This piece is part of Yellow Scene Magazine’s Opinion section. The views expressed here are those of the author, and do not represent a reported news position. At Yellow Scene, opinion pieces speak freely, challenge assumptions, and say the quiet parts out loud.

“Hello, how are you?”

My mind’s eye can’t erase the image from a recent newscast. A piece of heavy machinery with a gaping steel claw was crunching, lifting, and depositing an entire “homeless encampment,” as the newscast termed it, into a waiting dump truck. This, in our nation’s capital, where a National Guardsman also scolded a Black man smoking on his stoop. “President Trump doesn’t like that!”

“Quality of life,” they call it.  

In 19 years of living in New York City, unhoused folks were part of the general ambiance. I use that phrase because most New Yorkers strode past on their important missions without so much as a sidelong glance. Not once in 19 years did an unhoused person present a threat, although prudence suggested a slightly wider berth given to one in a clearly manic state.

For most of these years, one man frequented the corner of 80th and Broadway, site of the famous Zabar’s. He never asked for anything. His psychosis inhibited interaction. I passed the corner several times almost every day and always said, “Hello, how are you?”  I can’t know if my greeting registered, although, on better days, he made fleeting eye contact.

This was my wife’s and my practice as we moved through the city, accompanied by a dollar or two when asked.  The practice was not noble. It was the easiest sort of kindness. The lowest level of human expectation is to be noticed. At least we noticed.

The crunching of the encampment saddened and infuriated me. “Homeless encampment” is a telling oxymoron. An encampment is a home, as surely as Trump’s garish 5th Avenue apartment is a home. Such a home may house a family, or companions in desperate straits, along with whatever artifacts of a former life might remain. Humans eat and sleep there, and in more cases than one might think, dress small children and send them to school. Crunched, lifted and gone.

Since moving to Colorado in 2017, the unhoused remain in our consciousness. Our son and his partner worked with unhoused youth for most of these years. Being adjacent to this work further acquainted us with the sad realities of youth who find themselves alone and desperate. Loving them is sometimes hard, but always necessary.

We see the man in a wheelchair at the entrance to Whole Foods on Pearl Street, head covered as meager protection from the blistering heat. Or the woman with several children at 29th and Walnut, hoping to elicit a small offering from Target or Lululemon shoppers. Few cars come to a full stop. Fewer still slip a bill or coin through a window. One family created a home beneath a few trees by the Safeway at Arapahoe and 287. 

Root causes are manyfold: Unemployment, eviction, domestic violence, mental and/or physical illness, racism, homophobia, addiction . . . or some compounding combination thereof. The steady erosion of energy and spirit that afflicts the unhoused makes recovery much more difficult over time. 

This has never been a particularly kind society. The mythical attribute of rugged individualism distorts our social policy. Victim-blaming, bootstrap-pulling, and lies about equal opportunity give permission to think we deserve what we get and get what we deserve, Neither phrase is true. While hard work is a virtue, it plays second fiddle to the duet of inherited privilege and whiteness. Places like Boulder County are filled with folks who were born on third base and think they hit triples.

The Trump administration has enshrined cruelty as national policy. Such policies create the very pockets of despair that they then crunch in the steel jaws of authoritarianism. Escaping these jaws will require organized resistance, policy initiatives and political strength. 

But along with these macro efforts, every person can counter cruelty with kindness. 

My wife and I spend a great deal of time driving our grandchildren here and there, Uber-grandparents in the several meanings of that phrase. If we slip into a Boulder County version of Manhattanites in an important hurry, one or both of them will implore us to go back so that they can get out of the car with a dollar or two. 

“Hello, how are you?” may have a greater impact than you will ever know.

Support the local press that’s been telling the truth for 25 years. Become a sustaining member and get our monthly print edition at home. We’ve weathered 9/11, floods, fires, economic crashes—and some deeply chaotic years. With your support, we’ll keep going. Because democracy still depends on journalism.

The post Nelson’s Corner “Hello, how are you?” appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

A high court ruling on a lawsuit originating from Grants Pass, Oregon, could effectively decide a similar lawsuit in Boulder, with major implications for how cities address homeless encampments.

By John Herrick, Boulder Reporting Lab (Via AP Storyshare)

A Boulder County District Court judge has paused a lawsuit challenging the City of Boulder’s camping ban while the U.S. Supreme Court considers a similar civil rights case stemming from Grants Pass, Oregon. The ruling from the nation’s highest court could have major implications for how cities across the country respond to encampments in public spaces amid rising homelessness.

The Boulder lawsuit seeks to halt enforcement of an ordinance that allows city officers to ticket homeless people for sleeping in public spaces when shelter is not accessible.

The case, filed by the ACLU of Colorado in May 2022 on behalf of several homeless people and a local nonprofit, Feet Forward, alleges that the city violated protections against cruel and unusual punishment in the Colorado Constitution by issuing citations to homeless people when they had nowhere else to sleep but in public spaces, among other allegations.

The legal dispute is a flashpoint in a broader debate over how the City of Boulder addresses rising homelessness and its associated impacts on public spaces. In November 2023, voters passed a ballot measure that amended city code to make tents and propane tanks near schools, sidewalks or multi-use paths “subject to prioritized removal.”

The Boulder lawsuit is currently scheduled for a trial in August 2024.

However, on April 10, 2024, Boulder County District Court Judge Robert R. Gunning issued an order halting proceedings on the case until the U.S. Supreme Court reaches a decision on a related case involving a similar ordinance in Grants Pass. The order means that neither side in the City of Boulder lawsuit will be able to file motions for discovery or request depositions for several months.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling on the Grants Pass case in June or early July, at which point the local lawsuit could proceed. Gunning said the Supreme Court ruling on the Grants Pass case could provide important precedent and “hold tremendous weight” in shaping a ruling on the Boulder case.

The Grants Pass lawsuit, Johnson v. City of Grants Pass, was filed in 2018 and alleges the city violated Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment by citing homeless people for sleeping in public spaces when they could not access shelter.

The Supreme Court held a hearing on the lawsuit on Monday, April 22. The questions posed by justices suggested that the court is relatively divided on the case. Much of the debate centered on whether homelessness is considered a state of being or form of conduct, and therefore, whether people can be punished for violating local ordinances that prohibit sleeping in public spaces.

Liberal justices appeared to side with the plaintiffs. For instance, Justice Elena Kagan said sleeping is a biological necessity, implying that people should not be punished for it. “Sleeping in public is kind of like breathing in public,” she said. By contrast, Chief Justice John Roberts offered an analogy involving someone who is hungry and in need of food. “If someone is hungry and no one is giving him food, can you prosecute him if he breaks into a store to get something to eat?” he asked a lawyer for the plaintiffs. Roberts also questioned whether the nine justices should be making “policy judgements” typically reserved for cities.

A ruling by the Supreme Court is unlikely to entirely resolve the case in Boulder. The Boulder lawsuit is based on similar civil rights protections in the Colorado Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution. That said, the wording regarding cruel and unusual punishment is similar.

The City of Boulder, which filed the motion to stay proceedings on the local lawsuit, said the Supreme Court’s decision will have a “dispositive impact on the validity of Plaintiffs’ remaining claim.” The plaintiffs argued the stay will “interfere with ongoing discovery that is critical to the timely resolution of this case.”

The City of Boulder spends about $3 million per year clearing out encampments of homeless people and cleaning up public spaces.

At least 171 people are experiencing homelessness in the City of Boulder, according to a point-in-time count by the city in July 2023. That number is likely higher, as people are often turned away from the city’s main shelter in North Boulder, which has a capacity of about 180 during certain severe weather conditions.

The post Boulder camping ban lawsuit is paused as judge awaits U.S. Supreme Court ruling appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

In an unprecedented election season, the spotlight has been seized by proposed legislation on safety risks related to homelessness, the polarizing Safe Zones 4 Kids ballot initiative that both the Daily Camera and the Boulder Weekly have come out against. 

I was excited to research this article comparing policy positions of Safe Zones 4 Kids (SZ4K) and No on 302, a group I support. [This has been added back in from the original draft to disclose the author’s position]

Boulder psychiatrist and SZ4K spokesperson Jennifer Rhodes described 302 as a simple, straightforward matter of protecting schoolchildren by strengthening existing policy: “302 is a one sentence addendum to an existing ordinance, BRC 8-3-21, that would compel the city to give higher priority to schools and the pathways kids use to get to school when the city does the work of removing prohibited items, as defined by 8-3-21.” 

SZ4K, whose endorsers include Safer Boulder and PLAN-Boulder County, denied that 302 targets the unhoused. However, the ballot measure refers specifically to the controversial camping ban (BRC 8-3-21) established in 2021, an enforcement-based response to homeless encampments, a long-standing conundrum in Boulder that has never before been voted on. Homelessness has come to the fore because, as Andy Sayler of No on 302 pointed out, “the homeless rates have increased substantially over the last few years in a very visible manner. None of us walk around Boulder and go, like, things are going great. There’s people camping along the creek path!”

The No on 302 campaign, endorsed by organizations such as Boulder County NAACP and Boulder Progressives, acknowledges the reality of safety risks near paths and schools due to the actions of a very small percentage of unhoused people, particularly in the downtown area near the Boulder Creek Path and Boulder High School. They argue that the initiative will not effectively address such risks and that there is much to unpack in that single sentence on the ballot.

Not Simple?

Katie Farnan of the No on 302 campaign pointed to the language specifying the removal of “prohibited items, such as tents, temporary structures, or propane tanks” — equipment associated with homeless encampments—“within five hundred feet of a school or fifty feet of any multi-use path or sidewalk.” 

Farnan shared with me the City of Boulder’s “threat matrix” by which encampments are ranked in priority for clearing. Currently, the only category that ranks higher in priority than proximity to waterways (“x4”) and schools (“x4”) is threats of violence (“x5”), and, importantly, not everything that qualifies for removal gets cleared. 

According to 302’s opponents, this means that the change in policy would punish encampments for location more than for dangerous behavior. Winning the vote would enshrine the policy in law so that it is more difficult to change. Opponents like No on 302 organizer Aidan Reed are “not sure if that measurably reduces public crime. It does in the moment, perhaps. But over the long term, you’ve moved it along,” and on this point opponents mention cities like Chico, CA. No on 302’s Sayler added, “when you’re taking away the place they’re currently living without giving them any other place to go, you’re not really solving any problem, you’re just shuffling the problem around. It’s ineffective, but it is, unfortunately, the strategy the City has been pursuing and the strategy that Safe Zones helps to put additional political force behind.”

Ballot initiative 302 is as much about city politics as visible homelessness. Sayler described how there’s a “high correlation” between positions on 302 and the current high-stakes face-off between conservative and progressive candidates in city elections: “we’re electing a mayor, we’re electing four Council seats. Those five new people are really going to be the ones that drive Council’s position going forward.” No on 302 is interested in “making sure we have folks in those seats that are really interested in addressing this issue via effective, data-driven practices and a willingness to experiment.”

Although Rhodes of SZ4K stated that “a person not being housed does not alone pose a threat to public safety,” No on 302 said the law would respond as if it did. “Safe Zones wants to say that it doesn’t matter what an encampment is doing, it matters where it is,” Farnan explained. 

Indeed, as Rhodes of SZ4K stated, “302 changes the when and where, not the work that is done.” For Farnan, “that is basically criminalizing an entire group of people for being homeless.” Douglas Hamilton of No on 302 described the ballot initiative as “dehumanizing,” adding that “when you start to dehumanize folks, then anything’s possible. ” 

Perhaps both groups can agree that SZ4K 302 is “simple and straightforward.” To the No on 302 campaign it’s simply “a referendum on homelessness.”

Not about Safety? 

In addition to the safety of schoolchildren, the stakes of 302 include the safety of unhoused people — the real victims of homelessness — and how their plight can destabilize safety in a community.

Particularly in extreme cold and heat, the harm of being unhoused, which usually means lacking adequate healthcare, is very great, not to mention the shocking rates of sexual violence experienced by homeless women. 

“The unhoused are, by far, disproportionately the primary victims of crimes by the unhoused,” explained Reed, adding that this is why many unhoused people avoid shelters and prefer to camp. It can be difficult to keep these facts in mind when a person suffering from homelessness is behaving in an odd or menacing way, Reed said. Rhodes of SZ4K explained, “vulnerable people experiencing substance use disorders, mental health crises as well as being unsheltered who openly use drugs and experience instability in our public spaces pose safety concerns to themselves and the general public.” 

On top of that, according to No on 302, clearing encampments further disrupts the daily lives of homeless people, rendering them even more vulnerable, because they often have nowhere else to go. In the perspective of No no 302’s Hamilton, “this type of legislation is immoral” and would make Boulder “actually less safe,” as with other cities like Portland, OR.

As No on 302’s Reed pointed out, “leading with enforcement, leading with encampment clearings has a disproportionate impact on people of color.” African Americans are particularly overrepresented among the unhoused by comparison with numbers in the population.

Not about Kids?

Camping is already illegal in public space, propane tanks are already prohibited, and dangerous items are removed immediately if reported. So, opponents argue, in what way will kids be more protected? “I don’t really see how it actually measurably improves public health or safety,” said Reed.  For opponents, if 302 would merely push encampments to other areas, such as the Pearl Street pedestrian mall, the foothills, and neighborhoods like Goss-Grove and University Hill, heightening the risk of fire and sanitation issues affecting everyone, including kids.

SZ4K’s rhetoric about saving the children, explained Sayler, is an age-old tactic: “From a political standpoint, no one wants to take the position of doing something that’s bad for kids. Homeless or unhoused individuals in Boulder County are not even in the top ten set of risks to children right now. Similarly, on the trans front, trans individuals are not a risk to children. It’s a false political narrative that’s being deployed.”

What’s more, 302’s opponents said, 302 is clearly not limited to an effort to protect school kids. They add that, by including sidewalks and multi-use paths within safe zones, 302 covers around 80% of the city. As Sayler put it: “you’ve suddenly rolled up a huge amount of the city into this measure, the vast majority of which has nothing to do with schools.”

To these criticisms SZ4K responded, “the language of the ballot item includes the words ‘subject to’ prioritized removal. These words give the city the necessary latitude to use best practices based on real time risk assessments. In other words, not all sidewalks at all times all at once will be prioritized – like the opposition is disingenuously contending. Also the language says ‘multi-use pathways OR sidewalks’ not AND sidewalks. Even if the ordinance included only the words, ‘multi-use pathways,’ sidewalks would still be included according to the City attorney.” The City Attorney stated in an email, they will not comment on “a legal interpretation of a pending ballot item.”

Perhaps the most important criticism of 302 rests on the understanding that many unhoused people are children, and they are the kids harmed most by homelessness. Thus, according to opponents, the ballot initiative fails in its most central claim: protecting kids from harm. On average, there are just under 400 homeless kids in Boulder, and the number rises sharply following public emergencies like the Marshall Fire.

Children who are housed can also be negatively impacted by enforcement-based responses to homelessness. No on 302’s Farnan, who has spent many hours with her kids volunteering for local homeless aid organizations, sees 302’s approach as not just harmful to homeless people but a poor example for children, teaching them to dehumanize the unhoused. Kids, she says, learn what to think, feel, and do — and how to solve problems — from watching what adults are doing. Farnon said that 302, in effect, “is pitting groups against each other, pitting students against homeless people, and then asking voters to choose. I think it’s bad policy.”

A Question of Capacity

No on 302 recognizes that voters are frustrated with the amount of visible homelessness in Boulder despite the camping ban. Reed argued — paraphrasing Police Chief Maris Herold’s remarks at the September 7, 2023, City Council meeting — that the real problem is capacity: “right now our jail is full. They’re still dealing with COVID-era backlogs.” There is also a severe shortage of mental health professionals to provide services in the jail. 

Rhodes of SZ4K focuses on the resources already mobilized, claiming that Boulder taxpayers spend “more per capita than any other municipality in the county for sheltering and other supportive services like Boulder Shelter for the Homeless.” Rhodes argued that 302 would utilize existing resources without diverting funds from other programs or increasing spending. For the No on 302 campaign, avoiding budget increases is not the point. Reed sees a need for clarity about the resources and services available by comparison with the demand.

With respect to the issue of capacity, some might argue that Ballot Initiative 302 is overly simple. Rhodes may be correct in claiming that 302 “has no budget implications of any kind and really is little different from current enforcement practices, other than in the timing of removal of prohibited items.” However, according to No on 302, reprioritizing the use of enforcement funds and Boulder’s limited services would have serious material impacts, with unhoused people suffering more, even those who are not hurting anyone. 

“We Want the Same Thing”

“We both want solutions. We welcome the engagement about solutions,” Rhodes of SZ4K said. Hamilton of No on 302 summarizes how every parent feels, across the political spectrum: “I have two children in middle school, one is going to be in the high school next year. I care about their safety, and I don’t want them to be in dangerous places.” As Rhodes puts it, “One would think this is something we, as a community, would care to address.”

In Hamilton’s opinion, the yes-or-no decision-making of electoral politics may not lead to an answer: “The way electoral politics is set up is an us-versus-them mentality. And I truly don’t see the proponents of this measure as anything but human beings trying to do what they think is best for the community. How do we have a full community conversation? Homeless people need to be in this. Everyone needs to be in this conversation, as a community.” Similarly, No on 302’s Sayler said, “What I would like to see done isn’t actually on the ballot. The only way we’re going to make progress on this front is to be willing to try things and then look at whether or not they’re working and try something different.” 

Organizers of No on 302 emphasized that regardless of the outcome of the vote, they have ideas for how community conversations might move forward, and they know it won’t be easy. As Farnan summarized: “people are frustrated. People don’t want to have visible public camping in their spaces, where they believe everybody should have the freedom to use those spaces. But 302 is nothing more than a frustration channel. It’s not going to reduce homelessness. It’s not going to enhance our safety.”

When it comes to solving the problem of homelessness, said Farnan, “We could have started somewhere else, we should have started somewhere else.”

Like journalism like this? Consider becoming a sustaining supporter (and get our printed copy monthly at home.)

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

Democracy needs journalism more than ever. We’ve been telling the truth for 24 years. Your support helps us keep telling it for at least the next four years.

The post Ballot Initiative 302: A Tale of Two Boulders appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Editor’s Note: Press Releases are provided to Yellow Scene. In an effort to keep our community informed, we publish some press releases in whole.

Changing homelessness because it changed us.

Who: The nonprofit Feet Forward

What: A Thanksgiving meal for anyone in need

When: Thursday, November 24, 2022, 3:00 PM

Where: Boulder Bandshell, 1212 Canyon Blvd Boulder

Why: Feet Forward is the only area nonprofit offering a Thanksgiving meal to anyone in need Thanksgiving Day. Media is invited to come take photos and learn more about this organization and the charitable work they do to help the unhoused. Over 200 people will be served a warm meal by local volunteers.

About: 

Contact Nicole Perelman –  cell 415-385-2283 – for more details

The post Media Advisory: Feet Forward Feeds the Homeless in Boulder Thanksgiving Day appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Editor’s Note: Press Releases are provided to Yellow Scene. In an effort to keep our community informed, we publish some press releases in whole.

City and partners rehouse 359 households, including 597 individuals

DENVER – Friday, May 20, 2022 – Utilizing an infusion of additional federal resources resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, Denver concluded its second 100-day housing surge earlier this month to rehouse persons experiencing homelessness. A total of 359 households, including 597 individuals, were placed into housing.

“Denver’s network of shelter services partners do an incredible job, day in and day out, at delivering house keys and a brighter future for individuals facing episodes of homelessness,” said Mayor Michael B. Hancock. “With two successful housing surges behind us, we’re not only placing more people into housing, we’re also fostering innovations that will make a lasting impact going forward.”

Just over 100 days ago, Mayor Hancock and the Department of Housing Stability (HOST) launched the surge with a goal to get 400 households experiencing homelessness housed in 100 days. While the effort fell slightly short of meeting this stretch goal, gains were made over the first surge held last fall. Twenty-one more people were housed as compared to the first round, including a significant number of individuals who moved from unsheltered homelessness to housing. Case managers and street outreach teams placed a total of 90 households into housing from settings that included Safe Outdoor Spaces, unauthorized encampments and other unsheltered locations, exceeding their goal of 75 unsheltered households.

The housing surge expedited the city’s work with partners to connect people living in shelters and on the streets with housing utilizing new housing resources. The city worked with Emergency Housing Vouchers, rapid resolution, rapid rehousing, and permanent supportive housing providers.

A broad coalition of nonprofit and homeless service partners worked on the housing surge, with the support and coordination of Metro Denver Homeless Initiative, Community Solutions, and Homebase. The city also leveraged the voter-approved Homelessness Resolution Fund to expand an existing contract with the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless to provide housing units from their own portfolio and to help identify private landlords willing to participate. The housing surge is part of Mayor Hancock’s economic recovery package.

For more information on other housing resources available to Denver households, visit Denvergov.org/housing.

The post Denver Moves Hundreds of People from Homelessness to Housing Over 100-Day Surge Effort appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

By Amanda Horvat

Editor’s note: This story was originally published by NEWS | ROCKY MOUNTAIN PBS and was shared via AP StoryShare. It was originally written by Amanda Horvath. Amanda Horvath is the managing producer with Rocky Mountain PBS.

CENTENNIAL, Colo. — The end of the school year comes with a lot of pride for students; they’ve made it through another year with a lot of accomplishments and learning under their belts. But few students have tangible examples of their hard work from throughout the year.

“Being able to bring people to see our work is just, like, the most satisfying thing ever,” said 16-year-old Zayla Macias, a sophomore at Smoky Hill High School.

Macias is also part of hands-on construction classes at Cherry Creek Innovation Campus (CCIC). This campus is part of the Cherry Creek School District and acts as a real-world training ground, providing Career Technical Education classes for all sorts of careers including construction. For Macias taking classes here was a dream come true.

“I felt super lucky when I got accepted into here; I felt like I got accepted into Harvard and I was like, ‘Oh my gosh!’” Macias explained to Rocky Mountain PBS.

At an event on the morning of Tuesday, April 19, Macias proudly posed in front of one of the five “tiny homes” that she helped build over the last eight months. She smiled for the camera, then showed off the aspects of the large workshop and tiny homes to her dad and stepmother.

“They were really supportive, and they were really excited when they found out that I wanted to kind of step into this area,” said Macias.

These five tiny homes not only fill Macias and her 35 to 40 classmates up with a sense of accomplishment, but this project also connects with them on a human level.

“That’s probably one of the main reasons why I signed up for this class because it’s such a good cause. And I just like knowing that these homes are going to help, like, so many people,” said Macias.

These five tiny homes are going to the nonprofit Colorado Village Collaborative. The organization works to build a bridge between “the streets and stable housing by creating and operating transformational housing communities” with people experiencing homelessness. The Colorado Village Collaborative does this by creating tiny home villages, including the first one created called the Beloved Community Village. The Beloved Community Village currently has 19 tiny homes and will receive these five new tiny homes built by the students and teachers at CCIC at its new location, which later this month.

“We’re also trying to push things upstream and push larger social change, and that happens through education,” said Cole Chandler, the executive director of Colorado Village Collaborative. “So, kids having the opportunity to learn about this housing crisis while they’re in their education program and getting to actually get hands on and do something about it, we think is really valuable.”

[Related: This tiny home village finds success in transitional housing]

Chandler was among the dozens of people who joined the “sendoff party” for the tiny homes Tuesday morning. All parents, teachers and industry partners were there to see the impressive build from these students — a fulfilled mission in the eyes of Mike Degitis.

“I said, ‘I’m going to teach kids the things that matter, you know, things that are going make them successful in their career,’” Degitis said about his transition from “typical” math teacher to the applied math teacher and tiny home project coordinator at CCIC.

Degitis has been a part of the collaboration with CCIC and the Colorado Village Collaborative for the last three years. In a previous school year, CCIC built six tiny homes, meaning this year’s builds bring the total up to 11 tiny homes bought by Colorado Village Collaborative.

“We’re all neighbors and we’re all part of the same community,” said Chandler about the current rise in people without stable housing. “Really trying to solve this crisis requires all of us taking action steps. That means putting down housing projects in our neighborhoods and welcoming our neighbors as such.” 

For several of the students who helped build these homes, that mission is exactly what aligns with their personal views, like 18-year-old Jayden Stella, a senior at Eaglecrest High School.

“I’ve always been part of a very strong Christian community, which is all about serving,” said Stella. “I took it to heart because I’ve done service projects pretty much every year, and this is probably the biggest one I’ve ever done, and it hit me straight in the heart. I loved it.” 

Stella’s career passions have been confirmed through this project and has a job offer to do residential electrical work after graduation. And he’s not alone. Macias, a sophomore, plans to return for the higher level building class at CCIC as one of the handful of girls currently in the program.

“I liked the construction unit because it was kind of just something different … And there wasn’t a lot of girls here, so just thought I should step in,” said Macias. “Like, our teachers and everyone just … want women in construction and they want more of us because, I mean, we’re pretty cool.” 

As Macias, Stella and Degitis posed along with their fellow teachers and classmates in front of a finished tiny home, dozens of people took out their phones and cameras to capture the moment — a moment when a group of young adults helped make a difference in people’s lives.

“To know that we can … provide dignified housing, security, warmth and shelter to Denver’s residents that are most in need,” said Degitis “is something that just hits home for us.” 

The post Denver’s Newest Tiny Homes Receive a Big Send-Off From the Students that Built Them appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Correction: The article incorrectly stated Dionne Waugh as Police Chief. Article has been corrected to reflect her role as the Boulder Police Public Information Officer.

On October 11th of 2021, Jessica Aldama and her stillborn child were found on Boulder’s outskirts in open space land off of 5847 Arapahoe Avenue. Five weeks prior, Aldama was issued a ticket in Boulder for possession of a tent and a camping violation. Per Sam Becker, a Boulder freelance writer and researcher, this ticket from the Boulder Police and an additional negative experience with the City’s Homeless Outreach Team forced Aldama to move to a remote area where access to services and health care is mostly unavailable.

Front of ticket issued to Jessica Aldama. Sourced from Darren O’Connor’s Facebook.

In a letter from the Colorado ACLU to the Boulder Police Department (BPD) written on December 23rd, 2021, the ACLU condemned BPD’s use of criminalization of the unhoused. They also call out the City’s misconception that unhoused residents in Boulder are resistant to services or refuse to stay in shelters out of choice. 

“In the past, the City has defended aggressive enforcement of its camping ban by citing the persistence of unused beds at BSH, leveraging that data to advance a harmful narrative that the people on Boulder’s streets are ‘service resistant’ and voluntarily unhoused. But as we pointed out last summer, empty shelter beds were a product of Boulder’s policies of exclusion, not the personal choices of its unhoused residents. Indeed, Homeless Solutions for Boulder County (HSBC) had been unconstitutionally conditioning access to shelter on six months’ prior residency in Boulder County until it received the ACLU’s cautionary letter and reversed course. No longer skewed by HSBC’s discriminatory policy, the City’s data on BSH turn-aways now reflects what has long been true: shelter capacity in Boulder is woefully inadequate to meet community need.”

Yellow Scene Magazine spoke with freelance journalist and researcher, Sam Becker, who initially requested the documents regarding Jessica’s case. Becker is 25 years old and has lived in Boulder for over a year, after graduating from Claremont McKenna College in 2019. After reading about the case of Jessica in Daily Camera, Becker grew interested in the human rights violations committed in Jessica’s specific case. Becker sought to receive access to the files regarding Jessica’s case of being the first to obtain such evidence regarding the “extraordinary” efforts put in by BPD, that were not released in the initial article. 

“Supposedly, police officers were at the scene to check in on Jessica and connect her with services. The reality, of course, is that they ticketed her for having a tent. Jessica should have been taken to the hospital, but for whatever reason, she wasn’t. We know police officers aren’t medical experts. And the services for the unhoused in our community, especially pregnant individuals, are rather nonexistent. Understanding that the city council has tasked police officers to ticket, arrest, and remove unhoused residents for existing makes the situation a little clearer. Based on the records that I requested and then received, the case was not just a routine check-in or encounter. It was another example of how police are enacting this regime of criminalization that the city council has ratcheted up over the last year.”

“I received unredacted body cam footage, but BPD is sending me a redacted version of that footage soon.  In the body cam video, the police officer and the paramedics who eventually showed up were skeptical that both people’s clinic and the hospital could help.”

“There was no conversation about Mother’s House or a shelter that would specifically cater to the needs of Jessica as a woman, let alone a pregnant woman.”

Back of ticket issued to Jessica Aldama. Sourced from Darren O’Connor’s Facebook.

As Becker said, Jessica should have been taken to Boulder Community Health (BCH). Despite the police officers’ and paramedics’ opinion, BCH offers a wide range of prenatal care including family planning. The hospitals website lists the various options pregnant women have and even encourages all people to deliver at BCH. 

“What’s clear is that the police officer who’s questioning her, Officer Morris. The questioning is very harsh. This being the same officer who wrote her a ticket for existing, surviving in a tent. Her demeanor is different than when she’s interacting with the paramedics. She is very quiet and tries to avoid contact and interaction with the police officer. Whereas when she’s talking to the paramedic, she’s much more open, interested in having a dialogue.”

“This interaction shows what experts on homelessness say; police officers can’t both enforce the laws that criminalize homelessness and also try to be social workers for those experiencing homelessness.”

“Based on the interaction she had with this police officer who was making her feel uncomfortable. As someone who was probably already feeling very uncomfortable due to pregnancy issues, it would make sense to remove yourself from that interaction—the area where she was found, that interaction was far less likely to happen. I don’t think there’s any way of knowing for sure.”

“However, based on what experts say, people who have bad interactions with police are more likely to move away from spaces where those sorts of interactions could happen again.”

With most shelters only allowing people to spend the night, it leaves hours exposed to the elements, with no way to seek shelter without criminalization. The Boulder Camping Ban Ordinance is not something that is being affected by shelters capacity, because despite how many people they take in at night, their services cannot offer 24/7 care or shelter. 

“At Boulder Shelter for the Homeless, the majority of people have to leave during the day. There isn’t a day shelter right now. People might want to set up a tent to do something or shelter from the elements, but that isn’t legal under the tent ban. Experts say that this sort of criminalization pushes people away from accepting services, pushes them into sparsely populated areas, like the one where Jessica was found.” 

After thirteen days, YS was given the following statement from Boulder Police Public Information Officer, Dionne Waugh, stating that mental illnesses and addiction tend to be difficult to treat. This statement is rather ironic, with the City’s services for mental health and addiction dwindling over the past year.

“The City of Boulder takes a holistic approach to the complex issues surrounding the unhoused. The police department is one part of that approach. It includes our Homeless Outreach Team (HOT) that is focused on building relationships with homeless individuals–rather than enforcement–and educating them about the different resources offered by the City in hopes that these resources will positively impact their lives. The team also facilitates connecting them with the services for the needs they have and works collaboratively with a number of other homeless resources.

We also have mental health clinicians (CIRT) who work in coordination with the police department to provide direct services and referrals for behavioral health services. We have had some notable successes. However, there are some individuals who are resistant to services for a variety of reasons, and it is their right to decline our help. Some people experiencing homelessness suffer from mental health conditions and/or addiction, which are difficult to treat. Overall, the City’s focus is following the best practices of a housing-first model and has designed a system to that end.”

According to Sam Becker the Homeless Outreach Team that, Waugh mentioned in her response is the same organization that failed to provide Aldama with services. HOT took her to People’s Clinic again, providing no additional care to Aldama such as taking her to a women’s shelter or Boulder Community Health. This secondary interaction was only two weeks after her initial ticketing on September 9th, 2021.

“Members of the homeless outreach team brought her from Deacons Closet to People’s Clinic. There’s a distinction between the Homeless Outreach Team Officers and the Homeless Outreach Team. There are community members who participate in this outreach and service providers. However, again, the reality is that these police officers are first and foremost tasked with upholding the ordinances and laws that the City has enacted. And the social work they do is an afterthought.”

**Update: Boulder Police have indicated on the YS Facebook page that they want it made clear the Homeless Outreach Team does not issue tickets. 

In that distinction being asked of us it is important to note, the Boulder Police Department does. 

On the topic of the city’s “Housing First” approach, Becker had much more to say than city officials, listing the hard statistics on the number of people that this approach works with and for. With the city touting its effectiveness, the numbers tell a different story. The city often forgets to bring up crucial points like shelter requirements for entry such as being sober, which doesn’t happen overnight. 

“Boulder has a ‘Housing-First’ approach. The staff and city council talk about it almost every time they’re asked about homelessness; the reality is it only covers roughly 12% of Boulder’s unhoused population.  A portion of the other 88% stays at Boulder shelter for the homeless, and a very small portion stays at some smaller shelters. A large portion of the 88% of unhoused residents left out of the ‘Housing First’ approach cannot stay at the existing shelters due to various barriers to entry. Whether unhoused folks are at Boulder shelter for the homeless, or other shelters, they are undoubtedly subjected to a regime of criminalization. The camping ban. Propane ban. Which is all heavily enforced by the Boulder Police Department. This regime does nothing but pushes people away from accepting services.”

With the municipal and district courts of Boulder supporting the camping ban, unlike the 9th circuit court case of Martin v. Boise where it was ruled that it is unconstitutional as well as cruel and unusual punishment to ticket the unhoused while sleeping outside if there are no available spaces in city or nonprofit shelters. It doesn’t look like the end of this crisis is at all in sight. With more people dying on the street as temperatures drop and after the recent fires leaving even more unhoused, who knows how the city will proceed or be able to cope. Life in Boulder, for those that are unhoused, will be nothing but tragedy. Just as it always has been with their very existence remaining criminalized, they helplessly watch their friends such as Jessica die around them.

The post Jessica Aldama – The Real Story appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

Original Photo by Paul Wedlake, Graphic Image by De La Vaca

I don’t remember when I met Darren O’Connor. Darren has been a presence for as long as I remember. I have always counted on Darren just being there, helping shape the most important policies – all while advocating for the most vulnerable of our populations. Darren has become a well-known presence throughout the region.

Darren has long been a voice of the unhoused, being a relentless thorn in the City of Boulder’s side. For years he has advocated for them to take a more compassionate approach to helping people. He helped found and serves on the board for the NAACP Boulder County and nonprofit Feet Forward; he recently graduated from law school after leaving a career as a literal rocket scientist, in a quest to help others; and he established his own private practice.

Uncomfortable in front of the camera, Darren was most clearly in his element when we spent time with some unhoused men, talking to them about what they needed. Watching Darren, I knew then why I was drawn to him in the first place. His caring and non-judgmental nature of others, his sincere interest in making life better for all, and his willingness to be a fighting advocate, an Actionist.

Darren tells me he got his start as an activist during the 2009 economic crash and the subsequent housing crisis. People who were following all the rules were still losing their homes. He tells me he started out wanting to do sit-ins and block the police from coming to people’s homes, but it turned out he had to learn the law to help people. When asked what got him started, he tells me; “You know they had crashed the entire economy, and were benefiting from their greed and horrible financing policies all by taking people’s homes.”

He recounts a story where he was showing up to a foreclosure resistance for a grandmother who had lived in her home for 12 years, volunteered in the community and was just asking for some time to catch up. Instead he was met with a SWAT team, facedown with a gun pointed at his head.

Boulder’s “new” park benches,; designed specifically to prevent laying down. Photo by Paul Wedlake

His desire to help people stay in their homes led him toward working on legislation through the Colorado Foreclosure Resistance Coalition and helping start Denver Homeless Out Loud; he credits Terese Howard and others with being the force behind what it is today. He tells me how there used to be shelter through churches in Boulder that anyone could come into so long as they did not create conflict. Sadly, the City of Boulder shut this program down, “Because it was too easy for people to have a safe place to stay.” Darren continues; “Every policy the City of Boulder and the County passes is to make it as hard as possible for the unhoused.”

He tells me that the vast majority of people had a story of a traumatic event that led them to being homeless. That work made him realize that anyone could be homeless, including himself.

“It is emotionally and physically draining work. Basically, when you do this work, it’s not appreciated. You do it because it’s important.”

His advocacy also led to a former state representative, Angela Williams, (who has a history of very friendly relations with the business sect, including strong alliances to Oil and Gas), placing a protection order against him. It was Ms. Williams’ effort that killed a bill designed to protect homeowners from fraudulent banking practices. Ms. Williams represented a community with a 50% foreclosure rate. Darren vowed to show up to every town hall, every legislative session where Ms. Williams was in attendance. He tells me he left his Colorado Foreclosure Resistance Coalition card on her door and asked her to please call him. She responded by filing for a protection order. The protection order she sought against Darren was denied based on his First Amendment rights.

I asked him if this is what led to him deciding to become an attorney. No, it was not the guns pointed at his head, it was not Williams, it was a grandmother in Loveland in foreclosure. She had had a traumatic brain injury and was on a witness protection program as a victim. Her bank had released her name and address and were kicking her out of her home. Through a lot of work, he managed to get both the number for Steve Mnuchin’s office and got the Colorado Attorney General’s Office to work with him. He has the call recorded where it is admitted that this grandmother’s name was shared with her abuser. He was able to use the bank’s error to force a refinance of her home.

Photo by Paul Wedlake

Another event in Boulder, a homeless woman was at the bus station to help her disabled friend get on the bus but was harassed by a security guard for not having a ticket. She explained she was waiting for her friend to arrive and he told her to leave the bus station. When she did not, he tackled this 90-pound woman to the ground, and called the police on her. Darren said that; “At that point I am just crying, because she had to plead guilty to get out of jail. It’s just so f*cking unfair.”

That’s when Darren decided to go to law school. He graduated in 2019 after being able to attend on a full-ride scholarship and today is working to help those who have experienced police brutality and punitive measures for being unhoused. As part of his work with the NAACP he works to craft kinder policies in Boulder. He tells me it’s not just an uphill battle, but by all appearances Boulder is moving toward harsher policies, not kinder.

Asked why he continues to fight when the odds seem stacked against winning, he replies, “One of the weird things that happened to me becoming a lawyer, is at least three times a week I wake up in the middle of the night. It is emotionally and physically draining work. Basically, when you do this work, it’s not appreciated. You do it because it’s important.”

The post Darren O’Connor, Activist Lawyer: There For Those Who Need Him, and For Those Who Don’t appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

SUPPORT LOCAL JOURNALISM-DONATE NOW!

Press Releases are provided to Yellow Scene. In an effort to keep our community informed, we are now publishing some press peleases in whole. – Managing Editor 

Denver, CO, October 5, 2020 – On September 15, 2020, a local Denver mom, Eve Chen, launched a GoFundMe campaign to raise funds to purchase much-needed winter gear for unsheltered Denverites.   

Within a week of launching this campaign, Chen has raised nearly $2,500 in individual donations, more than tripled from her effort from previous years. “It is truly humbling to see how our community comes together, especially when many are hard hit financially by the COVID-19 pandemic, to provide temporary relief to the most vulnerable members in our community.  Colorado’s winter is very harsh, and every year we lose dozens of Denverites who are unsheltered during the winter season. Things become even harder for the unaccompanied youth on the streets” said Chen. “With the funds, we received so far, we can provide protection kits to 200 unsheltered Denverites who are doing it tough this winter,” Chen continued.

Englewood City Councilmember John Stone knows exactly what it means to be a minor living on the street. John became homeless before he turned 16 and spent the better part of half a decade living houseless. “I slept on park benches and took food from the dumpsters behind fast-food restaurants. I am still dealing with the health ramifications of my time homeless. If I had community support like Eve has put together for our Denver homeless community, I may be able to get off the streets sooner, and would almost certainly be in better health today.”

According to the Denver city data, over 1,000 homeless people are unsheltered in the county and city of Denver.  Chen also reached out to local legislators for support and was responded by HD 6 House Representative Steven Woodrow not only with a generous donation but also information on initiatives he and his fellow colleagues are working on in the legislature to fight against homelessness in our city.  

“We have a housing crisis here in CO, and it’s going to take resources to solve it. We worked hard last Session to secure nearly $20 million in CARES Act funding for rental and mortgage assistance but that isn’t enough. I encourage everyone to vote yes on 2B, which will impose a small sales tax increase and tobacco tax increase to support homelessness services, which reserves nearly $30 million for affordable housing,” said Woodrow.

The fundraiser will continue until the end of November 2020 with an aim to provide essential winter items including gloves, beanies, socks, hand warmers, hygiene products, and blankets to 30% of the unsheltered Denverites (300 individuals). These items will be distributed at Father Woody’s Haven of Hope Day Shelter located at 1101 W 7th Ave, Denver.  The date of distribution is to be confirmed.  If you can support this cause please donate at gf.me/u/yyzksj or contact Eve Chen if you wish to donate via PayPal/Venmo or cheque.  Together we can keep our streets warmer this winter.  

For more information about this fundraiser please contact Eve Chen at (720) 300-3458 or email evejpchen@gmail.com and for more information about 2B please contact HD 6 House Rep. Steven Woodrow at (720) 400-8107 or email repstevenwoodrow@gmail.com

The post Fundraiser Launched To Keep Unsheltered Homeless Community Warmer Ahead Of Harsh Colorado Winter | Press Release appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.

David is a massage therapist by day, Lyft driver by night; but his secret life is as a compassionate, entrepreneurial, Tiny Village builder. Here we will discuss his ideals on shaping the world into a healthier and brighter place. We capture David’s perspective on the Tiny Homes movement and creative ideas around developing Tiny Home Villages particularly for low-income and homeless people. But overall, David speaks of the idea of minimalist living, and the important role it has in our developing world of technology and the climate-change-driven-struggle to transform our social norms, to save the planet, our collective Home.

YS: Are Tiny Homes an ideal solution for low-income homes, particularly for the homeless?

DW: First, let me ask; internationally, what do we call small sustainable housing? In this country, we call them Tiny Homes, but in some other countries, they call them “Social Interest Housing.” In Mexico and Africa, it is of “social interest” to give people homes to live in. The American dream here is to have a big house on a postage-stamp lot, living in luxury, but that’s just goofy when it comes to sustainability and the pursuit to maintain balanced equality.

I met an architect in Vail and he designs Tiny Home Villages (Social Interest Housing) in Africa. He has integrated goat tracks throughout the village. He thought, “How could we have the food sources right out the back door?”

In our country we get so caught up in the zoning, thinking that everything must be divided into separate sections with retail over there, farming over here, and homes over in some other area, but this sectarian farming and division is not sustainable. It is possible to create a reality where everybody has a home integrated with sustainable technology throughout the land. So is Tiny Homes a good solution for housing the homeless? It’s not just a good way to give people homes, but it also sparks the pathway to create and cultivate an interactive and sustainable community.

We could build people 500-8,000 square foot homes that don’t use a lot of energy. When people have such huge homes, they have a lot of empty space and they end up warming or keeping cool that unneeded space, which is a waste of resources. It does not make any ecological sense. Eventually, we are going to wake up—like other countries have—and create sustainable, livable, and enjoyable small-footprint homes. It’s where the market is heading anyways.

YS: Do you think it is possible to develop Tiny Homes with current urban development?

DW: An example in Guile, Belgium shows how they have been housing all people for 650+ years. It was illegal to be homeless Guile. Towns in Colorado, and all throughout the United States, it is also illegal to be homeless. But here, they tell people to move along, go somewhere else and become invisible. In the United States, we criminalize poor, homeless people, for existing and then accept it as a cultural norm.

But in Guile, Belgium they have created a city where the culture is to open their doors and share their homes with the less fortunate while creating solutions to provide those people homes in the meantime. Social workers, health professionals, and neighbors come out to the homes that have been shared and spend time with the people of that unit, cultivating solutions and building strong relationships. It is beautiful for us to see such a thing. It is the norm for them to see, a tradition passed down throughout the city. It makes collective-survival sense to support people instead of condemning them.

Integrating the actual structures of the Tiny Homes and implementing sustainable land use is not the most difficult part of transforming Urban Development. Although it is hard to directly implement a new design due to the divisionary structure-zone planning in the United States, passing amendments through legislation could aid that effort. But, the most difficult part of this today is creating a social plan to cultivate what it means to be a community; to create a culture where Tiny Homes are not just a solution to problems, but a celebration of community; to transform the social norm into a pursuit of human equality and environmental justice.

YS: How do think current urban development affects low-income communities?

DW: There are people in the United States who truly do want to help homeless people, but seem to be at loss as to how. Current Urban Development plays a role in making it more difficult to allow those people to help the homeless. Out in the suburbs, like in Boulder County and other counties, people have extra bedrooms that they are willing to share. But, along with building those relationships and a foundation of trust and expectations from both sides, there needs to be a means of affordable transportation for people to even be able to reach those homes. Due to the divided structure of our land, it is hard to interact with different people of different backgrounds because we are geographically forced to be categorized into common groups, social cliques based on income.

Gentrification is generally what urban development stands for today, though this can be changed along with the culture change. When I was working in Kansas City with an organization I started called Brothers and Sisters Home Repair, we saw low-income housing be torn down due to the increase of revenue in that area; gentrification. Developers would come in, buy a bunch of houses and sell them for more than what they bought them for.

It’s social-economical prohibition through an act of commerce. Some low-income communities would also suffer due to code violations. One could not afford to fix their broken gutters and then get condemned for it. Brothers and Sisters for Home Repair would help aid these issues by providing a half-priced home repair service to these oppressed low-income communities.

The pursuit to build Tiny Home villages also runs into code issues, we have to change the city’s definition of what a home requires. So it is a challenge to break the paradigm. We need homes with mortgages that are more like $10,000 – $20,000 or less. In places like Boulder, there are small 1-2 bedroom houses going for $200,000 all the way to $400,000. When the flood came in a few years ago, all of the lower-income housing went away. Before the flood, you could find rooms for $500-$600 a month, but now those same rooms have gone up to a norm of $800-$1,500 for a one-bedroom apartment!

Same thing happened in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina: homes are lost due to an environmental crisis, new homes are built, but then those new homes are made unaffordable to that very same community.

The heat is rising and we need to respond to it the best we can, through equality and understanding, not through greed-based capital practices.

YS: Do you think homes are a human right?

DW: Let me rephrase that question into: “Is it a human privilege to house people without adequate shelter?” In the Catholic Tradition, Jesus asks people, “When did you feed me? When did you house me? When did you care for me? When I was homeless and when I was hungry and poor.”
And the people reply to him saying, “But you did not ask us to house you and feed you or care for you when poor.”

Jesus replies, “If you do it for my brothers and sisters, you did for me. When you did not do that for them, you did not do it for me. Just as you have turned the away from the poor, you have turned me away and so you also will be turned away.”

The homeless are people I know, my friends, people that I love. Whether you are religious or not, connecting with people without a home is an opportunity to make a friend and help people. They just aren’t people holding signs. They are people that can become your friends, people you can learn from and can learn from you. It is a privilege to have any kind of friend, whether they have a home or not. It is right to treat our neighbors like we treat ourselves. If you were homeless, wouldn’t you want somebody to open their door for you and show you kindness?

Every person has their gift to give to society. Every person has skills, ideas, and practices that they can give society, and not allowing those valuable resources to come into fruition is a failure of our human family. Homes are not just a human right, but it allows people the means to be able to cultivate their gifts to society. Poverty is an invitation to the community and, if we miss the invitation, we miss out.

YS: Could you please describe your current Tiny Home projects?

DW: What I want to do is buy a property, call it the Catholic Worker Ranch, 180,000 acres of mountain land with conservation properties. Because it is a conservation property, you cannot build current development homes, but you can build tiny homes. We would have eco-tourists come through and teach them about the homeless community, by the homeless community. We would have Permaculture principles and sustainable farming and living. We will be a retreat for scientists studying the conservation, funding the village. But the homeless need the retreat the most. The homeless need a retreat, a place to heal and walk around and feel the land, the Earth. But that is a future project.

Currently, I run the Dirty Dozen, a group of 12 homeless men, building their own tiny homes on an acre in Longmont. The phrase, “give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime” is no longer the issue. We have fishermen but need to give the fishermen fishing poles. We have carpenters, but we need to give the carpenters hammers. We have masons, but we need to give them stone. Homeless people are not stupid. They have skills. It is the proper allocation of resources and social-stereotyped myths that are the issues holding us back.

More information on the Dirty Dozen can be found at my website, NICE-World.org. That is what a nice world is about; where everybody’s needs get met. Not just the needs of the people, but the needs of the mycelia, the worms, the whole embodiment of Earth. We create a permaculture that includes our whole society, growing our own food, homes, and communities that people manage themselves through the natural structure. The “NICE” stands for the Network of Interfaith, Compassionate Entrepreneurs, where people collaborate through a faith, business, and compassion network for the common good.

We are trying to heal our sick world. We are being destroyed by industrial agriculture. We need to stop. We are doing damage to the Earth. People want to give their gift to society. If we can see the gift in all people, we can gain that gift, but we must see the gift to be given in the first place. The solution is not to cram people into some huge place, some kind of jail-like shelter, the solution is to give them a home and opportunity to give their gifts to society and help shape our world into a healthier place. But to make our world healthier, we need the inhabitants healthy.

Homeless people tell me they need help with their addictive personalities or their damaged bodies or their trauma. They need to reconcile with their families or a place to sleep and a place to bathe. Sleep deprivation makes people crazy, it kills people. Lastly, they told me they want a reason to get up in the morning, a place they look forward to going to. If they have a home, they find a way to give their gift to society and they will have that meaning.

The post Interview: David Ward appeared first on Yellow Scene Magazine.