Soglin’s Anti-Poverty Plan

Pat Schneider did a good article on Soglin and his anti-poverty plan. The Mayor is sounding a little defensive, which is a bummer, because like I said, he should just explain his plan. He has bits and pieces. Let’s take a look.

Ok, first let me say . . . I said a whole lot more than made it in the article. I’m always intrigued by what reporters and editors choose to keep and what to toss. I sound pretty critical in the article, but I said positive things too, they just didn’t make it into the article.

Second, people ask me if I’m disappointed in the Mayor. I’m not, he’s doing exactly what I expected. That’s the thing about Soglin, he’s still Soglin and you generally know what to expect. When I endorsed him, I knew there would be things we were going to need to agree to disagree on. I knew he would not be good on housing and homelessness issues. That’s why I didn’t endorse him 8 years earlier. Unfortunately, this last time around, both Soglin and Cieslewicz were both not good on housing and homelessness issues. But given that they were both not great on these issues, overall, Paul Soglin was better. And even when is came to housing, homelessness and poverty – well, at least he talked about it as an issue. He knows something needs to be done and doesn’t just ignore the issues. We might disagree on the solutions, but at least we agree its an issue that needs to be addressed instead of focusing on how to make Madison cool for hipsters and yuppies. So, I don’t regret my support of him because he is bad on homelessness issues. Or hasn’t got a perfect poverty plan. He’s still better than the alternative on these issues that are very important to me. And on just about everything else, he’s better as well. I know that is not what people expect me to say, but overall, Madison is better with him in the Mayor’s office than his predecessor.

Ok, so, let’s take a look at his plan . . . as much as we can piece together from an article in a newspaper.

UNFORTUNATE, OFFENSIVE LANGUAGE
The first thing we have to address is his offensive language when talking about poor people. His lifeboat analogy and admission that some people are just going to drown is mind blowing. He’s basically given up and admitted that he can’t solve poverty issues. While that might be realistic, it sure wasn’t very diplomatic. And, to those who he essentially told he has given up on, that was an extremely hurtful and stunning thing to say. Imagine being told that you weren’t good enough to spend time trying to save – or that you randomly weren’t going to make it. Or that you should just go back from where you came from – even if you came from Madison, or Dane County or Wisconsin. The stereotypes were just stunning from a seasoned politician.

The other thing that Soglin repeats often sounds racist. When he talks about people, he uses what people call “code for racism” when he says that people come from Chicago or Milwaukee. Most people hear that and think that means that black people are going to move here. And that is what Soglin is afraid of.

I’m also just stunned by his continued connection of poverty to crime. If nearly 1 in 5 people in Madison are in poverty, does that mean nearly 1 in 5 people are criminals. No, of course it doesn’t. But, he can’t talk about poverty without talking about crime as if it is the same thing. One of he most offensive comments I have heard, and perhaps because it effects me personally, is how he assumes that because someone is carrying needles that they are doing heroin. He doesn’t seem to realize there are legitimate, medical reasons for using needles. Instead of recognizing a need and complications of being homeless and having medical issues, he assume the worst. Yes, there were diabetics on the Occupy site that used needles. That doesn’t mean they were using heroin. And, when homeless, where do you dispose of those medical items? Grrr . . . I digress, but that one really gets me.

I don’t know what to say about these comments. Sadly, none of this is new. I’m shocked he continues to say them, but I don’t feel like its not things he hasn’t said before. The comments are blatantly and hurtfully offensive. It’s not very progressive thinking, and its why so many people couldn’t understand how I could endorse him. I’ve answered tons of questions about this from my progressive friends, but I stand by what I said above, Mayor Dave was not better on these issues, and Soglin is so much better on so many other things, so overall, he was the best candidate . . . despite a major and unfortunate flaw.

ARTICULATE YOUR PLAN
I see bits and pieces of a plan, I see him working on things that could address poverty here and there. I don’t think he is ignoring the issue, I think its not his top priority, but its on his mind. And like I said, that a major step forward from the last administration that wanted to just ignore it. From the article

“We need him to articulate what his plan is and show a vision,” says former City Council member Brenda Konkel, who, as an activist and executive director of the nonprofit Tenant Resource Center, tracks local housing and homelessness issues closely. “There may be pieces floating around, and if it were put together and presented as a package, we could say, ‘here’s what’s missing.’ But until that’s done, you can’t really discuss it,” Konkel tells me.

That sums it up as well I guess I could. Now, instead of getting defensive and making snarky comments about a press conference, he could just lay out his plan. And why he doesn’t is also confusing. He could just sum up all the pieces. Perhaps he doesn’t because its not a complete plan, but he could outline steps he will take to complete the plan. He’s had a year and a half to think about it, he must have some thoughts and ideas. Saying he is “laying the groundwork” seems a little goofy given how much he talked about it during the campaign and then just dropped it when elected.

SIDENOTE: KONKEL CURRENTLY BARRED FROM TALKING TO THE MAYOR
I had a meeting set up to talk to the Mayor about his thoughts on “housing, homelessness and poverty”. I wanted to ask him what his plan was. That meeting was cancelled, I was given the excuse that someone unexpectedly came from out of town that he needed to squeeze into his schedule. But then . . . the city attorney called me last week and said that the he has advised the mayor that he can’t talk to me until the Occupy lawsuit is resolved “because you are too close to Occupy”. So, you might think I could just ask the mayor . . . well, I tried. More on this later. *Huge, gigantic, exaggerated eyeroll*

THE PLAN PIECED TOGETHER
First of all, he gets the basics right by saying that we need to address housing, transportation, child care, health care, education and jobs. All of the issues have to work together and looking at it holistically is a start. Great start.

Second, if we are going back to the “moving poverty around” strategy from his last administration, I’m very disappointed. That strategy goes like this, send in the police to “blanket” the neighborhood. Yeah, remember the “blue blanket”. Arrest and intimidate everyone you can. Get the landlords to evict as many people as possible. If the landlords don’t cooperate, threaten to take their properties – evicting the tenants. Take legal action to get buildings, or the CDA condemnation powers. Then tear down the housing, build new housing, increase the screening standards so people can’t move back in to their old apartments and then they move to the next “challenged” neighborhood. Rename the neighborhood! Problem solved! Problem moved . . . and we do it again! Somerset (Parker Place) -> Broadway-Simpson (Lakepoint) -> Vera Court – > Allied Drive (Revival Ridge, barf)-> and round and round we go. (I might have gotten that slightly out of order . . . but you get the point.)

Third, neighborhood approach is good. He gets it half right here. I support revamping the Neighborhood Resource Teams and making them more transparent and effective. But I’m still not sure I totally understand what he’s doing, partially because the communication on this has been less than I expected given that our non-profit group United for Funding specifically met with him about this and his staff was supposed to follow up and that has been virtually non-existant. But I’ll give the neighborhood resource teams a chance . . . but then it goes horribly wrong . . .see the comment about crime, see above . . . and other comment about old strategies directly above . . .

poverty has to be confronted neighborhood-by-neighborhood — rather than family-by-family — so residents can pull together to take a stand against an “onslaught” of drug use and crime and related problems. “That’s the strategy we’ve used in the past and it’s worked and it’s the strategy we’ll use in the future.”

Fourth, efforts to collaborate with the Madison Metropolitan School District – yup good idea. We need the specifics tho.

Fifth, promote greater efficiencies by private nonprofit social service agencies. This one irks me. After years and years of less than cost of living increases if any, a growing population and growing numbers of people in poverty I’m not sure that meaner, leaner and smarter is really what we need. It think we are there! At least most of us are. (Currently, the biggest issue facing the Tenant Resource Center is “what happens if Brenda leaves” – our salary and lack of retirement benefits will not attract a qualified person. And our salaries for the rest of staff are not keeping pace with the market.)

He also talks about having a more organized system. Well, I don’t think that is the non-profits. It think that is all on the city – the city needs clear goals and strategies that they want the non-profits to implement. The Community Development Division should lay that out with input from the community and the City Council needs to stop ducking the issue and take it on. Otherwise, it will be ad hoc as non-profits come up with proposals that they think are good for the areas they are working in, but aren’t connected to the larger picture. I don’t mind if the mayor thinks the non-profits should “re-examine” themselves, but to what end? Stapped budgets can only produce so much. And how much money are they willing to invest in that process while we are taken away from our mission driven work?

Sixth, fresh, healthy food into low-income neighborhoods. Yup, good idea. However, just realize, the healthy poor people, are still poor people. Food carts, farmers’ markets and community and pantry gardens are still good ideas tho! Its good as a piece of the strategy and it helps build community.

Seventh, bring the city’s housing policy up to speed. We need a plan, a strategy. Also good, but what’s taking so freaking long? And the trickle down theory . . . as we know, means trickled on . . .

An adequate supply of housing in the current market — marked by falling home values, tight mortgage funds, and few apartment vacancies — is best attained by promoting development of new rental units, he says. And even though that new construction typically is marketed for the higher end of the market, the migration of tenants that follows frees up older units for lower-income families, and having those units in good shape helps keep a neighborhood stable.

Getting dripped on?

WHAT’S MISSING?
Jobs? I’m glad he’s not jumping on the throw-subsidies-at-businesses bandwagon. What is needed is job development and follow up and maybe the Mayor is leaving that to MATC, but its seems missing.

Transportation? It could be coming with the housing policy if done right. Meanwhile, they are eliminating bus stops . . . more on that later.

Childcare?

Healthcare?

Not sure. And that’s using his own formula. I really think the should be a committee (sigh) that comes up with a comprehensive strategy – the studies are all done, no more research, but an action plan for the city. Or it has to be assigned to an existing committee (Community Services? Community Development Block Grant Committee? Community Development Authority?)

And worst of all, our segregated city – we have two Madisons, that, as Soglin points out, rarely intersects:

A lot of people living in Madison don’t realize how deeply poverty is affecting the city, he says. “Take someone over 50, who doesn’t have kids in the public schools and travels in a crowd of professional and skilled workers, they’re not likely to see this. Unless they live in a neighborhood that is transitioning, they don’t get it.”

Ahem, that describes our former Mayor on this issue . . . but how did that happen? One problem, our long-ignored, lack of housing policy!

So, again, overall, I’m glad the mayor is talking about this. Or at least was during the campaign. He’s got some antiquated ideas and has to work on how he talks about issues and needs to explore some areas where he just gets it wrong and has to be open to new innovative ideas . . . but I still don’t regret endorsing him . . . now, if I could just talk to him! grrrrr . . . . giggle. Seriously?