What You Don’t Know About the Homeless Services Reform Amendment Act of 2017

The Homeless Services Reform Amendment Act of 2017 is currently under DC Council review.  After mulling over the latest amendments they will vote on it again December 5, 2017.  Before that happens, we’d like Grassroots DC readers to have some basic information about this bill so we’ve cross-posted the following from the Fair Budget Coalition, which describes what happened during the debate of proposed changes to the bill on November 7, 2017.

4 comments to What You Don’t Know About the Homeless Services Reform Amendment Act of 2017

  • Tori Wilkerson

    A little off subject, but i have a real problem with people making 50+k a year and they have housing vouchers.

  • Liane

    It is a little off topic but I see your point. Do you know people who make 50+k a year who are on housing vouchers? Or are you just saying that you can qualify for a housing voucher if you make 50+k a year? I personally was on the public housing waiting list for years. When they abolished it and started a new one, I didn’t bother signing up again. It didn’t even occur to me to try and get a voucher but I have no doubt I would have qualified. If you know or are willing to research the housing voucher program, I’d love to get a post about it. Let me know if your interested in writing one.

  • Sarah

    The Council and Mayor definitely need to draw a line, but it should be a line of benefits to DC below which no development proposals will be be approved. It’s waaay past time for this city to stop acting like it has to give the public’s assets–land, vacant buildings, especially schools, taxes, and services such as sewage, gas and electric lines, streets, alleys and much more–away for free in order to “attract” developers, as in the deal with the MLB for a baseball stadium.
    The annual trek out to Las Vegas every year to peddle DC neighborhoods as if they were just vacant acres of space with no one living or owning businesses or going to school there, just waiting to be remade into any developer’s design, and the glossy magazines put out by the Washington, DC Partnership, started by the William’s administration when the city was truly poor and trading a public asset for cheap in order to get some renewal going made a certain sense, should have been revised as soon as the housing prices, especially rental ones, started going up and roofs started disappearing over people’s heads.
    It is exceedingly poor governing not to maintain housing that is affordable for every income level, even poorer not to use development projects as a part of a plan to eliminate homelessness.
    But instead of watching for the effects of development on the people of the city, noting that developers had “discovered DC” sufficiently enough for the the tax base to rise (the stated goals of the give-aways)and affordable housing to begin to disappear and realize that they did not have to beg anyone anymore to come here, they now want to deal with homelessness just the same way they deal with so many other things–blame the “victim”, rather than look for answers in their own laws and policies, and come out with measures to punish the public rather than to better govern their assets to their benefit.

  • Liane

    AMEN Sarah! I’d really like to understand went on with that baseball stadium deal. I’m sure we’re still paying for it. And what did we get out of it? A few part-time service jobs. I think a good explanation of the stadium deal would help residents understand this whole process. Do you know of a good article about this subject that we might post on this site?