News from Patrick Flynn

Let’s start with the basics.  I live close to downtown, I work downtown, I frequently patronize a wide variety of downtown establishments, I’m part-owner of a downtown business and I support (and have worked in) our visitor industry.  Under no circumstances would I ever want the image of downtown Anchorage to be that of John William Martin III.

But by now readers have surely heard about Mr. Martin who, for the past several weeks, has been staging a protest of municipal policies towards homeless residents by occupying space on the sidewalk near City Hall.  Because I frequently spend time in the area I’d noted his presence long before the media and found it far less disruptive than other sidewalk activities.  Some examples include:

• People queuing up to patronize sidewalk vendors,
• Young people “hooping” (employing hula hoops),
• Intoxicated individuals loudly greeting one another and conducting their affairs, and
• Bicyclers apparently ignorant of laws prohibiting riding on sidewalks downtown.

Having observed Mr. Martin many, many times I have never heard him raise his voice, seen him interfere with anyone’s passage or otherwise accost an individual.  In fact, I actually took a few minutes to speak with him (he was quite courteous, and I doubt he knows I’m on the Assembly) and learned that he’d like to speak with the mayor regarding his concerns about homelessness and get some assurance that as we work to eradicate homeless camps in our parks we provide some place for those folks to go.  That makes some sense, so why the kerfuffle?

First off, let’s recall that the administration officials seeking to make Mr. Martin’s sit-in illegal are the same folks who repeatedly lost court battles over ordinances seeking to eradicate homeless camps.  This despite my efforts to find common ground between the administration’s position and the ACLU.  In the end the administration’s intransigence cost taxpayers more than $90k in legal fees to the ACLU’s lawyers, goodness-knows-how-many MOA attorney hours, roughly a year’s delay in enforcement and resulted in a law far more liberal than any lawmaker had previously proposed.

Second, when the administration capitulated to the ACLU’s standards I cautioned that enforcement was only one part of the issue – we had to work with service providers, particularly in the more-efficient non-profit sector, to help break the cycle of homelessness.  Instead, the opposite has occurred.  Not only has the municipality’s support of non-profits declined over the past two years (though the Assembly has restored some of the most draconian administration-proposed cuts), but the administration’s ill-considered attack on the fire department’s “Fill-the-boot” campaign cast a chill over municipal employee volunteerism as evidenced by an anemic 2010 Share campaign (the city’s version of a United Way workforce campaign).  I’m told employee efforts were severely curtailed following the administration’s new policy, meaning that many municipal employees were never given an in-person opportunity to make a contribution, and the numbers bear this out.  The 2009 campaign saw pledges of $145,077.17, which dropped to $53,361.00 in 2010 following new administration restrictions.

Third, what about the mayor’s homelessness leadership task force?  Well, we’ve adopted the cold weather ordinance, which allows churches to house the homeless during cold snaps without the more-lengthy permit process associated with homeless shelters.  And there is a “wet housing” facility underway (though in the wrong location).  But every other recommendation, including the one where we provide more housing options prior to closing down camps, has fallen on deaf ears.

Finally, let’s talk about leadership.  Administration officials tout the concept of non-profits aiding the community so it’s worth asking if they walk that talk.  I reviewed the United Way of Anchorage’s recently-issued Leadership Giving 2010 booklet, which thanks those who’ve donated $1,000 or more, and searched it for names of senior administration officials and Assembly members.  I’ll note that there are many worthy charitable organizations in our community and the United Way is just one among them, but I’d argue that there’s no single-entity that brings a more holistic approach to resolving homelessness issues.  Ready for the count?

Four (of eleven) Assembly members gave at a leadership level in 2010.  Two (of about 30 I searched for) senior administration officials gave at a leadership level in 2010 (and neither has an “S” in their initials).

So the administration is free to propose whatever laws they see fit, and they might even come up with one that passes constitutional muster (hopefully without spending another small fortune on attorney’s fees), but it’d be nice to see those efforts aimed at providing help for those who need it.  And, if you don’t like Mr. Martin’s appearance or behavior, please recall that the average homeless person is about nine years old.

Regards,

Patrick