is a proven project, that uses hard evidence to back it up. People can't get sober on the street, and they can't live in fear of being evicted if they don't stay sober. Best option. | |
| theresa hennemann | 7/6/2010 2:19:50 PM |
| I strongly support this effort. It is so needed in our community and will help keep our streets safe! | |
| Carol Jacobsen | 7/6/2010 2:18:04 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor | |
| Kate Yenik | 7/6/2010 2:12:03 PM |
| I fully support the Karluk Manor. As a past resident of Fairview, I have seen first hand the affects of alcohol on our homeless. It is a scary site to see people laid out, outside, at night, in the middle of winter. It is important that we keep our communities safe and the Karluk Manor will provide that safety. Not only will it be a safe space, the Karluk Manor will also provide services that are essential for the Chronic Inhebriates. This is a solution that will help our community. | |
| Alison Kulas | 7/6/2010 1:58:00 PM |
| I am a Fairview resident and I fully support the Karluk Manor. Our community needs to address the issue head on. We need safe streets. We need all our citizens to be protected. There is no better place to put such a project than in Fairview. While I love living in Fairview, there are a number of inebriates on the streets. Frequently when walking home late, or even in the middle of the day, I see people passed out on the sidewalks or sometimes in the middle of the road. The proposed Karluk Manor is a wonderful solution to this problem. It does not mean giving people a safe house to “party” in, it means giving people a house to be safe. Just as giving people free condoms does not promote HIV and seatbelt ads do not encourage accidents, this is a public health issue that cannot be ignored. By placing Karluk Manor in Fairview it will meet the homeless population where they are and help them find the resources they need to be out of harm’s way. RurAL CAP has a proven track record of success at helping people help themselves. The Seattle model is an exemplary program that shows tremendous success and I know RurAL CAP will take all the necessary steps to making the Karluk Manor a safe and respectable place for our homeless population. In turn, Karluk Manor will make our community a safe place for ALL our residents. I SUPPORT Karluk Manor. | |
| Hellen Fleming | 7/6/2010 1:45:51 PM |
| As quoted from KTUU on June 23rd--Over the last two years, more than twenty people with a history of chronic alcoholism have died outdoors in the Anchorage area. "Just another tragedy in the life of the city, to lose people like this… Some people need to understand. Life on the street isn't conducive to longevity," said Lt. Dave Parker, APD. As quoted from ADN on July 2nd--Another man has been found dead at an Anchorage homeless camp, bringing to 23 the toll of men and women who were homeless or otherwise familiar with street life who have died outdoors around the city in just over a year. These were the latest tragedies of our homeless population that made the news last week. It is a lifestyle that was not chosen, but rather a result of alcoholism. Twenty three people have made headlines from dying on the street. These people sought help, sought to end their addiction; however their disease of alcoholism, their grief, their history of physical abuse, their mental illness, etc. always bought them back to the street. The hurdle was too high, the pain and sadness too much. It runs in a circle month to month, moment to moment. These are the people that are slated to become a tenant at Karluk Manor. RurAL CAP can offer a stable environment—a warm place to live and sleep, a full meal, and opportunity for much needed supports such as addressing health concerns, alcoholism, mental health concerns and the like. That is the impact that RurAL CAP wants to make at Karluk Manor. I know many would like these people to be far away, away from their neighborhoods, their businesses, and parks etc. Presently these individuals roam through their neighborhoods, their businesses, and parks; they are looking for a place that will warm them up for an hour, a place to drink, or just a place to be. How empty and how sad to roam the streets it is the plight of homelessness. Mother Theresa said “One of the greatest diseases is to be nobody to anybody”. We must do something to make these nobodies a somebody. Karluk Manor is that something. It recognizes the problem and offers a solution to the neighborhoods, the businesses, and a place to call home for that somebody. Housing is a human need and a human right. May I end this comment with another quote from Mother Theresa-----We are all pencils in the hand of God. Let’s all write a good ending to these peoples plight of homelessness. Let’s support Karluk Manor-----------A solution-------------A place to call home. | |
| The Alaska Veterans Foundation, Inc Ric Davidge | 7/6/2010 12:16:02 PM |
| We began investigating the homeless veteran issue about 2.5 years ago. We recently participated in the Mayor's Homeless Leadership Team as the representative on veterans concerns. What we have learned has changed our approach to this national disgrace. Out of the entire homeless community there are a few who continue to be homeless, about 20% nationally. Of this small group most have some level of mental disfunction, either physical or phycological that keep them from being able to function at a level able to maintain a home or a job. America has failed to understand or responsibly address this specific group, so they remain on the street corners, in the woods, etc. Housing First is the first and only new concept that appears to be working across the nation. We did not support this concept at first, but have come to understand it and what it can offer our community and our homeless. We are committed to ending veteran homelessness in Alaska in 5 years. We can do it and we belive this venture by Rural CAP is a solid and important step in the right direction. As a result, the Foundation has offered to partner with Rural CAP in facilitating services to any homeless veterans they house. Our National Veteran Service officer will be available to assit any veteran housed to connect with VA services they have earned through service and sacrifice. We look foward to working with Rural CAP as this venture matures. The Alaska Veterans Foundation will be offering another opportunity for our homeless in VetCity a new Honor Farm type facility to be located on property we are acquiring in Eklutna. We will keep you informed as this develops. Ric Davidge Chairman | |
| Christy Anseth | 7/6/2010 10:40:00 AM |
| I fully support Karluk Manor. These people need help and they are living in my backyard as it is. During the summer months just look under any tree in any park and you will see them living there. If these services are offered and there is alot of positive support then perhaps; these people will get the help they need to become productive member's of our society, but to keep down talking them is not going to help them in anyway. | |
| Oleana Nelson | 7/6/2010 10:30:36 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Janice Berry | 7/6/2010 10:24:57 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor because it adds to the inventory of affordable housing that is so lacking in this city. The residents who will reside there can get out of the parks and in a safe place where they will have more of a chance at bettering their lives. As for the location, residents will need to be in a central place for good access to public transportation when they are ready to work. Not many other places fit better than downtown for good access to public transportation. | |
| heidi heinrich | 7/5/2010 9:20:02 PM |
| AT THE MEETING HELD BY RURAL CAP LAST WEEK I WAS AMAZED AT HOW MANY PEOPLE CONFUSED THE FACT THAT FAIRVIEW COMMUNITIE'S NOT WANTING KARLUK MANOR IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD MEANT THE PEOPLE OF FAIRVIEW LACKED HUMANITY. ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER. WE ARE SIMPLY SAYING WE HAVE ENOUGH OF THESE TYPE OF SERVICES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. | |
| Jack Lervaag | 7/5/2010 9:12:41 PM |
| I have been discussing the proposed Karluk Manor with clients of late. The over whelming response of my customers is "sign me up! Free rent and party all the time!" | |
| jan heinrich | 7/5/2010 9:09:33 PM |
| I have been a resident of Anchorage for over 45 years. I do not believe Karluk Manor is the answer to Anchorages inibriated homeless issues. | |
| sierra wahlen | 7/5/2010 9:04:56 PM |
| I DO NOT SUPPORT KARLUK MANOR! | |
| Tim Godfrey | 7/5/2010 1:37:47 PM |
| I support the proposed Housing First project at Karluk Manor. I am a 46 year resident of ANC and the city has never been able to resolve the problem regarding our chronic alcoholic homeless people. I find the location of the proposed Karluk Manor probably better than most other locations in town (not sure about fire codes at the vacant Northern Lights Inn); the current Red Roof Inn is on the fringe of Fairview along a commercial corridor. I think this proposal for Karluk Manor is the best use of an already questionable motel with a shady history, and is projected to save the city a lot of money overall in public safety & health care costs. We are only talking about housing for 48 homeless people who would otherwise be camping out in Fairview and through out the city. A stable safe housing environment is the key to recovery & self sufficiency. I have been very impressed with how Rural CAP has managed their properties in Mtn View with strict tenant codes of conduct. As a property owner of two apt bldgs in Fairview on LaTouche and Juneau Sts, I truly care about the neighborhood, it's safety and well being for it's residents. I have confidence that Rural CAP can pull it off. In fact, I hope the proposed Karluk Manor's success, if approved, might lead to other housing opportunities for other chronic homeless alcoholics in this city. | |
| Barbara Rawalt | 7/4/2010 11:16:34 PM |
| I am glad for the option of Karluk Manor, and the concept of 'housing first' -- I believe it would be a help to the city of Anchorage, and a step up into new life for the chronic inebriate. | |
| Jason Stacey | 7/3/2010 3:07:16 PM |
| In a perfect world this concept might work. In a perfect world the tenants of Karluk Manor would be well behaved. In a perfect world the neighbors would not even know they were there. In a perfect world we wouldn’t need Karluk Manor. | |
| Ty Bolder | 7/3/2010 3:06:51 PM |
| The sight of an individual too drunk to stand, lying in the bushes is not a pretty one. No one grows up planning to be a drunk. However isn’t it amazing that over the past few years that both a father and a son from the same family died on Anchorage’s streets? This leaves me thinking that perhaps if there was a facility that tough sobriety , that required its tenants to abstain; maybe this father would have been this sort of example for his son. If we are to embrace this effort, this is not the way! | |
| Brittany Miller | 7/3/2010 3:06:22 PM |
| I have been a resident of Anchorage for most of my life; the chronic alcoholics that roam our streets are not a new sight. What is new is the idea of housing them altogether in a so called wet house. It is astonishing to me that the folks at Rural Cap believe they can control these folks when they are intoxicated with a limited staff. On the occasions I have had to have confrontations it is always unpredictable in nature. One minute you have a jovial drunk, the next a fuel fledge maniac. Putting 48 together in one building doesn’t sound like a feasible idea to me. | |
| June Jones | 7/3/2010 2:58:41 PM |
| The Idea that absolutely no effort is being put into requiring the tenants of the Karluk Manor to cease and desist with the alcohol is enough reason for me to say No to Rural Cap. | |
| Katherine More | 7/3/2010 2:57:59 PM |
| I have been following with interest the controversy of Rural Cap’s purchase of the Red Roof Inn for housing of chronic homeless inebriates. While there is a need for some sort of program to keep these people of the streets, I do not believe this is the answer. An old fashioned honor farm is better suited idea. Instead of having little or no expectations of the tenants they would be required to work for their keep. This more than a roof over their head gives them more reason to feel a sense of pride. | |
| Sophie Hinson | 7/3/2010 2:45:16 PM |
| A housing complex for chronic homeless inebriate next to one of the busiest intersections in town? Are we trying to help these people or eliminate them one by one!!! | |
| Shelby Mundell | 7/3/2010 2:44:48 PM |
| Shame on Rural Cap for tooting their own horn in the Daily News leading people to believe they would have made these changes if the HAND commission had not shot them down. Their plan needs lots of improvements before I am willing to say Yes. | |
| Russ DeVries | 7/3/2010 1:47:45 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Howard Harris | 7/3/2010 1:10:47 PM |
| I am writing in opposition to this facility and specifically it's location. We operate a warehouse nearby and have no interest in attracting further problems to the area. This location is a busy intersection that is gateway to our city which needs to upgraded in terms of use rather than denegraded by this type of facility. The recent opening of a corporate facility in the same block was a good omen for interest in improving the area that is now likely to be devalued by the proposal to house inebriates next door. | |
| Carmen Baker | 7/3/2010 10:37:05 AM |
| We have a warehouse on 1036 E 4th. We have pay an employee to spend, at least a half hour each morning to pick up after the "clients" of The Brother Francis shelter and Beans Cafe'. Some mornings this means literally waking people up who are sleeping it off underneath one of the container trucks, some mornings this means Mike is cleaning human excrement from our lot. This behavior will only increase as we add yet one more facility in Downtown / Fairview area for inebriates to congregate. An area that is already overburdened with inebriate services. Instead of adding one more blight to the neighbor hood why not encourage legitimate commerce that will INCREASE property values rather than bring them down. This is a problem with no clear solution, and I am not without sympathy for the effected individuals; but we can't continue letting this small population bring down the hard work and diligent efforts of a community valianlty trying to raise the standards of living in their neighborhood. Please do not permit the "Red Nose INN" to operate in this renaissance community. | |
| Sharon Chamard | 7/2/2010 2:03:26 PM |
| The Fairview Community Council has no position one way or another on Housing First. It is the location of Karluk Manor, more so than the project itself, that led the Council in February to vote 21-2 to oppose it. We are concerned though that the proposed project has been compared to the 1811 Eastlake facility in Seattle, and on that basis many presume it is destined for success. We think there are significant meaningful differences between the Seattle project and what has been proposed for Karluk Manor that are likely to reduce this project’s success. First, 1811 Eastlake is located in a well-to-do commercial area far away from Pioneer Square, sort of like Seattle’s 13th and Gambell. The Red Roof Inn is less than a mile away from Anchorage’s premier gathering spot for chronic public inebriates. It is also within blocks of Brother Francis Shelter, Bean’s Café, and Sleep Off. Putting 48 end-stage alcoholics in this environment with the expectation that they will drink less is like putting someone with an affinity for cookies in the middle of a bakery and expecting them to lose weight. Second, 1811 Eastlake was built from scratch. Security features were designed in, not added after-to-fact to an existing structure. If you walk by 1811 Eastlake, it looks like any other building. Unlike the proposed Karluk Manor, it is not surrounded by a six-foot-high iron fence and sliding security gates. This is not exactly a look that makes people feel they are in a safe neighborhood. Third, and most significantly, the level of services at 1811 Eastlake could be called “robust.” I fear the level of services we will see at Karluk Manor will be scanty. The services that make a difference in Seattle, like clinical support specialists who practice “assertive engagement,” are absent in RurAL CAP’s plan. Instead, they intend to “refer” residents to services that, in Seattle, are provided on-site. We are all aware of the funding crisis in this state for programs dealing with substance abuse. Are there in fact enough resources to provide an adequate level of services to residents of Karluk Manor? In short, the very things that make 1811 Eastlake so successful are missing here. We have legitimate concerns that RurAL CAP, despite their very best intentions, will be unsuccessful managing the tenants of Karluk Manor. They do a good job with their properties in Mt. View, and because of this they claim to be experienced in running a place like Karluk Manor. Is this likely to be the case? First, their largest property is only 25 units. Karluk Manor will house 48 people. Second, in none of their properties do they house chronic inebriates who are permitted (and expected) to drink on the property. They provide transitional housing to participants in the Homeward Bound program, but these people are typically also involved in some form of treatment. If they do decide to drink, they have to leave the property. There is clearly a demonstrated need in Anchorage for housing for chronic public inebriates. We have heard that there may be upwards of 400 people who fall within this hard-to-house group. We have heard that this group, but a small percentage of the total number of homeless people in Anchorage, consumes a disproportionate amount of services. We have heard that other cities have had success implementing the “Housing First” model to reduce the public costs associated with these populations. What worries many people in Fairview is whether these “savings” to Anchorage, as a whole, will be had at our expense. What we don’t know, because it has never been studied, is what is the impact on the quality-of-life of those who live and work in proximity to a facility housing people with substance abuse issues, mental illness, and general behavioral problems. What we do know, because we see the evidence every day, is that the social services for chronic inebriates we already have here are a drain on the lifeblood of our neighborhood. Those who oppose Karluk Manor are not uncompassionate, unreasonable “NIMBYs”, as RurAL CAP’s Executive Director told readers of the Anchorage Daily News in his Compass piece this past Saturday, but people who have suffered for too long under this excessive and disproportionate burden. We’re not saying, “Not in My Backyard,” but “Please, no more. We just can’t take anymore. We have enough.” As President of the Fairview Community Council, I am guided by a simple decision rule – will what I am doing help to make Fairview a “neighborhood of choice,” that is, a place where people want to live, not a last resort because rents are low. The question that I, and many others have been wrestling with for some months, is whether Karluk Manor will help Fairview revitalize. Will it attract more businesses? Will it attract more middle-class people and homeowners who will help to stabilize the neighborhood? I don’t think I can answer “yes” to that question. That is why I oppose this project, even though I am a big fan of Housing First. I have some doubts that just won’t go away. RurAL CAP has certainly made great efforts to show that they will be good neighbors. But the repeated experience of this Fairview community has been that social service providers promise one thing, and after implementing their projects, do quite another. There are few mechanisms for accountability, so we are stuck with the negative side effects of their activities and the bad behaviors of their clients when they are off-site. I can’t help feeling like this neighborhood is being wined and dined by an ardent suitor, but that in the morning, when they have gotten what they want, we just won’t be respected anymore. | |
| Lorraine Oneal | 7/2/2010 1:59:54 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor | |
| Jim McLaughlin | 7/2/2010 12:49:32 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. I have been a past resident of Fairview and I have worked there over 20 years with residents of that community. It is undeniable that there is a crisis in this city with “street inebriates”. Individuals are dying on the streets of Anchorage at a pace seen nowhere else in our country. I believe we have a moral obligation to do something more, something different than what we are doing now. The Karluk Manor is based on a model in Seattle that has been proven successful. Alcoholics get off the street and even though it’s not required, many cut back or even get sober. Tremendous effort has gone into getting the local Karluk Manor project to where it is now – on the brink of approval. This is a really a gift to the city of Anchorage. Some residents of Fairview have consistently been against any social service facility being located there. There is fundamental disagreement about whether street alcoholics are deserving of help and also concern about negative impact on the neighborhood. Everyone wants their neighborhood to improve – I think Karluk Manor ultimately could help Fairview improve. The neighbors of the project in Seattle are happy with their development now. I believe supporting Karluk Manor is unquestionably the right thing to do. | |
| Daniel Phillips | 7/1/2010 6:28:56 PM |
| If all you want to do is make it more comfortable for alcoholics to get drunk, this will achieve that. If you want to solve the problem, you have to actually address the problem, and this moronic plan doe not do that. | |
| Patric Montero | 7/1/2010 6:28:04 PM |
| Personally, I think that this should be somewhere OTHER than in Fairview. They have too many problems as it is, and many of it's community members are trying to clean things up. Dumping 50 proven chronic inebriates will cause more problems. More drunks will gravitate towards the place in hopes of a bed, and camp in the local parks, destroy personal property (whizzing on the bushes being the least of the problems, stepping in human excrement while collecting the morning paper, etc), and generally cause a problem for traffic as they panhandle, jaywalk, etc. | |
| Jason McKinney | 7/1/2010 6:27:03 PM |
| All this housing unit will be is another move that will enabling those that choose this lifestyle to continue it. Beans Cafe, the Community Patrol Van and other such organizations that coddle these people that are Hell Bent on killing themselves are doing is enabling them to continue. I believe that if a drunk is treated like what he is, a criminal, you will get better results. If a person wants out of this lifestyle, no one other than themselves is going to get it done! No amount of free rides, free meals, free places to pass out and sober up or anything other than personal desire is going to make them stop. If you can be a street bum, not work etc and someone is going to feed, cloth and provide you with a warm secure place to sleep, why should you change? We don't need to treat these people any different than any other criminals. Arrest, jail, and put them in front of a judge: if guilty of a crime, sentence them to confinement with a work detail program to clean the streets of Anchorage, the roadside ditches etc. I will wager if the free rides are no longer there the numbers of public inebriates will drop drastically. Yes you are going to have the people who are currently employeed caring for these individuals shouting this is the wrong way to proceed, but I strongly disagree. Criminals need to treated as such, not rewarded for illegal behavior. | |
| Richard Wood | 7/1/2010 6:23:19 PM |
| $500,000 for 24/7 staff, utilities, maintenance, repairs, housekeeping is questionable. Let those who approve this venture guarantee expenses with their salaries. I don't believe all Rural Cap is saying. Say no to Karluk Manor. | |
| Josh Cason | 7/1/2010 6:21:18 PM |
| "Maybe everybody should be forced into government housing if it saves money on such a grand scale? Like Rural Cap says!!! | |
| Matt Winn | 7/1/2010 6:16:49 PM |
| The angels of my better nature say, put this in your backyard Mr. Hardenburgh, and while you're at it, BFS, Beans, the Downtown soup kitchen, etc. After all, why should Fairview residents have all the challenge of responding to their "better nature" and emulating the great President Lincoln? And once you and your ilk have totally destroyed this neighborhood, you can move back here, chances are you can pick up property for a song once the rest of Anchorage has allowed Fairview to sink even deeper into ruin and despair | |
| Maria Miller | 7/1/2010 6:16:20 PM |
| I do not quite understand how jobless addicts and alcholics, who are homeless now, are going to get the money to pay. If they had any money, on the cold nights most would try to rent a cheap room. I definitly think they should be off the streets and out of the woods so the idea sounds great except for the amount of money required to stay in the housing development. | |
| Andrew Phillips | 7/1/2010 6:13:52 PM |
| 'It was Abraham Lincoln who coined the term "the better angels of our nature" in his first inaugural address,' quotes Mr. Hardenbergh. The president was speaking to the reprehensible practice of returning escaped slaves to their owners, not providing housing for alcoholics. Hardly an applicable analogy. Comparing the monstrous nature of what Lincoln was speaking of to the question now before us is, at least, a bit of a stretch. | |
| AAAAA XXXX | 7/1/2010 6:11:24 PM |
| The residents of this complex will be fed approximately $22k/yr - or $1,800/mo - for being homeless. How much of this are they going to cover in rent, themselves? These "projects" mentioned; are they for the complex itself or for the community? If they don't participate, are they kicked out and made homeless to face the perils of homeless life again? If they can't afford rent because they spent their street corner handout money on booze, do they get kicked out on the street to face the perils of homeless life again? Having been homeless for this long, I would threat to endeavor that the concept of being kicked out to be homeless, again, isn't a credible incentive. Moreover, knowing that they will have to sign and abide by a lease agreement on top of paying rent, essentially giving up their come-as-you-please, handouts-for-booze lifestyle, how many residents is the agency actually expecting to fill 48 vacancies? That unfortunate, negative reality considered, I'm not incredibly certain I want to be picking up the tab for a vacant building. Read more: http://www.adn.com/2010/06/25/1341659/karluk-manor-would-take-homeless.html?pageNum=2&mi_pluck_action=page_nav#Comments_Container#ixzz0sUFuoiSn | |
| Mario Zapado | 7/1/2010 6:03:56 PM |
| No one forces people to drink. No one forces people to continue to drink to the point of addiction. No one forces the addicted to remain so. Addiction of any kind is a choice. We live in a democratic Republic Being forced to pay for a persons bad "CHOICES" is socialism. NO to Karluk Manor. | |
| Kat Miller | 7/1/2010 5:55:41 PM |
| What Rural Cap is saying, I think, is that since it's all about saving money, the best way for taxpayers to save money is to pay a bum tax to government and help Mr. Hardenbergh's $35M, 900-employee outfit make lots of money. Now, in your opinion, the time must be right for government to start "bum sweeps", rounding up every bum in the city for internment in Hardenbergh's Bed and Breakfast, yes? If no, why not? | |
| Chelsey M. Fisher | 7/1/2010 5:45:36 PM |
| Everyone is so willing to say yes to Karluk Manor because it’s not in their back yard… I understand The Fairview community and I support their efforts to STOP Karluk Manor. Place a facility like this in an industrial area where it won’t affect families. | |
| Anna Morris | 7/1/2010 5:42:20 PM |
| Many are not concern with the cries of the Fairview community. Don’t you think we need to listen to this community that already has experience in providing services for the needy? They know how involve with the community providers continue to be once they open their facilities. I say NO to Karluk Manor, I am following the advice of the Fairview Community. | |
| Amanda Mojorro | 7/1/2010 5:30:11 PM |
| Please DO NOT grant the conditional use permit for Karluk Manor. WE need to find a better location for this project. Many believe that the Fairview community is not compassionate and is afraid of change; Unfortunately that is not the case. The Fairview community has and will continue to help our many social services to continue helping the many homeless in our community. The problem is that we already carry the burden of caring and providing for this group in society. The city of anchorage needs to step up and help us provide for them too at alternative locations. | |
| Trena R. | 7/1/2010 3:42:02 PM |
| As a resident of Alaska and a Supporter of the Karluk Manor I find it hard to believe that there are so many people holding this project back. As Alaskans we should all be making the attempt to better the people of our state. With the continuing issue of homelessness and the rising problems that surround it, we need more programs that are making a difference. I believe that RurAL CAP has made a difference in the homeless community and have identified the growing need of support for homeless men and women in the Fairview area. RurAL CAP had tackled the understanding of addiction in the homelessness community and has given these men and women an opportunity to make changes within their lives. I feel that they have proven how this program can work and are willing to not just walk away from the issue of homelessness, but provide a support system in helping these individuals make needed changes to better their life. So many people have just given up on these individuals, turned away, looked down upon, beat up and just ran for the simple fact that they do not understand. I ask the question would you still remain negative about the project if it was your mother, father sister, brother, etc, people who often do not choose to be this way, but there are lack of programs to help them. These are humans as well who have a need for someone to care. Karluk Manor would be a safe place for these Alaskan men and women and children to feel comfortable in their journey to a better life. I support this project and all others that can help in the efforts to help our homelessness. | |
| B F | 7/1/2010 3:38:55 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. I have worked in Fairview for over 2yrs & see the need for support & help for people. I walk thru Fairview frequently & have never had any problems with anyone whether they are homeless/intoxicated. I also have a friend who lives right on 9th & Karluk & we visit her almost weekly, my daughter plays out with all the kids in the park & she loves it there. I have found myself needing services when I was down my luck & I thank god for people who took there time to help me when I needed it. I was unemployed & receiving unemployment & only $120 month in Food stamps I can tell you that was hardly enough to feed myself & my daughter for an entire month. I was given a phone number of a woman who helps people w/food & what ever she could. It was the first time in my life I had to go to a Food Bank & I had to put my pride aside & realize that there is nothing wrong or degrading about asking for this help when I really needed it. I have stood in line at Mother Lawrence’s for food & she is the sweetest woman I have ever met & a heart of gold. When I was working I never had any problems not having enough food or any needs for my home so I thought at one time in my life that I was better than those people who had no other choice but to go to Food Banks or Shelters because they were homeless or needed a helping hand. Losing my job opened my eyes & I’m grateful for people who take the time to care for others who are struggling with what ever it might be drugs/alcohol/homeless/domestic violence. I fully support Karluk Manor & Rural CAP. | |
| Fernando R | 7/1/2010 2:52:40 PM |
| As a long time resident of Alaska I have seen many changes of the economy. One of the rising issues is homelessness. I have read alot of the comments involving Karluk Manor and find it appalling that there are so many individuals with negativity about the pressing issues of homelessness. What people do not understand they fear, and that fear shows how blind people can be to the issues. I believe that RurAL CAP has hit the target area for a need in the Anchorage area and has seen the rising issues surrounding the homelessness. Often times we see the persisting problems and turn a blind eye to the issues at hand until it is too late, I believe that RurAL Cap has taken those issues head on and is making a change to better the Fairview community and give the opportunity for 48 individuals who desperately need it. I support the Karluk Manor. | |
| Josh Hanson | 7/1/2010 2:44:28 PM |
| I do not Support Karluk Mannor. | |
| Brandon Kang | 7/1/2010 2:43:53 PM |
| I see the need to help the homeless, but why do we have to allow them to continue to drink??? This is wrong. I do not support Karluk Manor. | |
| Alan Oswald | 7/1/2010 2:41:15 PM |
| I do not support Karluk Mannor... we need other options. | |
| Mabel Paterson | 7/1/2010 2:40:21 PM |
| I DO NOT support Karluk Manor. As a long time member of the Fairview community, and someone who walks to work, I too witness the need to help those who are homeless and struggling with alcoholism and disability. I believe in the Housing concept but NOT IN FAIRVIEW. Fairview has too many services already offered for the homeless and needy we need to spread the wealth and have our city share our burden. | |
| Ellen Kazary | 7/1/2010 2:17:59 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. As a long time worker in the Fairview area, and someone who bikes to work year round and walks every day, I regularly witness the need to help those who are homeless and struggling with addiction and disability. This Housing First option is part of the solution Anchorage needs to help improve the situation and reduce the number of deaths on our city streets. | |
| Joie B | 7/1/2010 2:17:20 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Tammy Smith | 7/1/2010 2:14:51 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor & Housing First. | |
| Candace Bell | 7/1/2010 2:05:16 PM |
| Please grant the conditional use permit for Karluk Manor as one step toward providing secure and dignified housing for the homeless so they might better work toward self sufficiency. | |
| Ella M | 7/1/2010 1:47:59 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor | |
| Mike Saville | 7/1/2010 1:26:39 PM |
| Anchorage has struggled with both homelessness and public inebriates for decades. It’s time to stop allowing this to be a political football every few years and do something positive. The housing first model has proven itself to be of value in other cities; Rural Cap should be commended for taking this challenge on, and deserves our support. As for location, lets not say no until we can propose another viable option. | |
| Corbett Mothe | 7/1/2010 1:25:06 PM |
| We all claim to live in a compassionate, humane society where people care about whether others live or die. I believe in that philosophy in my life so I totally support the Karluk Manor project. | |
| Mike Saville | 7/1/2010 1:14:57 PM |
| Anchorage has struggled decades with homelessness and public inebriates (two separate issues. Its time to stop making these issues political footballs and do something. Rural Cap should be commended for taking on this project and deserves our support. The housing first model has proven to be effective in other cities and should be a positive step forward. As for location, don't say no until you can propose another viable option. | |
| Mike Saville | 7/1/2010 1:07:11 PM |
| Anchorage has struggled with homelessness and public inebriates (two separate issues) for more than the 30+years I have lived here. Its time to do something instead of treating this as a political football. The housing first concept is proven to be sound in other cities and Rural Cap should be commended for stepping forward to initiate this program and deserves our support. As for the location, don't say no unless you can propose another viable option. | |
| Andrea A | 7/1/2010 1:02:27 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Mike Saville | 7/1/2010 1:01:16 PM |
| Nancy K. Bell | 7/1/2010 12:45:01 PM |
| The location of the proposed Karluk Manor is between 5th avenue and 6th avenue 2 main roads that are bordering the building, roads that have very high traffic. I have personally talked to the Traffic Unit Supervisor from APD Sergeant Justin Doll and we have discussed how the corner of 5th avenue and Karluk is one of the highest ticketed locations for running a red light. This would be a hazard for inebriated individuals like the individuals living in Karluk Manor, especially since they will be crossing the street to visit the bar that is less than 200 feet from their new home. WE MUST find a better location!!! | |
| Cam P | 7/1/2010 12:41:30 PM |
| I do NOT support Karluk Manor. | |
| Matt Nelson | 7/1/2010 12:39:54 PM |
| 1811 Eastlake has a nick name on the streets of Seattle. It’s called the “Death House” because in the first eight months of being open six of its residents died from alcohol related deaths. The fire department responded 148 times in these same 8 months, every one of these 148 visits were for medical assistance. Statistically RURAL CAP says it will save the city money in the short term, but as the people that are housed in these apartments are allowed to continue to drink their bodies will continue to deteriorate from alcohol related illnesses and substance abuse and thus require more medical care in the future. What is the estimated cost of health care for these individuals in the long run??? I do not belive Karluk Manor will be as succesfull as rural Cap says they will make it. Say NO. | |
| Alison Bell | 7/1/2010 12:38:04 PM |
| I fully support the overall concept of the “Housing First” initiative, as well as its initial incarnation as Karluk Manor. While understanding and empathizing with the comments of those from Fairview who do not like the location of the Red Roof Inn because it is in their neighborhood, I realize that Karluk Manor needs to be located ‘somewhere’, and that there will always be a local concerned citizens’ group for whom that it is threatening and objectionable. Perhaps we (Anchorage) collectively can think of it this way: Karluk Manor will be the first of what could be numerous projects to provide purpose-driven, relatively economic housing to specific disadvantaged individuals, in this instance, chronic inebriates. It is in a downtown location where this population tends to congregate already and where support services are focussed as well. If Karluck Manor is successful, perhaps other locations and facilities can be developed. If it is not successful, perhaps it could be altered or closed, and other models and locations can be attempted. Could people in the local Fairview Community participate with RuralCap and the Municipality in determining the timing and criteria by which the Karluck Manor project would be judged successful? A process for evaluation which is set up beforehand, and accurately measured and documented, would go a long way toward shaping future discussions about this, and other, Housing First initiatives. | |
| Cory C | 7/1/2010 12:37:30 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor | |
| Summer Ryan | 7/1/2010 12:26:51 PM |
| Will the residents of the Karluk Mano be the same group of people we see gathered on the corner of 13th and Ingra @ the Carr’s and Oken Keg liquor store??? How will Rural Cap prevent them from hanging in groups and panhandle like they do at 13th and Ingra. 10 Staff members will not be enough to control 48 individuals. I do not support Karluk Manor!!! | |
| Paul M. Jones | 7/1/2010 12:21:16 PM |
| I believe in the Housing First Concept. I truly believe it can help our inebriate homeless. However I am “not” sold on the Karluk Manor Project. They need to offer a form or rehabilitation and it should not be a wet house. | |
| Grace O'Neal | 7/1/2010 12:19:36 PM |
| I support the Karluk Manor Project. The population of homeless inebriates continues to grow due to lack of resources and safe housing. I think this project would benefit the community greatly and provide housing for many who are currently living on the streets of Fairview and others areas of Anchorage. | |
| Sandra J. Miranda | 7/1/2010 11:52:14 AM |
| I do not support the propose location for our first “housing first project”. It is vital that our city does this project right from the beginning. Let me mention a few of the most glaring problems with the proposed project: 1. The Red Roof Inn Motel is being made to fit the program. The building is an old run down motel and cannot be compared to the state of the art building that Seattle 1811 Eastlake facility is. Their success is due to their facility layout and precise designs that were made to house this individual. Rural cap is not adopting the full model from Eastlake. Rural cap is only implementing what they feel would fit the building of Red Roof Inn. 2. The location of Red Roof Inn is a big concern. Not only is it located in a rundown neighborhood with lots of low income housing but it is also right in the middle of two of the busiest streets in towns with lots of high speed traffic. When one of these individuals gets rundown while attempting to cross the street and the city gets sued is Rural Cap going to carry the burden or will our city be responsible? 3. Fairview is a neighborhood that has many burdens to carry and once again we are dumping one more public service at their door. What will happen to the many families who live in the area, who are trying to raise a family and once again their community is force to house more of the “undesirables” that contribute nothing to any community and drain all. I understand that we must be compassionate to those who are less fortunate than us. I understand that we must try to help those who need us, and I understand that if we choose to do nothing that helps no one. But I truly believe that we must also rank our priorities and analyze where we spend our money. | |
| Jim Miller | 7/1/2010 11:50:44 AM |
| I DO NOT support the development of the Karluk Manor and the efforts of RurAL CAP to make this happen. I do support housing first but why are we consentrating services all in one area??? | |
| Theresa Blair | 7/1/2010 11:31:14 AM |
| The more the protest, the less is seen the light at the end of the tunnel. I keep reading how Fairview residents feel they shoulder the burden of the homeless population. Does anyone remember when Mountain View used to be a scary part of town? An 'old' neighborhood, run-down, full of crime and violence, drunks and druggies? Have you taken a walk through Mountain View lately? For the first time, in I don't know HOW long, a bank has opened on the corner of Bragaw and Mt. View. Housing projects (including several RurAL CAP projects) have taken abandoned, or run down properties and renovated them. They are in constant management by responsible entities. This work has improved and beautified Mt. View and it is encouraging businesses back to the area. This wasn't accomplished by only one group or entity. It took the cooperation and commitment of the community to work with resources like the Alaska Mental Health Trust, RurAL CAP, Cook Inlet Housing, and many others. It was a brave step and ultimately has shown great success. I think that part of the problem (and understandably so) is that Fairview residents have shouldered a burden of nuisance, but not "the" burden. As it was so succinctly put last night at the Community Forum...Anchorage is FULL of chronic inebriates. And most of them we don't see, because they have a home. This is the whole point of Karluk Manor--a safe home that will get the people we "see" on the streets, off the streets. I've seen the changes that RurAL CAP has brought to a neighborhood. Good changes that create good neighbors. You really have to open your hearts, minds and eyes long enough to look at the record of success, rather than fall back on baseless fear. This project is an opportunity not a burden. And, finally, we need to remember--these are human beings, people, with minds and hopes and wishes. They are lost, they need help, and that help begins with a foundation...a foundation of safety, warmth and compassion. I urge you, as a constituant, as a citizen, as a taxpayer, and as a human being, to allow the Karluk Manor Project to bring a positive change to our city. Thank You. | |
| Joan Fisher | 7/1/2010 11:30:23 AM |
| I strongly support the Municipality of Anchorage to approve the plan for Karluk Manor. I believe that an individual needs housing first before they are able to take nexts steps toward recovery. I also believe that the cost of housing people will be less than the numerous police and community service patrol encounters and the emergency room admissions. As a community, it is important to take steps to improve the homeless situation for not just this population but for all of the homeless adults, families and children. Let's start with this plan and continue working on solutions for all. | |
| Paul Boling | 7/1/2010 11:01:27 AM |
| I support the Karluk Manor and will work to make it a success. The "Housing First" model has been very successful in other communities and should be given an opportunity here in Anchorage. The issues of chronic homelessness and alcoholism are an obvious problem for our community and should be addressed by professionals using proven methods and compassion. | |
| Paul Boling | 7/1/2010 10:38:35 AM |
| I support the Karluk Manor. Anchorage needs to address the issue of chronic homelessness and alcoholism. The "Housing First" model has been very effective in other communities and should be given an opportunity to succeed here. I will help this program succeed. Vote "Yes" in an effort to help the least among us. | |
| Sherrie Pierce | 6/30/2010 6:17:38 PM |
| I support the Karluk Manor. I feel as though this is a project that will fill a current unmet need. There has been a longstanding outcry to have something positive done to address the issue of chronic inebriates in Anchorage. This project is the opportunity. | |
| Tina Schranz | 6/30/2010 2:58:06 PM |
| I support the development of the Karluk Manor and the efforts of RuRALCAP to make this happen. I advocate for the zoning and permitting to be approved. | |
| Carol Pearcy | 6/30/2010 12:44:36 PM |
| Building this facility in that location is a huge mistake for many reasons: 1. High traffic area 2. Too close to public park 3. Too close to other shelters, soup kitchens, and the detox center already in this neighborhood 4. The building is not suitable for this kind of facility I am counting that on July 19, 2010 you will vote “NO” to the requested conditional use permit. It is your civic duty to weight all the consequences and to analyze the possible outcomes. VOTE NO!!! | |
| Robert Spellens | 6/30/2010 12:43:42 PM |
| To whom it may concern: I am a Fairview community member that have called Fairview home for years. I am not pleased to hear that my neighborhood will once again be nominated to house more social services, especially a wet house that offers no rehabilitation. I don’t believe that Rural Cap is concern with the makeup of their future costumers at Karluk Manor. Lets be blunt the demographics of Anchorage Chronic homeless inebriates is not the same as the infamous 1811 Eastlake in Seattle. Our homeless are not old white veterans who drink alone in their rooms. To be blunt ours are generally social drinkers, and to be blunt once again mostly native(I am part native). These people drink in groups, rarely solo. The Fairview Lions Park will offer the perfect congregating area for these folks once they are housed in Karluk Manor. Do not put the Fairview Community in further strife say NO to the conditional use permit. | |
| Olga C. Gomez | 6/30/2010 12:39:38 PM |
| My name is Olga Gomez and I have a bachelor’s degree in Early Childhood Development. I am a concerned citizen who would like to express my opinion in regards to the proposed location of the housing first model project, the so called Karluk Manor (housing for severe alcoholics) soon to be located in Fairview. I believe that currently we are putting the needs of these chronic alcoholics ahead of the needs of the community where they will be housed. Are we once again going to put a misguided social program before the needs of our children in Fairview??? Are we once again telling these kids in this low income neighborhood that their safety comes behind that of Chronic Homeless Inebriates??? 500 feet is not too much to ask!!! Say NO to the conditional use permit for RurAL cap, and say YES to the children of Fairview. They are the FUTURE our city!!! | |
| Richard Mierzejewski | 6/30/2010 12:33:36 PM |
| As a long time Fairview community member, I have seen many sides of Fairview. The community has changed in many ways. One way it has not changed is the burden put on this neighborhood by the many social services facilities already here. Shelters, food kitchens, detox center and the city jail. And of course this is without mentioning the drug dealing and crime that plague this neighborhood. I have just recently moved to a better neighborhood solely because I wanted to live in an area that was safer. I cannot remember how many times I was woken up at night to a shootout fallowed by the sirens of the cops. Or how many times I was witness to what I know was a drug deal. I stayed in Fairview for so long because I live by myself and as a grown man those things don’t influence my moral compass. I only need to answer for my personal behavior, However I truly feel for the families that call Fairview their home; families that have small children who are exposed to this kind of behaviors. Many of them have no choice to where they live; they end up in Fairview because it is a low income neighborhood and that is all they can afford. I choose to leave Fairview to better myself, these families cannot. These children are the future of our city and we are exposing them violence and complex social problems and adding Karluk Manor to this neighborhood will continue to expose them to social behavior that is not appropriate. I still work in the Fairview area and have been for the past 20 some years. While I lived in the neighborhood I walked to work as it was only a 6 blocks walk. I always knew I was going to encounter drunks on my way to work, and of course the teenagers and grownups that were high on drugs and / or buying and selling them. On my 6 blocks walk to work I would always pass the Lions Park; the park in discussion for the conditional use permit. I can attest to all the inappropriate behavior that goes on at that park. I’ve seen it all and more than I care to mention; from drunks passed out and sleeping in the grass to drunks having sex. I’ve seen this park became a congregational point for teenager selling their drugs and for natives to gather with their friends and drink. By bringing Karluk Manor to our neighborhood we are making sure that all the drunks from our city congregate in one district and our Lions Park will provide a nice public area to meet up with their friends. We are not cleaning up Fairview instead we are bringing the problems of all around our city to Fairview. This is hardly fair to a community already in distress; we keep staggering these complex social problems and dumping them all in one community. Your job at the Planning and Zoning Department is to make sure that we don’t dump all this problems into one community. Your job is to make sure our neighborhoods have a fighting chance for their people and to provide a guided planning for their future as a community. How many more people like me will it take for the city to really pay attention to the overwhelming social problems Fairview has, DON”T ADD ANY MORE. Please listen when we as a community say NO to Karluk manor. | |
| Tina Ponte | 6/30/2010 12:32:28 PM |
| Each day I bicycle to work through the streets of Fairview. Each day I see a neighborhood trying to rise above its infamous reputation. In summer the community council planting flowers and helping paint and maintain the yards of those less able. I see people trying hard to take pride in a neighborhood often weighted down by the overflow from the well meaning social service faclities in its midst. how much more can this neighborhood take on? The intentions are good, but these are the people that pay the price for every well intended facility that is put in Fairview. Its time for another Anchorage neighborhood to shoulder some of the burden. | |
| Josh Rendon | 6/30/2010 12:17:43 PM |
| Follow the housing and Neighborhood Development Commissions lead....say NO to the special use permit! | |
| Arkee Johnson | 6/30/2010 12:14:16 PM |
| I work and live in Fairview and must commute daily through its streets. I dread the thought of even more of the city’s homeless inebriates being concentrated in one area. Why are we doing such a large project in one location? I already stopped purchasing my groceries at the Carr’s in 13th and Ingra because I hate being hassle by all the drunks and homeless individuals that gather up in this area. And this location has a police substation that obviously cannot handle their constant traffic. And here is Rural Cap trying to tell me that they will be able to control 50 drunks living in once complex. I really have a hard time believing them. Fairview has enough problems already. Please don’t add to it. | |
| Carly Arroyo | 6/30/2010 12:13:18 PM |
| As a young teenage mother trying to raise my two boys on my own. I already face many hurdles in my future. In the Fairview neighborhood there are already few good examples for my boys.Now the possibility of having 48 of Anchorages worst examples practically across the street frightens me even more. I have no yard for my kids to play in, and already hesitate to take them to the park in our neighborhood to play. Rural CAP can promise they will be safer.... some how I do not believe that will be the case. | |
| Jose Ayala | 6/30/2010 12:07:52 PM |
| Fairview already has more than their fair share of services of this kind. No Karluk Manor!!!. The Fairview Community is under siege already. Please put our neighborhood first!!! | |
| Jose A. Gomez | 6/30/2010 12:06:40 PM |
| My name is Jose A. Gomez. I am a concerned citizen who does not believe in the Karluk Manor project. I am relying on you to do the right thing and vote NO on July 19,2010. The Planning Department's mission is and I quote "to guide Anchorage land use development and community resources to meet the quality of life, economic, social, environmental, and physical needs of present and future residents. Good planning makes for livable neighborhoods, a safe and healthy community, and a sustainable economy. How land use fits in with housing, transportation, community and economic development gives Anchorage its character." I got this out of your website, please do your job and weight in the consequences of amending the Ordinance and conditional use laws that our assembly set for projects like this. Do your JOB and SAY NO!!! | |
| Amanda Anderson | 6/30/2010 12:01:45 PM |
| My Name is Amanda Anderson and have been working near the propose location for Karluk Manor. I am very concern with how this will affect me, my coworkers, and how it will affect the neighborhood. What upsets me the most is that this 40 plus chronic alcoholic homeless become more important than the hundreds that already call Fairview their Home. People like me, who work, pay taxes, raise a families and let’s face it people who contribute to our community. Why are we not concern with the social consequences of having a wet house around families or business that have called Fairview home for so many years. I believe this is the wrong location for a project like this. Rural cap needs to find a location that meets the laws and requirements set by the Anchorage Assembly, with no variations and no additional permits. That is why the Assembly set these groups of rules to protect neighborhoods, business and people like me!!! | |
| Shelby Hinson | 6/30/2010 11:58:59 AM |
| Karluk Manor is a horrible idea! The children in the Fairview area already have enough to contend with now we are going to bring the 48 worst offenders of the drunk and disorderly laws into the neighborhood!!!It isn't enough they get shot through the walls of their homes, can't walk the street without fear,and more often then not have little to no supervision. How do we ever expect to help these children have better lives when we continually dump our problems into their front yards! Say no to the conditional use permit! | |
| Nathan Lervaag | 6/30/2010 11:49:15 AM |
| Sign me up!!! I wanna have the state take care of me for no other reason then I choose to drink everyday instead of get a job!!! How did this group of homeless folks become more important then the many families in our community that are homeless. People that are trying to make a better life for themselves and their families. I say help those who help themselves! | |
| Mackenzie Seger | 6/30/2010 11:13:54 AM |
| It was with great interest that I read the Anchorage Daily News arcticle this week. The glaring ommission of the fact that the HAND Commission voted against recommending the Karluk Manor project to this commity was obvious! The HAND Commission did their job and put the neighborhood first. The Fairview community is hoping this commity does their job as well. Your mission statement says that you are dedicated to"guide Anchorage land and use development to meet the quality of life, economic, social, and physical needs of present and future residents." Please remember this when concidering the conditional use permit....Fairview's future is at stake. | |
| Heidi Heinrich | 6/30/2010 11:00:38 AM |
| The Housing and Neighborhood Developement Commission did their job a few weeks ago when they listened to the the Fairview communities cries of ENOUGH! They took into account that this is a neighborhood already under stress!With more than our fair share of Anchorages social service facilities located within this small area. Please do your job and listen to our community we say NO to Karluk Manor! | |
| Luis Garcia | 6/30/2010 10:51:26 AM |
| This letter is regarding the purchase of the Red Roof Inn for use a wet house by the Rural CAP organization. There are some major problems with the proposed location that seem unimportant to Rural CAP. They are aware of them yet they are pushing forward with their plans.If we are going to bring a project like this here to Anchorage to help inebriated homeless we owe it to them and ourselves to do it right the first time. Karluk Manor is not the right location for many reason's. The community surrounding the proposed sight is already over burdened with well meaning social service facilities. If we fail in the first attempt there may not be a second. | |
| Angela Ryan | 6/30/2010 10:50:28 AM |
| Anyone living and working in Fairview for any length of time.has seen the groups of individuals hanging out on the corner of 13th and Gampbell.drinking, fighting, and panhndling.As a resident of Fairview who also works here, I walk to work daily. I am greatly concerned if we open Karluk Manor and bring 48 of these people from all over the city: the corner of 5th and Karluk will soon become the same frightening sight. Is this the first impression we want to make with visiting tourists driving into Anchorage? In the newspaper we are told that Rural CAP is working with the Fairview community, as a member of this neighborhood I do not believe this is so. Amending the law to allow them to be closer then the 500 feet to my neighborhood park is not the right decision. Please listen to the people of Fairview... our opinion on what happens in the neighborhood we call home should matter. | |
| Ty Boita | 6/30/2010 10:49:28 AM |
| As members of the Planning and Zoning Commity I am sure you are fully aware that 5th and Karluk is the number one corner ticketed for running a red light in Anchorage? Or, maybe your not. According to the traffic unit supervisor from A.P.D. Sergeant Justin Doll this corner garners more tickets then any other in town. The roads themselves are very high traffic. And this is the proposed location of a "wet house"? Inebreates crossing two of the busiest streets in town? Doesn't sound like good planning to me. | |
| Gordon Dale | 6/30/2010 8:49:55 AM |
| As a 30-year resident of Anchorage and having seen the homeless population & problem steadily grow worse each year, I strongly agree with the RurAL CAP Housing First Kurlok Manor Project. I have not seen or heard of anything that makes as much sense as Housing First approach on the road to rid Anchorage of such a large and complex sorrowful human problem. If not at the Red Roof Inn (Karluk Manor) then where. I read that RurAL CAP & the city of Anchorage looked at 7 other sites using a long list of acceptable criteria, with Kurlok Manor meeting all but one of them (outside yard space). The other 7 sites met at best, only 3 (at most) of the 8 items of acceptable criteria. If not Kurlok Manor then lets hear from the "naysayers" as to where. That old and tired "not in my neighborhood" just doesn't get anything done. In the America that I grew up in, neighbors helped neighbors and the homeless population are our neighbors. With the Karluk Mannor up and running, at least 48 of them wouldn't be sleeping in the parks or woods near another neighbors house. And if the Housing First project works like it's predecessors in other states, Anchorage may start to get a handle on this miserable human dilemma. The Karluk Mannor has all my support and I'll bet the majority of the Fairview residents that don't support it now, will change their minds and support it in less than 3 years from it's opening. Lets give it a chance Anchorage, we at least owe them that much. | |
| Jessica Parks | 6/30/2010 8:39:20 AM |
| I have worked in Fairview for over 6 years, and have seen the need for a program like Karluk Manor for every one of them. The population of homeless inebriates in the Fairview area already exists, and Karluk Manor would put these clients indoors, out of the elements, and with caring staff that will help them on the road to self sufficiency. RurAL CAP's track record with innovative programs should speak for itself. They have a history of taking a chance on programs that they believe in. One only needs to look at the successes of the Homeward Bound to see this. Karluk Manor will be a positive force in the Fairview neighborhood, and I wholeheartedly support it. | |
| jane Schlittler | 6/30/2010 8:18:16 AM |
| I believe that the Karluk Manor proposal by Rural Cap has a lot of merit and should be tried. The recent improvements to the proposal by Rural Cap including cleaning up the park on a weekly basis would certainly be a big plus. After years of failed attempts to deal with homeless inebriates in this city, Karluk Manor sounds very promising and should be given an opportunity to help solve this difficult problem. | |
| Paula Frisby | 6/30/2010 8:17:46 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. This project is well-researched and tangible action that will produce positive results - not only for those who will find shelter and safety but for our entire community. | |
| Troya Williamson | 6/30/2010 8:04:57 AM |
| I support Karluk Manor. I have worked in the substance abuse treatment field for over 15 years and have found that it is impossible for someone to get and stay sober if they do not have housing. If we want to help the homeless, Karluk Manor is an essential beginning. | |
| Roxanne Martin | 6/30/2010 7:33:43 AM |
| I am writing in support of Karluk Manor. I have worked in Fairview for 15 years and have seen the population of homeless inebriates grow to an alarming number. I know the neighborhood feels they already shoulder the burden of a large percentage of programs supporting this population, but we must face the fact that they also have one of the largest populations of homeless inebriates in the city. What the people in opposition to Karluk Manor are not realizing is the big difference in how the current programs operate as opposed to the operation plan for Karluk Manor. Currently Bean’s and Brother Francis only house this population for brief periods during the day and a few short hours at night then they are turned out to wander the streets again. Karluk Manor will provide 24 hour a day shelter to people who actually want to be there as opposed to being forced to be there. This means they will be spending much less time on the streets thus cutting back on the amount of city services they consume and the time spent loitering on neighborhood streets. I truly believe this will be a win-win situation for all involved and if given the chance RurAL CAP and Karluk Manor will prove to be excellent neighbors and a great asset not only to the Fairview community but to the city overall. If Anchorage wishes to tout itself as a 'progressive city' then it’s time to start progressing! | |
| Deborah Holmes | 6/29/2010 10:38:35 PM |
| I completely support RurALCAP’s efforts to make Karluk Manor Anchorage's first large Housing First project. In 2006 when I read about Seattle’s Housing First program, 1811 Eastlake, I immediately thought that we could use a program like that here in Anchorage. The proponents of the Eastlake program met with the same resistance that RuALCAP is now, however they did succeed and a subsequent three-year study proclaimed - 1811 Eastlake Study Released: Housing First Saves Lives and Money (http://www.seattle.gov/housing/homeless/1811.htm). RurALCAP’s Karluk Manor addresses three main concerns that the public has with chronic homeless inebriates – getting them off the streets, reducing the public costs associated with them, and improving the safety to themselves and the public. We have to support RurALCAP’s efforts to address this growing problem in Anchorage. And after it proves itself like Eastlake did, we will see that it will lead the way for increased public support and funding for more Housing First projects. Not only am I in support of Karluk Manor because I am a 40-year resident of Anchorage and I care about its people and its problems, I also have a personal interest in it because I am the mother of an alcoholic who has been living on the streets for over a year in a city outside. My child has voluntarily entered rehab twice – once for 14 months – and yet still went back to drinking and living on the streets. For over 10 years I have tried to help and support my child in every positive way I can and I still hold onto the thought that one day sobriety will return and be long term. But in the meantime I would love to have the peace of mind that my child is in a city that had an Eastlake or a Karluk Manor so that I knew they would have a safe place to stay and would not be as costly to or a menace to society. I urge you to support Karluk Manor. Homeless inebriates come from many backgrounds and get there for many reasons. My child is only 25 and came from a comfortable middle-class home. Somewhere down the line Karluk Manor could serve someone you know and care for | |
| Sarah Ervine | 6/29/2010 9:54:13 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Mitzi Barker | 6/29/2010 9:02:20 PM |
| I am a certified city planner with over 35 years experience in the field. I am writing to urge approval of the Conditional Use Permit for Karluk Manor to operate a Severe Alcohol Dependent Housing project at the former Red Roof Inn. It is essential in any land use decision to consider the spirit and intent of the appropriate ordinance - in this case, the proposed project is slightly within the somewhat arbitrary 500' separation between the use and a dedicated municipal park. The proposed use is consistent with the mixed commercial/multi-family residential land use patterns of the surrounding neighborhood. To make an arbitrary distinction based on the disability status of many of the proposed residents is most likely in violation of the Fair Housing Act. RurAL CAP is not an "outside" organization imposing a new use on Fairview; RurAL CAP is also a Fairview resident, with its business located in the heart of the neighborhood for over 20 years. The proposed project will take the currently derelict Red Roof Inn, an underperforming transient hotel and turn it into permanently-occupied defensible space, with a pleasing exterior presence and 24-hour security, and an asset to the 5th-6th Avenue corridor and the neighborhood. | |
| Jim Renkert | 6/29/2010 9:02:05 PM |
| I am a 50-year old life long resident of Anchorage. There has been a chronic inebriate problem in Anchorage for my entire life and it’s getting worse every year. You never used to see them panhandling on street corners with signs. Every year they seem to be on a several new corners. It’s time to try something new. “If the potential benefits of trying something outweigh the potential negatives it’s a mistake not to try it.” I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Kari Singsaas | 6/29/2010 5:57:45 PM |
| The Karluk Manor would be a safe option for many homeless individuals in our community. I support Karluck Manor | |
| Drew Phoenix | 6/29/2010 5:16:26 PM |
| As an Anchorage resident and local United Methodist minister, I wholeheartedly support the Housing First program and Karluk Manor. I have complete confidence in the professional expertise, experience, and careful strategic planning of Melinda Freemon and her staff as well as the entire RurAL CAP organization. I have no doubt that Karluk Manor will both benefit the homeless persons who will reside there and the Fairview community. | |
| Ivy Spohnholz | 6/29/2010 4:57:34 PM |
| As a home owner in the Fairview area, I want to express my support for Karluk Manor. Having a Housing First model program in Fairview is not counter to a healthy community. Not addressing the chronic innebriate problem, which has plagued Fairview for a long as I can remember is a much greater threat, to a healthy community. If Karluk Manor can be even a small part of the solution to Anchorage's, and Fairview's, chronic innebriate problem we should give it our wholehearted support--which I and my family of four do! | |
| Barb Rosetti | 6/29/2010 4:40:03 PM |
| I support Housing First and Karluk Manor. I have great confidence in Melinda Fremon and her leadership of an agency that understands the problem and the solution. RurALCAP has found a solution and as a community, we need to get behind it! Right, wrong or indifferent, we cannot continue to ingore the homeless problem. It's not going away on its own, and creates a more dangerous situation each day. Please support these efforts. | |
| Colleen Ackerman | 6/29/2010 4:19:38 PM |
| I have worked in the substance abuse field for over 25 years and specifically with the chronic homeless alcoholic population for over 2 years as the Program Manager for the Rural Alaska Community Action Program Homeward Bound. I currently supervise Homeward Bound’s Housing First Program; therefore, I am keenly aware of the housing needs of the chronic homeless alcoholic population and am very familiar with the Housing First model. In spite of intensive case management services provided to some of the most vulnerable of the chronic homeless alcoholic population in “scattered site” apartments, many are evicted from their apartments and require a more structured permanent setting to succeed such as the Karluk Manor. I strongly support Karluk Manor! Housing First works. Having an apartment provides security and stability to start working on other issues besides homelessness and survival. Lack of housing creates feelings of hopelessness and despair. Traditional programs are not designed to support people through their relapses because housing is often tied to treatment and abstinence. When residents have their own apartment, they often begin to change their drinking patterns as a result of the stability they experience when housed. Empowering the residents of Karluk Manor to make choices about their drinking and behavior, providing them support and non-judgmental responses to their choices, and promoting accountability will ultimately improve the quality of their lives and decrease the costs to the community. Housing First is a recommendation of the Mayor's Task Force on Homelessness and is contained in the city's 10-Year Plan. This project must be approved to save the lives of the most vulnerable of the homeless population. Housing is a right, not a privilege and the homeless deserve a place to call their own. Article 25 of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights states, "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control." | |
| Larry Snider | 6/29/2010 4:04:52 PM |
| I urge your support of the proposed Housing First, Karluk Manor project concept and urge your approval of the required conditional use permit. | |
| Heather March | 6/29/2010 4:03:33 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. Anchorage's chronic homeless individuals need the shelter and care provided by Housing First, and taxpayers will benefit from the reduced cost of public emergency services required for chronic homeless individuals. Housing First saves lives and money. | |
| Kent Banks | 6/29/2010 3:53:40 PM |
| I support the home first approach of the proposed Karluk Manor as this will help for the less fortunate and inebriate homeless problem that is so prevalent in this area of town. I see this home first program as a large step in a positive way toward helping the community in curbing the homeless problem. Not only should Karluk Manor be supported by our community, but we should follow this lead for other home first properties in areas of town where helping people off of the streets into an arena that allows and assists chronic inebriates in making steps toward becoming productive members of society. I personally do not believe that because a person is an inebriate, they should be given up on and swept into the gutter to be disposed of in the street. Let us work toward helping those in need in a positive way. It makes sense to me for homeless people to go through an application and acceptance process to obtain a place to call home and then to obey rules that need to be adhered to in order to stay a resident of Karluk Manor. This is not a program that only gives to the clientele. It requires the people who live there to live their life in such a way as to comply with the accepted norms of today’s society. Like any other program, there will be successes and failures. This is an organized approach to managed and monitored housing for those in dire need. The individuals that this program can help, typically, currently live in the streets. The cost to maintain an inebriated homeless person is staggering. As a tax paying citizen of the Municipality of Anchorage, I see this as an opportunity to cut costs and offer an avenue for those less fortunate to travel in order to get their lives back in order. This is a win, win situation and should be allowed to move forward. Thank you. | |
| Bruce Greer | 6/29/2010 3:48:19 PM |
| What will you or I do today to help someone who has no home? Probably nothing. I Support Karluk Manor. Anchorage needs this program,and more like it. | |
| Julie Fronzuto | 6/29/2010 3:30:10 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor & House First | |
| Fred Traber | 6/29/2010 3:25:30 PM |
| I support Housing First and Karluk Manor. We finally have some positive work being done by a non-government agency that understands the problem and the solution. RurALCAP has found a solution and as a community, we need to get behind it! | |
| Gloria Kelly | 6/29/2010 3:13:38 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Michael Covone | 6/29/2010 11:38:40 AM |
| I support the Karluk Manor. Housing First projects work! | |
| John Sperbeck | 6/29/2010 9:29:14 AM |
| I support this project. Karluk Manor is and will be a project that addresses the Anchorage issue of chronic inebriates at the core. People have asked for solutions and said that something needs to be done, and this project is right on target as a successful first step. | |
| Michele Brown | 6/29/2010 9:12:39 AM |
| United Way of Anchorage supports the Karluk Manor Housing First project proposed by RurAL CAP. Chronic homelessness has long been a major problem in Anchorage. It is obviously a problem for the homeless person. But it is also a problem for all residents. Taxpayers bear the high cost of public services for the chronic homeless alcoholic, have public safety fears, want public spaces available for comfortable use by all, and are disturbed by the many deaths of the currently homeless. The housing first model is a solution that has shown promise towards reducing chronic homelessness, cutting public costs, and improving public safety. RurAL CAP has done an outstanding job in planning for the Karluk Manor project. It is experienced in the model and has run successful programs with this population. It has designed a project that fosters responsible tenant behavior and secured funding. It has also thoroughly and responsively addressed the many neighborhood safety and other issues of concern regarding the location risks. We understand that there are remaining concerns about the particular site. However, in weighing the many valid perspectives and issues, we believe the balance tips in favor of supporting Karluk Manor for three main reasons. First, RurAL CAP has a sound track record of responsively and promptly addressing problems. It has promised to remain responsive, adaptive, and a good neighbor, and it has shown it will follow through. Second, after long consideration and deliberation, the Mayor’s Leadership Team endorsed the housing first concept and the Karluk Manor project. And, finally, we cannot afford to wait years for an ideal place to materialize. If we move forward on Karluk Manor, we can test the housing first model at a modest scale, and can then determine how best to expand it, if successful, at another location. We appreciate your consideration and hope that you will allow the housing first model be tested and adapted for Anchorage by an organization with a longstanding excellent reputation for providing effective programs that are respectful to both the people served and the overall community. | |
| Ken D Stone | 6/28/2010 10:30:27 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. There are many in Anchorage who are just one or two paychecks aways from being in the "homeless" boat. Times are rough for everyone and everyone deserves a helping hand. Everyone deserves a fair shake. Everyone deserves a "quality" of life. Does living indoors consititue quality? To many, yes it does. To others not so much. Hopefully those that it means less to will never have to endure nights on the street. | |
| Donald Greene | 6/28/2010 9:51:15 PM |
| I strongly support Karluk Manor. Living near Midtown and Fairview, I first-hand witness many of the problems posed by the chronic homeless. RurALCAP has proven themselves capable of running a program to be a positive place for residents of their proposed project, and the community the project resides. In an area already plagued by problems caused by chronic homelessness, the project would act as a community catalyst. | |
| Alex Barros | 6/28/2010 5:18:19 PM |
| Living in Anchorage for the last few years has been wonderful except for the homeless problem. Let's get them off the streets and into a safe place. It is a tragedy that so many people are found dead on the streets every spring. I support Karluk Manor and the housing first model. | |
| Terri Bramel | 6/28/2010 4:54:52 PM |
| As a medical provider I fully support the Karluk Manor project. While I understand the community concern about the concentration of chronic inebriates, I don't think it will worsen the already bad situation with chronic inebriates downtown. It would make it more likely for them to actually get help and possible get sober. I have worked with many patients in this situation, and sometimes housing is the thing that actually turns their life around. | |
| Cynder Gray | 6/28/2010 4:18:53 PM |
| Homelessness makes recovery issues more difficult to solve. If we can assist in providing a stable environment treatment of substance abuse, disability, and other afflictions have a much better chance to be positively resolved. For this reason I support the Karluk Manor project. | |
| Chrissy Bell | 6/28/2010 3:57:30 PM |
| I am in support of the Karluk Manor project. Homelessness is a symptom of a larger issue and by providing individuals with a basic need like shelter without conditions, they will be able to focus on the larger issue that is causing the homelessness-whether that is substance abuse, mental illness or a disability, which will, in turn, improve the quality of life for not only the homeless individual but also for the entire community. As a community we must come together to solve the problem of homelessness in Anchorage and Karluk Manor is an essential step toward the solution. | |
| Suzi Pearson | 6/28/2010 2:58:54 PM |
| As the representative of Abused Women's Aid In Crisis and The Alaska Coalition on Housing and Homelessness I am in full support of The Karluk Manor Project. This project fully supports Anchorage's 10 Year Plan in addressing housing and homeless issues as related to those who are chronic users of alcohol and experiencing disabilities. The proposed project provides intensive services that meet the needs of the population identified and does so with respect. Housing First is a proven model of success nationally. The Rural Alaska Community Action Program, Inc. (Rural CAP) is an excellent steward for this project and have shown success with other programs they administer such as Homeward Bound. This model is successful and addresses the Municipality of Anchorage's adopted and approved 10 year plan. And as a resident of downtown Anchorage I can only see the benefits that this project will provide to our community. | |
| Mollie Mathieu | 6/28/2010 12:20:45 PM |
| I live in Government Hill, and I support Karluk Manor's location and mission. | |
| Christina Kowalczewski | 6/28/2010 9:47:16 AM |
| I live in west Anchorage and work in Mountain View. Every day I pass the Red Roof Inn going to work and in the evening pass Beans and the Brother Francis Shelter on 3rd. Everday I see the inebriated homeless wandering the streets. This morning there was one sleeping near the entrance to the building where I work. I absolutely support the use of the Red Roof Inn as a location for housing these individuals. It may not be perfect but it is a start. The appearance of the Red Roof Inn will actually be improved and there will be fewer people stumbling down the streets of Fairview, not more. This location is close to the services utilized by this populaltion and has good bus access. Please give this much needed program a chance to succeed by approving the conditional use permit. | |
| Carol Petersen | 6/27/2010 4:52:49 PM |
| I support the Karluk Manor Project and the Housing First Initiative. This type of program has been shown to be cost-effective, with no detrimental effects to the neighborhood, both in Anchorage and in other cities. The homeless are already in the neighborhood (I am a member of Central Lutheran in Fairview) and it makes sense to give them housing where they already living, and where there are other public services nearby. As a member of a faith community, I am also compelled to urge you to do the right thing, and enact this program. | |
| Rev. David Boling | 6/27/2010 4:46:01 PM |
| I strongly recommend that funding be allocated for Karluk Manor. As a clergy person who has been very active in social justice mission work, I feel it is important that the city of Anchorage unite to address issues of the poor and vulnerable in our society. We can no longer ignore the needs of the vulnerable on our streets and in our neighborhoods. This project is just a start to restoring human dignity to homeless individuals with addiction issues that live in our community. | |
| Rev Paul Boling | 6/27/2010 4:37:00 PM |
| I strongly recommend that finances be allocated for Karluk Manor. As a clergy person who has been very active in social justice mission work, I have seen firsthand how the "housing first" model can transform a city's issues of homelessness and addiction. I have seen this model work in many city's in the Pacific Northwest. Anchorage would greatly benefit by adopting this policy. Thank you for addressing issues of the poor and vulnerable in our society. | |
| Kenneth Petersen | 6/26/2010 9:49:01 AM |
| I support the Karluk Manor. It appears to be the only way to help some of our most challenged citizens. I have tried to help a homeless longtime public inibriate friend and realize that I need help to do so. It is difficult to help him when I can't get him into housing due to his drunkeness. It seems like a place like Karluk Manor might help me and others to do so. I am a local business owner and a life long resident of Anchorage. I would like one of these, or something similar, in each community as well so that we can share the opportunity to help. Consider also the Qupqugiak Inn which is located near where I live. Please help support this effort. Kenny | |
| Sharon & Michael Pipino | 6/25/2010 6:28:33 PM |
| My husband and I both support the housing first project at Karluk Manor. These people need a break, life has been really hard for them over the years...this sounds like a the right thing to do and we hope it goes smoothly. | |
| Melba Cooke | 6/25/2010 5:17:53 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor Project. As a certified Substance Abuse Counselor and long time member of this community, I think the time to act is now. We have had over twenty homeless inebriate die on our streets. It is time to change this trend. We can’t wait any longer. The messages against this project show how some community members view these individuals as expendable. I ask, “What does that says about us as people and as a Community?” This project will never get the blessing of everyone. We ask our leaders to lead by example - have the chutzpa to make it happen – support Karluk Manor | |
| Emily Boling | 6/25/2010 12:00:34 PM |
| I fully support the Karluk Manor and the Housing First Initiative. Homeless individuals with addiction issues deserve to have their basic human rights met through safe housing. Housing First initiatives have been proven to work in other communties and this project will only help members of Anchorage's population of chronic public inebriates to regain dignity and respect through RuralCap's program. | |
| Dan Seiser | 6/25/2010 10:46:50 AM |
| I support this zoning action for the Karluk property. As a downtown resident I witness the chronic drunks staggering around and passing out in our alley and street leaving human waste and garbage in their wake. I feel this project will likely reduce the number of severe drunks using the local streets of our neighborhood as their home. | |
| Shannon Wilks | 6/24/2010 12:19:38 PM |
| I am in favor of the Karluk Manor project. Anchorage has been trying to deal with the myriad of issues surrounding housing and services for persons who are homeless and who experience complex substance abuse disorders for decades. Karluk Manor is the first housing option that appears to hold promise to providing safe and affordable housing for this population. Many people in Anchorage have worked long and hard to address this significant lack of appropriate housing for year. Housing First models have been proven to work in several cities where there was the will and courage to try this housing option. Anchorage deserves a chance to try Housing First as well. This is a well thought out project with great potential for success. | |
| Jennifer Allen | 6/24/2010 9:53:07 AM |
| I am an Masters of Social Work student at UAA and fully support the Housing First program, Karluk Manor. As a social worker, my profession is grounded in the belief that a person cannot begin to address issues that are interfering with their life, such as alcoholism, until their basic needs are met. Many people view the chronically homeless inebriate individuals as "those people" and view them as a nuisance that should be tossed away. What we should see are human beings that deserve to have a safe and stable living environment and who are worthy of a roof over their heads, clothes on their backs, and food in their bellies. Is Karluk Manor the be all to end all program for Anchorage's homeless problem? Absolutely not, but it is a start. Karluk Manor would allow Ancorage's hardest to reach homeless inebriate individuals a place to call home and provide them with the dignity and respect that all human beings deserve. Studies have consistently shown that Housing First programs are successful in reducing drinking use among individuals served by these types of programs. There is a benefit to the community as well. The cost of providing housing to homeless inebriates is significantly less that cycling them through detox centers, residential treatment, and the corrections system. It is my opinion that something new and innovative needs to be attempted in helping our homeless brothers and sisters. Karluk Manor is that new and innovative step and should be supported by the Municipality and moved forward so that the doors can be open to serve those who need this service. | |
| Steve Smith | 6/24/2010 8:48:55 AM |
| I'm 100% in favor of Karluk Manor. As a resident of Anchorage for over 40 years, I have seen the issue of Chronic Inebriates grow and grow. We have generated plan after plan, without minimal action or success. Without a Housing First program, this issue will continue to plague our communities. Is the Red Roof Inn the correct location? When is it ever the right location or the right building? No matter what, there will be a concern or an issue. We are not asking for blind faith or for P&Z to take blind action. RurALCAP has years of experience working with this population, has the most successful program in our State in assisting this population in becoming more productive members of our community, has successful developed and implemented apilot Housing First projects in our community (10 unit apartments) and have a development and implementation team with strong knowledge and experience. Plus, true research (not just an opinion passed on emotion) shows the success of Housing First for the individuals entering the program and the community at large. What else could we as a community ask for? We cannot allow this issue be a political issue. Please support Karluk Manor. | |
| Mary Beth Bragiel | 6/24/2010 8:38:37 AM |
| Catholic Social Services supports RuralCAP's efforts to open a housing first project at Karluk Manor. This is a much needed program to help chronic inebriates. As the operator of the Brother Francis Shelter, we are well aware of the needs of these individuals. They not only face the problems of alcoholism, but usually criminal histories, mental health issues, and credit problems as well. These are the truly hard to house. Other similar programs have been shown to be effective in helping this type of individual. Some have lessened their drinking. At the very least, chronic inebriates will have a place to stay, which offers them more dignity and respect than wandering the streets. They will be safer in this environment (Karluk Manor) and our community will be better for that. | |
| Susan Bomalaski | 6/24/2010 8:13:08 AM |
| Catholic Social Services (CSS) supports the Rural Alaska Community Action Program, Inc.’s (RurAL CAP) Karluk Manor housing first project. Karluk Manor will be a valuable resource in our community, and have a significant positive impact by serving individuals who have given up hope of ever having a life beyond the streets. , The individuals who will be housed at Karluk Manor face overwhelming odds in order to move from the streets to safe and secure housing as they are coping with chronic alcoholism and homelessness and histories of trauma and neglect. This project is essential to provide housing stability and hope for recovery from homelessness for this vulnerable population. This approach has proven successful in many communities across the United States and the HUD report on homelessness, which was released on 6/17/10, attributes the decrease in the number of chronically homeless individuals nationwide to the Housing First approach. It is time for Anchorage to adopt this approach to preventing deaths on the streets in this very vulnerable population. Karluk Manor’s Housing First project offers us the best solution available and one that is within our grasp. | |
| Rebecca Rogers | 6/23/2010 9:29:05 PM |
| We support the Housing First project on Karluck. Its a great location that will serve the community well. The Housing First concept is vital to the health and welfare of all homeless people who suffer from chronic and severe drug and alcohol addiction. They deserve a chance at adequate housing regardless of their addiction and recovery outcomes. After a tragic year of too many deaths, its time we put Housing First and give people back their basic right to safe and secure housing. | |
| Rebecca Rogers | 6/23/2010 9:24:54 PM |
| We support the Housing First project on Karluck. Its a great location that will serve the community well. The Housing First concept is vital to the health and welfare of all homeless people who suffer from chronic and severe drug and alcohol addiction. They deserve a chance at adequate housing regardless of their addiction and recovery outcomes. After a tragic year of too many deaths, its time we put Housing First and give people back their basic right to safe and secure housing. | |
| Anne Williams | 6/23/2010 5:32:21 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor at 5th and Karluk. This location IS the prime location for the facility. :) | |
| Margaret Benson | 6/23/2010 5:03:06 PM |
| We lived in Anchorage many, many years; the homeless problem was always talked about but never anything specific done to help the situation. At least, this is an alternative to living in the woods in your back yards; give it a chance; if it doesn't save money for the city in the long run, the city can always kick the tenants out & close it up. Maybe buy each homeless person a ticket to Seattle, as in the old days! | |
| Dave Mayo-Kiely | 6/23/2010 3:12:07 PM |
| I support Rural Cap's proposal to create a Housing First program for chronic inebriates. I believe Karluk Manor will will have a positive impact on our community. The issue of chronic homeless inebriates is complex and there is no single solution but Rural Cap's proposal is tremendous step in the right direction. | |
| Dale Williams | 6/23/2010 1:01:03 PM |
| I work directly with homeless individuals in anchorage and can tell you from first-hand experience, "Housing First" projects like RurAL CAP's proposed Karluk Manor are effective. Karluk Manor as proposed by RurAL CAP will have an overall positive impact in the Fairview area by reducing public inebriation, morbidity and mortality associated with public inebriation, crime and public vagrancy, including early death due to alcoholism, excessive CSP pick-ups, police calls, and excessive use of ER/trauma facilities - all of which have an overall negative impact and a direct impact on MOA budget and services. For a community that purportedly wants to reduce the problems associated with public inebriation, homelessness and premature death associated with our city's homeless population, it is a tad bit disingenuous of our public officials and civil servants to disregard effective public health programs, policy, planning and professional opinion in light of public health data that suggests "Housing First" works. To those in Fairview who say "Not in MY back yard!" and have lobbied heavily to influence our Mayor and Planning and Zoning to create barriers to "Karluk Manor" I say, you already have this problem in your back yard and it has not and will not go away any time soon. The fact of the matter is, Anchorage and in particular Fairview has a public inebriate thoroughfare between Brother Frances Shelter and Bean's Cafe all the way to the Carrs grocery store at 15th and Gambell. Opinions aside, whether or not you allow "The Red Nose Inn" i.e. Karluk Manor at 5th and Karluk you will still have "drunks" in your neighborhood, sleeping in your back yards, under your stairwells and in your crawl spaces; and you will continue to have the community problem you aborre so much unless you do something different. Personally, I think it wise to establish Karluk Manor in Fairview as proposed at 5th and Karluk; Anchorage might as well establish a "check point" for those who really need it. If you have actually witnessed the positive effects of “Housing First” and are accurately informed of what the program is, and the incredible work RurAL CAP does in our community, you know that what we actually have is much worse than what is proposed. Moreover, "hats off" to RurAL CAP for their continued effort to invest in Anchorage and champion solutions to the tough problems we all face as Alaskans. Hopefully, reason will prevail in this debate. | |
| John Hirst | 6/23/2010 12:57:11 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Bill Doherty | 6/23/2010 11:58:31 AM |
| We provide subsidized housing in the community for approximately 40 individuals or families. A high number of these clients were homeless when we moved them into the apartments, with some having been homeless up to 20 years. Even with intensive case management, some of these clients / families have not been able to maintain independent housing and end up being evicted. Some of these clients we have housed up to three times, all resulting in evictions. The usual reasons for the evictions are due to a high rate of traffic coming and going which is usually an indication of drugs. They also invite their homeless friends in to party at their apartment. Neighbors complain, and they get evicted. What is missing in these cases is 24 hour staff oversight or coverage for the units. These individuals aren't very good about saying no to the other homeless folks when they want ot come in and party. There isn't another option in the community for some of these individuals. They need a place like Karluck Manor, the program being proposed by Rural Cap, where 24 hour supervision and oversight will be available to help this population be successful. If Karluck Manor opened tomorrow, we would be standing in line to have 8-10 of our clients placed at Karluck Manor. Most of our clients don't require this level of care, however those that do, will not fit anywhere else in the community and will continue to be homeless. | |
| Sigvold Juliussen | 6/23/2010 11:48:03 AM |
| As a Fairview resident and property owner I strongly approve of the Karluk Manor. Our city needs to help the cronic homeless. I beleive Karluck Manor will benifit not only Anchorage but, Fairview in gerneral | |
| Shaun Debenham | 6/23/2010 11:41:14 AM |
| I DO NO support Karluk Manor. Please do not approve it. Thanks. | |
| Karen Bitzer | 6/23/2010 11:35:44 AM |
| I am in support of the Karluk Manor project. | |
| Jo Ellen Smith | 6/22/2010 3:26:33 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. | |
| Connie Markis | 6/22/2010 2:35:58 PM |
| I would like to voice my support for the Karluk Mannor housing option for our city's chronic inebriates. I work in a health care for the homeless program & have worked with homeless populations for greater than 25 years. Studies do show that best practices for homeless inebriate and even mentally ill persons who are homeless do better in a "housing first" model where someone can have a place to stay & get the supportive services, direction & access to things which improve their lives & health. Of course, this saves money for the community and decreased incidents for residents and businesses as well. While there have been concerns voiced about the location, there are plans that mitigate this concern & I would say that Karluk Mannor will probably provide more safety than the streets. RuralCap with their Homeward Bound Program has a good track record for working with this population & a solid proposal for making it work. Since this model has worked in other communities, it seems prudent to support this project and hope that we can improve the lives of those needing it. | |
| Barbara Franks | 6/21/2010 10:13:30 AM |
| A crisis can mean different things to different people. I heard this quote, "Even a bridge can only handle so much weight." How many things must a person have to struggle with before they can get some help? Why do you think so many people end up in jail? 3 meals a day, a roof over your head? This was "their" way of reaching out for help, sacrificing "freedom" for your heath and safety. As I work with suicide prevention across the state, this is a concern shared by other communities. As others transition to a larger community, same problem different community. My best wishes on your efforts to take control of a serious issue. | |
| Shawn Bolam | 6/21/2010 9:15:44 AM |
| I support the proposal for Karluk Manor. | |
| Peter Birmanns | 6/21/2010 2:32:10 AM |
| I support the project. The city of Anchorage is in dire need of a new approach to the problem of homelessness. This is obvious to anyone driving or walking our streets. Giving people a roof over their head levels the battlefield in their war against alcoholism. Expecting them to sober up while living on the street is unrealistic. | |
| Rachel Gearhart | 6/20/2010 7:52:05 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. While I understand that location is a factor, there is NO perfect location. We must open our neighborhoods to allow the chronic homeless experiencing substance abuse to create their own HOMES and their own place in a neighborhood. Housing First isn't new or un-founded. It has been a successful program in other places and with all the deaths this winter among the homeless population, having Karluk Manor available is a no-brainer to me. | |
| Anna Nelson | 6/20/2010 4:01:30 PM |
| I support Karluk Manor. Adequate housing is an essential element of any healthy, functional society. It benefits everyone to have appropriate housing for all members of society. This project just makes sense for our community. Homelessness is a symptom of a dysfunctional society. Karluk Manor addresses this problem both by providing the housing as well as support services to help the tenants live healthier, more productive lives. | |
| Thea Bemben | 6/19/2010 4:26:56 PM |
| I support RurAL CAP's proposal to use the former Red Roof Inn as a Housing First development to serve our city's homeless population. I lived in and owned a house in Fairview for 5 years, very close to the location of the Red Roof Inn. My opinion is that this project will ease the impact of the homeless population on the Fairview neighborhood. I believe that by providing support and housing for homeless inebriates, from a caring and competent organization like RurAL CAP, there will be greater supervision and ability to respond to neighborhood concerns. Today, without that support, there is no one to call other than the Community Service Patrol, which is very limited in the help it can provide. Karluk Manor will offer a long-term solution for Anchorage's severe level of homelessness, and will ease the impacts of that situation on our residents. It is simply not OK for a city of our size to allow people to die in our woods and parks on a weekly basis. We cannot wish this situation away, or try and move it to someone else's neighborhood. We all need to come together to tackle this problem and to provide long-term solutions for individuals who are homeless and addicted to alcohol. This is the best solution anyone has proposed in years and I think the residents of Fairview, and all of Anchorage, would be smart to support it. | |
| Kim Stalder | 6/19/2010 2:33:41 PM |
| Having been involved over the last 20 years as a consultant to homeless providers and preparer of Anchorage's Continuum of Care homeless assistance grant application, I am keenly aware of the housing needs of Anchorage's homeless population. Based on this knowledge and my familiarity with Housing First as a concept and in operation, I strongly support Karluk Manor. Residents of Housing First often begin to control their drinking as a result of the stability they experience when housed. The neighborhoods around Housing First projects, while often skeptical at first, come to appreciate the positive impacts it generates. Housing First is a recommendation of the Mayor's Task Force on Homelessness and is contained in the city's 10-Year Plan. This project must be approved. The proven success of RurAL CAP's homeless programs should give the neighborhood comfort that this program will be operated in such a manner as to not negatively impact their quality of life. Quite the opposite, it will give hope and shelter to the population that currently frequents Fairview. Given the choice to sleep outside in the cold or to go home to a warm bed, I believe the people who will reside at Karluk Manor will choose the latter. They won't have that choice, if the project does not exist. While I know the opposition from the neighborhood will be calmly and rationally presented, it is based on fear of the unknown and an irrational presumption that this project will bring an unwanted element into the neighborhood. This element already frequents Fairview. As I noted earlier, I believe Karluk Manor will provide an alternative to some of those individuals who might exhibit behaviors that none of us would want near our homes, bettering the Fairview neighborhood and improving its residents' quality of life. The need for the project is understood and the location is entirely appropriate. It is not in the middle of residential development, it is near commercial operations and is bounded by non-residential streets. Where better to locate such a project? Not in a residential neighborhood far from needed services. Not in a warehouse in an industrial area. The proposed location gives the population easy access to services in the area and minimizes any unwanted impacts. The project will have tight controls in order to ensure that the neighborhood is protected from the impacts they fear and to provide for the safety of Karluk Manor residents. More importantly, it will offer the most needed housing type for the homeless in Anchorage--Housing First. Please consider the facts in this case, not the emotions, and vote in support of Karluk Manor. My many years working with the Commission gives me confidence that your decision will be thoughtful and well-reasoned. | |
| Grace Matsutani | 6/19/2010 9:35:11 AM |
| I support the Karluk Manor project. There is seldom a perfect location for these programs as we are all reluctant to have them in our neighborhood. Can we pause for a moment and realize these are our brothers and sisters who deserve to be treated with dignity and compassion instead of being exiled outside the city gates. | |
| firBarbara Abercrombie | 6/19/2010 8:37:50 AM |
| I very enthusiastically support the Housing First concept of Karluk Manor and hope that the city will get behind this effort wholeheartedly. | |
| Peggy McMahon | 6/18/2010 11:55:42 PM |
| I would like to support Karluk Manor and help make it a reality for RurALCAP to meet the requirements for a conditional use permit. I have worked with a lot of the people who would make use of this facility and I would make a plea to "do unto others what you would want done to you". We all deserve the opportunity to live with dignity. That is difficult to do if you are addicted to alcohol and are homeless. It becomes a never ending cycle of addiction and homelessness unless there are creative and innovative approaches to provide one of the basic human needs: shelter. Providing shelter to one of the lesser of us promotes hope that there will be a better tomorrow and a purpose for waking up other than continuing the cycle of drinking. Imagine the embarassment and humiliation that must accompany the behavior of people under the influence. We should overcome the fear of those who are different from us and do the opposite, which is courage to take the next step. I believe that step is supporting Karluk Manor, and giving it a chance to be a success story. | |
| Janus Reyes | 6/18/2010 3:56:21 PM |
| People without support become homeless wanderers with little hope. Our community needs Karluk Manor to support our community initiative to prevent homelessness. This problem will not go away on it's own; housing helps people develop a foundation of hope and strengthens our community. Everyone deserves hope and support. | |
| Tanya Iden | 6/18/2010 2:57:15 PM |
| I strongly support the Karluk Manor. If the Municipality is truly serious about their efforts to tackle Anchorage's homeless problem and help public inebriates obtain needed treatment, it is critical that we embrace innovative and creative new models like Karluk Manor. Facilities like the proposed Karluk Manor operating in other communities have had a lot of success. I also think that the location is completely appropriate. While it is near the community of Fairview it is not within it, but adjacent. It is bounded by fast-moving arterials that act as a seperation between the facility and the Fairview community. Please support Karluk Manor. | |
| Scott Turner | 6/18/2010 2:03:28 PM |
| I work with some of these folks on a daily basis. There is such an obvious need for this model of housing, to get people stable and safe. That is the only way to keep them healthy and then on the road to sobriety! This keeps the public safer, eliminates the need for people to camp in public parks, and frees up more emergency services. Please support Karluk Manor! | |
| Lorraine Beaver | 6/18/2010 1:31:20 PM |
| I support the proposal for Karluk Manor. Give it a chance!!! | |
| Babbie Jacobs | 6/18/2010 12:27:59 PM |
| I am in support of the Karluk Manor program. Not only does it provide a safety net for those severly effected with the disease of addiction, but it makes the surrounding neighborhoods safer. Additionally, it frees up more police, firemen and emergency responders to work with other issues rather than tying up precious resources that could be used to assist others. Research shows this type of housing saves a community a great deal of money! | |
| Pat Wendt | 6/18/2010 12:23:32 PM |
| I stand in support of the Karluk Manor project as it is a giant step forward in the constant struggle to house inebriates. I would hope that there is some sort of on-site counseling available and ideally a couple more facilities where inebriates can graduate to as they seek sobriety. This model has proven successful in other states and I hope we can also be successful. Certainly is better than what we have! | |
| Rev. Lisa Smith | 6/16/2010 4:31:27 PM |
| I speak in favor of RurAL CAP's proposed housing first initiative (Karluk Manor) at the present Red Roof Inn. I believe RurAL CAP has been responsible in researching and planning for this project to be as safe and respectful as possible for citizens of Fairview. I work in Fairview at Central Lutheran Church (15th and Cordova). I live nearby, at 11th and C. Our congregation sees a great amount of homeless and chronic inebriate traffic during the day, almost every day. We allow folks to use our bathrooms and water fountain. Yet we have also seen considerable damage to our property and we all have CSP's phone number memorized. I have worked here for 5 years and the problem is not going away and not improving. We must not pretend that ignoring the homeless will make them go away. My faith calls me to care for the least and the lost, the outcast and the stranger. Thus, I support the Karluk Manor project that will care for these chronic inebriates. I understand that others who live and work in Fairview have concerns about the effects of chronic inebriates to their neighborhood. I can empathize with their concerns. It seems to me, however, that putting people in housing with facilities will mean getting inebriates out of yards and alleyways. I think it will be a win-win. It is also better than doing nothing. Again, I support the RurAL CAP project for the Karluk Manor at the current Red Roof Inn. | |
| Kay Gajewski | 6/16/2010 11:52:37 AM |
| As a resident of Fairview I support permanent housing for the chronic homeless population with intensive case management services available. The conversion of the Red Roof Inn to the Karluck Manor appears to be a perfect beginning as its location is where the homeless are. The vigilance that RuralCap must maintain to keep the grants supporting the project provides the opportunity to reduce the negative impact on the neighborhood. RuralCap's Homeward Bound Program in Mountain View, a similar program, has resulted in a reduction of alcohol use by the tenants and a positive influence on the neighborhood. Give it a chance. | |
| Judy Helgeson | 6/16/2010 11:37:48 AM |
| I am in favor of the proposal to utlize the property which has been idtified for Karluk Manor. Many of these people are in need of services and it would be to all of our benefits to have them in a safe housing situation and off the steets and out of the neighborhoods. We have moved many of the supports and services through out the city and yet we continue to have people stay in this area of town. This would be an opportunity for them to be able to help themselves as opposed to everyone doing it for them. Self worth is very important to all people. | |
| Dahna Graham | 6/16/2010 8:46:34 AM |
| I want to speak in favor of the conditional use permit for RurALCAP's Karluk Manor project. I am dismayed by the tragic fate of too many of our chronically homeless citizens. These folks are already in the neighborhood, wandering with no place to rest or be nourished. It would be much better for all concerned to house people in safe apartments as demonstrated in Minneapolis for the past twenty years at Ashinabe Wakiagun. RurALCAP has the expertise and staffing to make a difference for those caught in a hopeless cycle. I believe they will maintain an effective home for those in great need without adversely affecting the neighborhood. | |
| Kristy Crosby | 6/1/2010 9:34:10 PM |
| I am opposed to conversion of the motel to a facility for chronic inebriates. First - what is the municipality's liability if an inebriate, purposely housed in a facility on one of the busiest corners in Anchorage, steps out into traffic and is injured or killed? Second - what about the residents of Fairview? Fairview Lion's Park is generally a mess and unsafe for children because of the inebriates who hang out there. I have observed inebriates engaging in noisy sex in the porta-potties, in broad daylight. I've watched them beat each other up. I've watched them urinate and defecate in random spots in the park, despite the porta-potties. I've seen them urinate and defecate down the children's slide and other playground equipment. Groups of inebriates wander through the neighborhood, pass out on lawns, and scream and curse at residents. Third - who benefits from this transaction? I suspect the Red Roof Inn has been a financial disaster for the owners. Who approached whom in getting this deal started? What a coincidence that a failing motel suddenly becomes the perfect place to house hard-core inebriates. Fourth - Why must we, the residents of Fairview, be forced to subsidize the destruction of our neighborhood? Those in support of this plan essentially claim that this won't cost the residents of Anchorage anything because it will be funded by grants. Well where in the world do you suppose that grant money comes from? The Feds don't make money; that money comes out of working people's pockets. Fifth - The claims about the success of the program in Seattle are highly over-stated. Read the studies and the information. Read the truth about what that program is costing the city, and the dismal outcome for the residents. | |
| Les Gara | 6/1/2010 3:52:47 PM |
| The following is the text of an earlier letter I wrote this spring noting our concerns about the Red Roof Inn proposal, and that the proposed location is inappropriate given the legitimate safety concerns expressed by neighbors and area residents. I would add these thoughts to the sentiments expressed in my earlier letter. I do think treatment for those who qualify for the Housing First model can make sense, if done in an appropriate setting. I understand the Red Roof Inn was picked because of its attractive, discounted price. But the proper location for such a facility is not in a residential neighborhood, at least not one where the residents express legitimate safety concerns as is the case here. If an affordable and proper alternate location cannot be found, I do think the City, and possibly the state, should help with a reasonable level of needed funds, but only in a non-residential location, where safety concerns for neighbors are not an issue, and only for a plan that will lead to effective treatment. I have supported increased alcoholism and substance abuse treatment for those willing to undertake the effort to address their addictions. That is the right thing to do, and will save us costs, and agony in the long run. But choosing a location that is inappropriate, just because it is offered at an attractive price, is not the proper approach for this facility in my view. The body of my earlier letter from this winter on this subject follows: Re: Red Roof Inn: Wrong Location for a Needed Solution Dear Neighbors: During the first month of the legislative session, I’ve been working on a full slate of projects, and, at the same time, have been hit with a full court press by the oil industry for corporate tax reductions on oil production. While that’s been in the press, I want you to know I haven’t forgotten about the Red Roof Inn issue in Fairview. Two weeks ago we received a presentation on the topic in the House Finance Committee. While I believe strongly in helping people who want to help themselves, I think the Red Roof Inn is the wrong location for the Mental Health Trust Authority’s “Housing First” project. It is too close to our neighbor’s homes in Fairview, and should be located in a place much further from a high density, established neighborhood. I do think that, if placed away from homes, the Housing First concept has enough promise to give it a try. Alcohol is the main driver of crime in our state, and pretending people will get better on their own, or that the violence, danger, and distress caused by alcohol abuse will disappear on its own is wishful thinking. I have long been a proponent of cutting the waiting lists at effective alcoholism and substance abuse treatment centers for those who are willing to work towards recovery. For example, Anchorage’s main heroin addiction treatment center has a waiting list of over a year. I have pushed to fix that – because if we don’t, heroin users will continue to feed heroin dealers, continue to commit drug crimes, and continue to feed the cycle of neighborhood crime, family destruction and community danger. Six and twelve month long waiting lists for alcoholism and substance abuse treatment centers make no sense when the treatment is for those willing to help themselves. Waiting lists increase crime, increase the time children are taken away from parents in need of treatment, and I will continue to call for a fix to that problem. Here are a few things I’d say about the Housing First concept, which I think is worthy of a try AWAY from a residential community. On the positive side, Housing First does drastically reduce Community Service patrol pick ups. At least a portion of those who’d enter treatment truly want to improve their lives, and indirectly, ours. On the other hand, I have to say that I haven’t yet been convinced it shows miraculous results in weaning people away from alcohol abuse. Those statistics aren’t as clearly positive. Maybe the latter is too much to ask for when people are dealing with an addiction. I do respect that the project aims to help those who are willing to be treated, so my ears are open to hearing more evidence. But the bottom line is that the project should not be placed at the Red Roof In location. That poses a problem for the promoters of the project – since the Red Roof Inn came at a low sales price. But the solution is to find a better location, with community help, and not fund this one. The following is an excerpt from my statement during the House Finance Committee Hearing. In addition, I am sending our last e-mail newsletter for your information. House Finance Committee, February 4, 2010. “So let me get to Housing First because we’re going to have to, there’s a budget proposal that we’re all going to have to think about on it. The bad part of it is what Representative Kelly has said. You know, you spend a lot of money to get someone from 15 drinks to ten drinks, and for those of us who aren’t inside your profession, that doesn’t seem like a staggering success to spend a lot of money on. . . . And there is a concern about putting this inside of an established neighborhood. I mean if we’re going to experiment with something new to the scene like this, I don’t think that it goes on an established neighborhood.” | |
| Trevor Storrs | 6/1/2010 1:27:19 PM |
| I’m in support of the request for a conditional use per 21.50.510 to allow for severe alcohol dependent housing project referred to as Karluk Manor (East Addition Subdivision, Block 13A, Lots 6A & 7A. Generally located east of Karluk Street, north of E. 6th Avenue and south of E. 5th Avenue). The project is based on credible research and the success of a pilot project currently operated by RurALCAP. RurALCAP has an outstanding reputation of operating programs for the targeted population. Their excellent history as a provider and property owner of several building throughout Anchorage, speaks volumes of their strong qualifications to receive the conditional use permit. RurALCAP possesses the knowledge and experience to ensure the Karluk Manor project is successful for both the participants and the community that surrounds it. RurALCAP is more than a service provider when they enter a community. They integrate themselves and the participants of their programs into the community by actively get involved in community activities (i.e. spring clean up, adopting a park). The location selected is ideal for the proposed project. It is not in the middle of a residential community, close to other social service providers, close to bus routes and the building can be retrofitted to meet the needs of the program. The Karluk Manor project will be a huge benefit to our community. We are continually seeing the number of Chronic Homeless population increase, as well as the financial burden placed on our community increasing. This project will reduce the demand on our public services, relieve our streets of constant “nuances”, and increase community safety, while saving the tax payers money. | |
| Johnny Ellis | 6/1/2010 1:16:10 PM |
| As a resident of Fairview and the State Senator representing this neighborhood, I am very concerned about the proposed location for Rural CAP's housing first program at the Red Roof Inn. Due to myriad safety concerns and the potential negative impact on the neighborhood, I am unable to support this project in the currently proposed location at Karluk Street and Fifth Avenue. | |