"Some go so far as to sleep in the subway cars," — says reporters AlterNet senior analyst at the Coalition for the Homeless Patrick Mark. — "Some go to the hospital emergency room, some — in the laundry. Women return to those who beat them, and remain in dangerous homes. "
Families who come to shelters began to stay there much longer, waiting for the case to move to a permanent home. When reporters asked Mayor Michael Bloomberg's why the homeless
The question: "there is really great?" And indignation at his statements,
That's such a deep compassion for the poor, accompanied by all the acts of the mayor, which became the cause of the crisis that
Here is a guide on how to Bloomberg's administration was able to increase the rate of homelessness, having spent a lot of public money.
1. Reduced access to federal aid.
For many decades, Republican and Democratic mayors reduced the rate of homelessness by providing parents and their children priority access to federal housing subsidies and rental vouchers. But in 2004, the five-year plan to reduce homelessness, the mayor, the administration kicked homeless families from the top of a huge queue for federal housing subsidies. City officials, without providing specific evidence of poor people accused of defrauding the system, and in a special resettlement in shelters, in order to obtain vouchers. (Like many conservative fudge affecting minority intriguing, this is also no doubt true in some ways — some people here and there lied — but studies show that such an attempt on the system
Level of homeless families receiving federal subsidies fell to a record low. According to the analyst
Instead of programs that give them access to permanent housing, homeless families have received as a gift — an invaluable lesson of personal responsibility! First, the administration introduced the program "Housing Stability Plus» (HSP — Housing Stability Plus), which
Then, in 2007 the program was introduced "advantage", which helped to reduce the rent (requiring that residents found jobs or retraining), but the action of the program lasted only 1-2 years. It was assumed that when the grant runs out, families are able to find a permanent home. Instead, the family returned to shelters because, according to homeless advocates — no magical passes were not working, and in New York, the rent is not reduced. Every third family that gets under the "advantage", in 2011, returned to the shelter, according to the calculations of the Coalition for the Homeless.
2. Reduction and cancellation.
Despite this, and in response to the demands of the homeless advocates and some officials, who urged the mayor to give priority to families federal aid, the administration touted the program as a success. Therefore, a very strange thing was that when, in March 2011 the Governor of the State of New York has cut funding by half, "Benefits", the Bloomberg administration has refused to finance the difference and destroyed the program. At the same time,
When city officials have cut the program, 15,000 families with housing costs relied on the "advantage" received written notice that they have only two weeks to
3. Spending money on temporary solutions.
Instead of these programs, the administration only desperately opens more and more temporary shelters.
Here the problems — no matter where you look. Contents of the family in a shelter costs 3000 per month — more than the housing allowance. In addition, studies show that the lack of a permanent home has a destabilizing and harmful effects on children, even if they were in one of those New York's shelters, which hit the mayor with the luxury. Homeless children are sick more often, get sick more rare and serious diseases than those children who have a home. They often suffer from respiratory and digestive infections. The lack of a permanent and safe housing
"If homelessness is bad for adults, for young people the consequences can be catastrophic, causing problems can last for a lifetime," —
4. Refusal to change course.
The City Council of New York outlined a plan to restore the programs that are said to have reduced the rate of homelessness. As written by Christine Quinn, Annabel Palma and director of the Coalition for the Homeless Mary Brosnehen
According to the analysis of the urban plan of the New York City Independent Budget Committee concluded: "If 5,000 families a year derived from shelters with priority programs and NYCHA Section 8, the cost of maintaining families in shelters would have decreased by $ 29.4 million, thus saving the city budget would amount to $ 11 million. "
Until now, the administration rejects the plan. At a hearing in September, the Commissioner of the Office of the homeless Seth Diamond said the unlikelihood of a successful program of retraining as a way to deal with the sharp increase in homelessness. One member called this approach — "zasovyvaniem heads in the sand."
Diamond reiterated the administration's position — the inhabitants of shelters are not a priority for housing assistance.