THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, June 18, 1995 TAG: 9506160235
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 08 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: BY NANCY LEWIS, CORRESPONDENT
LENGTH: Medium: 76 lines
Members of a committee planning how to spend $800,000 to help the city's homeless are still waiting to find out where a homeless shelter could be built.
Most members of the Homeless Advisory Committee were unhappy this week with a subcommittee's failure to provide information about possible sites for a permanent shelter.
Neither are some members content with a proposal to give conditional ownership of the planned facility to whichever non-profit group the city decides will run it and to then allow that group to select the location instead of the advisory committee.
So vocal was the outcry that the Homeless Advisory Committee Wednesday told its site subcommittee to go back to the drawing board.
Andrew Friedman, director of the city's Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation sits on the five-member group charged with finding a piece of land or a building for the proposed facility. He touted the plan Wednesday to the Homeless Advisory Committee.
``I really think that the way it's going to happen is a provider will be awarded the funds to go out and find a site,'' said Friedman. ``The hardest part will be getting City Council to approve a site. Without a non-profit, it's not going to happen.''
But some committee members objected strongly to the plan to give ownership of the shelter to whatever group is selected.
``The city should own it,'' said Hazel Whitney. ``What if the provider decides not to continue? Then we're back to no shelter in Virginia Beach.''
Mary Kay Horozewski said, ``I thought we were going to get options - get things out there for potential bidders.''
The full committee has been meeting since January and has agreed with proposals of its other two subgroups - standards and program. As it now stands, the committee will advise City Council early next month that a 100-bed, 24-hour shelter be built or purchased.
Also part of the recommendations will be human rights guarantees, though grievance procedures are still being honed.
The site subcommittee has not made public the five or more locations under consideration because of concern that negotiations would be adversely affected.
Especially vocal in his objection to proposed sites not being divulged was David Sullivan, director of Volunteers of America, one of the two non-profit care providers competing for the contract.
``The city should select the site,'' said Sullivan. ``We should not sit back and say we accept that council is opposed. Dredge it up. Change minds. Change a lot of things. We want the city as an equal, active partner. We want more than money. If (the city) is going to regulate, it ought to participate.''
Susan Kowalski, chaplain and women's program director for the Judeo-Christian Outreach Center - the other contender - agreed, saying, ``there's nothing wrong with a non-profit working to secure community support (for a site), but it should be a collaborative effort with the city.''
Daniel Stone, director of the city's Social Services Department had another idea.
``A self perpetuating board could own it,'' said Stone. ``The issue is not who owns it, but where it will be.''
He recommended that the site proposal be sent back to the subcommittee, which, he said, should be told to ``begin with collaboration.''
Ramona Murmillo, who sits on the subcommittee, confirmed that five potential sites had been considered.
``We have five sites we could present - the pros and cons and cost,'' said Murmillo. ``We felt the provider would be best served by being able to select'' the site.
Lin Smith, member of the full committee, urged that City Council be given a plan that recommends both a site and a provider.
The full committee meets again June 28, at which time the site subcommittee will offer at least general information on possible sites. by CNB