Homeless in Heartside

[MAU]

I would imagine they could move wherever space became available on a case-by-case basis. There's a lot of previously used manufacturing space available in the city. I've seen new and old manufacturing space turned into office space, and you couldn't even tell. I agree with GRTP, if a situation arose where it made financial sense, each one could look at the possibility of moving to a new locale.

[GRDadof3]

Then what happens when that area becomes prime real estate location?

[Sunlover38]

. Perhaps our problem in GR is that we're too "compassionate", sipping our hot latte from our nice cushy seat at Resurrection Life in Grandville.

[PR-15]

This is a tough subject and always in the back of my mind, despite everything that I have said above, I really think that a city is rich because of its diversity (economic, social, racial, and even the "crazies" and the "sanes"). By sterilizing everything, we will indeed lose something.

Poverty and homelessness is not the problem, the problem lies in the concentrations of poverty and homelessness. The fact that all of this stuff is concentrated in a small area of the city instead of being integrated into diverse populations creates the stereotypes, the racism, etc.

[Mark Miller]

Then what happens when that area becomes prime real estate location?

[BostonianinGR]

Wow, that is extremely harsh. Talk about stereotyping . . . .

[Veloise]

Cascade Twp.

[civitas]

Yes, but just because its a stereotype doesn't mean its false.....

[rivegauche]

Can't, no Rapid service.

But there are enough **$$$ establishments.

[GRDadof3]

GRDad's comment was, "Perhaps our problem in GR is that we're too "compassionate", sipping our hot latte from our nice cushy seat at Resurrection Life in Grandville."

Churches in West Michigan are filled with people sitting in varying degrees of comfort who have varying degrees of compassion. These are the people who give to their churches (and church organizations) who run the missions that care for the homeless.

If the stereotype is true, was it directed at only those compassionate people who drink latte at Resurrection life in Grandville or was it directed at all church-goers who love their neighbors as themselves?

You're not really suggesting that either Resurrection Life or all compassionate churches are the problem are you?

[starrfish]

This whole thread blows my mind...like the homeless are truely less than and undeserving of being on or near desireable/developable land because they're in the situation they're in? I just can't follow the "move them somewhere else" line of thinking, like the homeless that we see along Division are pieces of furniture to be moved about a living room as someone else desires.

These are people we're talking about! I used to work in the United Way building - no problems. I frequently stop into Vertigo and Sanctuary Folk Art. I've washed windows along Division as a volunteer for Dwelling Place...spent a few hours on Division and actually had some nice interactions with some of "those people." Bottom line, they're people and they just happen to live on the street/in the missions or low rent apartments along Divison in a fashion that's not what you're accustomed to. A quick turn of unfortunate events and it could be you...

Moving the shelters/missions will not solve "the homeless problem" it might make some of you feel better for the time being, but things need to be addressed on a systems-level (education, health care, housing etc.) over a long period of time for there to no longer be people in the community who are without permanent shelter/jobs.

*fish

[Prankster]

I may have been a little harsh in my comments, but although I agree that there are a lot of good, decent people who go to the evangelical mega-churches, I seem to encounter just as many who are self-righteous, judgemental and pretend to be compassionate, even toward fellow Christians/Catholics who don't "believe in the right things", who don't "worship the right way", "read the right gospels", "worship false idols", or haven't "given themselves totally to Jesus", all from their cushy seats in their multi-million dollar mega concert halls. I probably should have just come out and said that. That shouldn't be offensive to anyone who doesn't do that.

Was it the latte comment that was stereotyping? It could be Cappuccino or an iced latte too...

[civitas]

I may have been a little harsh in my comments, but although I agree that there are a lot of good, decent people who go to the evangelical mega-churches, I seem to encounter just as many who are self-righteous, judgemental and pretend to be compassionate, even toward fellow Christians/Catholics who don't "believe in the right things", who don't "worship the right way", "read the right gospels", "worship false idols", or haven't "given themselves totally to Jesus", all from their cushy seats in their multi-million dollar mega concert halls. I probably should have just come out and said that. That shouldn't be offensive to anyone who doesn't do that.

Was it the latte comment that was stereotyping? It could be Cappuccino or an iced latte too...

Sometimes I'm just guilt of making certain people feel uncomfortable in their own skin.

[joeDowntown]

We're not trying to solve "the homeless problem". We're really discussing "the development problem". Is Heartside development hindered by the shelters. Yes. Will it ever be a viable work/live/shop area with the shelters all congregated there? I'd say no.

Joe

Moving the shelters/missions will not solve "the homeless problem" it might make some of you feel better for the time being, but things need to be addressed on a systems-level (education, health care, housing etc.) over a long period of time for there to no longer be people in the community who are without permanent shelter/jobs.

*fish

[ccbarnes]

This whole thread blows my mind...like the homeless are truely less than and undeserving of being on or near desireable/developable land because they're in the situation they're in? I just can't follow the "move them somewhere else" line of thinking, like the homeless that we see along Division are pieces of furniture to be moved about a living room as someone else desires.

[gvsusean]

They don't own anything...we can move them wherever we see fit. Beggars can't be choosers!

They're not little lost puppy dogs that just need Jesus and a hug.

If these were High School kids doing the same things we'd have that place shut down and the cops wold be all over the neighborhood, but instead we have a mayor that gives them more rights than the patrons of the city.

[PR-15]

Without straying too far off topic, try being a Catholic in this area. Talk about stereotyping. A lot of the Evangelicals that I encounter lump Catholics in with the tax collectors and lepars.

[GRDadof3]

Now I understand. I've also been suspicious of people who drink latte ...

...and I spent 20 years of my life rejecting my faith because of hypocrites in the church.

I've since learned that latte drinkers aren't all bad and I no longer use the failures of others as an excuse to deny my own beliefs. I also pray that my failures don't affect someone else's view of the church.

Most of us in churches are there because we know we're not perfect and we're really trying to improve. We may always be able to find "self-righteous, judgemental, pretenders (hypocrites)" in the churches, but we shouldn't let them change who we are.

In spite of the hypocrites, I will suggest that the majority of the money that supports the church sponsored missions in Heartside comes from sincerely compassionate people who do care about the homeless.

I might even risk that there's probably nothing wrong with them writing checks while drinking latte.

[GRguy]

Well, I am glad you are not closing the thread. I believe a lot of the things GRdad is saying and I know how hard it is to say something not politically correct. Keep talking, man...

Last year, I found an old Grand Rapids magazine from 1981 or so. It was talking about how South Division was getting a small hotel and that cafes and gentrification was just around the corner. 25 years...you could have changed the names and written the same story today. Unless something major happens to move the missions out of that area, we will be having this conversation 25 years from now.

[starrfish]

We're not trying to solve "the homeless problem". We're really discussing "the development problem". Is Heartside development hindered by the shelters. Yes. Will it ever be a viable work/live/shop area with the shelters all congregated there? I'd say no.

Joe

[MAU]

Talk to Dwelling Place and see if they want to move - they actually do own quite a bit of the property we're discussing along Division, between Fulton and Wealthy.

[GRDadof3]

hmm...seems to me like it's one in the same...developers and armchair developers here seem to think "those people" are interfereing with making big bucks off some land. All I was saying is if you look at root issues rather than just how a handful of people might make more money off the land "hindered by shelters" then you may actually achieve solutions to both issues.

I bet the people who already live/work in the Heartside feel it's already a viable area.

And to ccbarnes who said:

"They don't own anything...we can move them wherever we see fit. Beggars can't be choosers!"

Talk to Dwelling Place and see if they want to move - they actually do own quite a bit of the property we're discussing along Division, between Fulton and Wealthy.

*fish

[concretepoem]

Well, I am glad you are not closing the thread. I believe a lot of the things GRdad is saying and I know how hard it is to say something not politically correct. Keep talking, man...

Last year, I found an old Grand Rapids magazine from 1981 or so. It was talking about how South Division was getting a small hotel and that cafes and gentrification was just around the corner. 25 years...you could have changed the names and written the same story today. Unless something major happens to move the missions out of that area, we will be having this conversation 25 years from now.

[Allison Slater]

These are people we're talking about! I used to work in the United Way building - no problems. I frequently stop into Vertigo and Sanctuary Folk Art. I've washed windows along Division as a volunteer for Dwelling Place...spent a few hours on Division and actually had some nice interactions with some of "those people." Bottom line, they're people and they just happen to live on the street/in the missions or low rent apartments along Divison in a fashion that's not what you're accustomed to. A quick turn of unfortunate events and it could be you...

[BostonianinGR]

So let's see if I can offer a humble attempt to pull together some of the various threads under this topic.

It seems to me that we probably all agree on the following:

1.) The heartside district is an integral part of the redevelopment of GR.

2.) There is a large concentration of non-profit services (i.e. homeless shelters) in the area.

3.) These services attract the homeless which does create problems for developers.

More controversially:

4.) The folks in Kent County, Cascade etc. are quite happy to leave the homeless problem to the "City". This is perhaps a more controversial axiom, but I think it is defensible. Setting aside the discussion about the members of Resurrection Life or whoever, no body and I mean no body, wants to live around the homeless. (There is a reason why the world has produced only a handful of "Mother Teresas" and "Dorothy Days".) The folks who live in Kent, Cascade and other cities are normal people who are simply acting in their own rational self-interest. They are happy to let GR deal with the problem.

It seems to me that GRDad is correct in realizing that (3.) is a problem that must be addressed. It is not going to go away. No developer, not even someone trying to build apartments for lower/middle income families, wants to invest in a place that has a concentration of homeless shelters.

So the question is: what is to be done about it? I don't know, but relocating the shelters is, clearly, one solution to the problem of developing downtown GR. I know that some people are accusing GRdad of "relocating the unwanted in a Hitleresque fashion", but this is actually the way things are currently. To repeat my point in (4.): folks in neighboring cities (Ada, Cascade etc.) are quite happy to send their homeless elsewhere. If places like Cascade do what is necessary to keep out the unwanted "riff raff", I don't see why GR should not be allowed to do the same.

Unless someone can think of a better solution......