[ Music ] >> Hi, everyone.

Welcome to Both Sides of the Story .

I am your host Alan Gionet from CBS4, thank you for joining us.

We continue our semi final rounds tonight with the first debate from our winners bracket.

And, it is sure to be a great one on tonight's show students from Cherry Creek high school in Greenwood Village and mountain Vista high school in Highlands Ranch compete for a spot in the winners bracket championship.

So, let's meet our participants now.

First up, Masha Osovskaya is a senior from Cherry Creek high school.

Let's hear her story.

>> Hello, my name is Masha Osovskaya.

I go to Cherry Creek high school, I am a senior.

Debate just seemed like a really interesting class I really wanted the opportunity to express what I had to say on a variety of issues.

I also wanted to gain public skills because I feel like that's applicable in basically any field that you go into the most interesting topics for me are the ones I go beyond the United States.

For example, West African urbanization.

Just because I hadn't been exposed to anything like that I learned something new as I was preparing for it.

>> Masha.

Is a phenomenal student a kind, compassionate student is great in mentoring other students.

She does a great job of staying calm under pressure and able to process multiple arguments.

It really helps her to convey her ideas.

>> Outside of school in debate I dance and I play the piano, I've been doing that for a very long time.

For the future I want to go to engineering specifically, biomedical engineering because I find medicine really interesting.

I want to make a difference in people's lives by creating new technologies in discovering new things to help make doctors jobs easier.

>> That is Masha.

Now meet Sahithi Mathukumilli, a junior from Mountain Vista high school in Highlands Ranch.

Let's catch up.

>> As a kid I was super, super shy.

I was afraid to talk to people.

I found speech and debate and I was like, you know what, let's try it.

And, here I am.

Now, super comfortable speaking in front of people.

I am Sahithi Mathukumilli and I go to Mountain Vista high school.

I am in 11th grade.

Since I do want to go into healthcare, I hope that I can be that person where my patient till super come to pull talking to me.

That I can communicate clearly, concisely, in a way that is perceivable to my patients.

>> Combining her ability to be so calm and poised and passionate but with that organizational skill in the collaborative nature, I think that's one of the things that she brings to the debate environment.

It takes away the aggression and leaves that little sense of a good knowledgeable experience student.

>> I believe taking part in speech and debate is one of the most impactful things that you can ever do.

It will improve your competence, your speaking skills, and it's something that you can do to make change wherever you see that change needs to be made.

>> All right, now you have met two of the best speech and debate students in the state.

Also joining us, our special panel of experts who will offer their analysis of our debate.

They are, Dominic Dezzutti We have the host of Colorado inside out, the weekly roundtable program here on PBS12.

He is joined by Kim O'Connor, codirector of the young writers program at the lighthouse writers workshop.

And, Marianne Goodland.

The chief legislative reporter with Colorado politics.

Time to set our ground rules.

Each side will present their case.

They will ask each other questions and have a chance to offer rebuttals.

So students have prepared their case for tonight's debate and they won't know which side they will defend until we have a coin flip right here in the studio.

When it is finished, we will go to our lustrous panel for their questions.

We will find out how they felt offer the best argument.

Let's get started.

The issue of the debate is this.

Addressing mental health in Colorado should be the highest priority in tackling the problem of homelessness.

Let's have our coin flip right now.

We will get underway.

Sahithi I'm going to let you make the call.

Heads or tails?

>> Tails.

>> And, it is heads.

So, I am afraid, we are going to let Masha make the pick.

Would you like affirmative or negative?

>> I will take affirmative.

>> Affirmative means you go first.

So, as a proponent the floor is now yours for three minutes.

Go ahead.

>> I affirm that resolve addressing mental health in Colorado should be the highest priority in tackling the problem with homelessness.

My first point is addressing mental health addresses the root cause of homelessness.

Poor mental health is widespread.

The Denver Post writes in 2016 that psychiatrists believes 65% to 75% experience mental illness.

They find out mental illness was the third largest cause of homelessness for single adults.

While, they corroborate this.

There is clearly a link between psychiatric disorders and homelessness.

Mental illness, and homelessness proceeds about two thirds of cases.

Homelessness in turn has been associated with poor mental health outcomes.

Prioritizing mental health is the only way to break the cycle between mental illness and homelessness.

The impact to save lives.

The director of communications at Colorado coalition for the homeless finds that among those experiencing homelessness, 31% in Denver died from drug overdose.

It was the primary cause of death.

Addressing mental health help solve this issue as the national Institute on drug abuse says that people who are addicted to drugs are also diagnosed with other mental disorders.

We can significantly reduce these deaths by breaking these connections through mental health services.

My second point is that other solutions are simply ineffective.

Proposals to address the housing issue first do not work.

From the Manhattan Institute they write that there is no evidence-based group of housing first ability to treat mental illness effectively or drug or alcohol addiction.

Housing first is not a reliable solution.

They discuss a study, the veterans in the housing program were re-addicted by the end of the 12 months after placements.

Additionally, consider the danger of leaving someone with a mental illness alone in their new home.

For instance, according to better health in 2020, people living with schizophrenia are more likely to harm themselves than they ardent to harm others.

Other mental illnesses because also endanger the individual.

Wherever housing first is nothing to reduce homelessness as a whole, look to California which implemented the model.

They say that California's experience has been increase in investment in supportive housing and an increase in homelessness.

Other regions have adopted this model yet, we haven't seen a significant reduction in homelessness.

This is simply not the best approach for Colorado.

My last point is that prioritizing mental health would reduce the cost of homelessness.

The substance abuse and mental health services administration in 2021 writes the interventions to prevent homelessness are more cost-effective than addressing issues after somebody is already homeless.

Considering that mental illness is such a prevalent cause of homelessness, addressing it early on would significantly reduce its costs specifically on mental health, the County of Santa Barbara finds in 2011 that the cost of the mentally ill individuals is greater than the cost of a planned and sustained effort that addresses their housing and mental health challenges.

By redirecting money from prisons to mental health services, Colorado could reduce the cost of homelessness, decreasing the burden of taxpayers.

Because prioritizing mental health saves lives while reducing costs I urge you to vote affirmative.

>> Thank you very much.

Now, you have two minutes for any questions and cross-examination, go right ahead.

>> Thank you for your speech.

How would you suggest that we focus on mental health first?

What strategies do you suggest that we take to improve the lives of the homeless?

>> Well, I think investing in mental health services could definitely be a step in the right direction.

I don't know if there is necessarily a like they don't necessarily have a specific plan.

But we do need to be addressing mental health first because, people with mental illness will not be able to move into housing if their basic needs of being healthy are not met first.

>> Thank you.

And, why do you say that mental health takes priority over finding shelter?

>> Well, for the reasons I mentioned.

There have been studies and actual cases where cities like California and states have tried housing first and it clearly does not work.

So, that proves that mental health is a hindrance and housing first does not have the ability to improve that mental health.

Just because, it is lower on the hierarchy of needs than it is in housing.

>> And then, do you have a rough estimate of how much mental health finances would cost in comparison to housing or other alternatives?

>> I do not.

But I do believe that housing will be more expensive, he will have to build those homes whereas, the mental health services already exist you just have to redirect money from prisons to the mental health services.

>> Thank you.

>> All right, both sides of the story we have Masha in the affirmative and Sahithi in the negative.

We have three minutes right now to state your case opposed, go right ahead.

>> When looking at the homeless population, in Colorado, we should take note of the mental health struggles that exacerbate the condition of the homeless but our first priority should be to focus on finding a secure shelter for people to live in.

I will agree, mental health is very important.

But while people are dying of hunger and hypothermia on the streets, it is not fair to anyone to offer therapists over a blanket and a meal.

Rather than jumping into solve mental health issues, we should first provide homeless individuals with safe environments and housing.

Safety, food, water, and shelter are basic necessities that humans need to thrive.

As expressed by the Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

In order to begin a journey of improving mental health, people need to live in a place where they are not fighting to survive.

And, at the heart of all of these discussions, we would all like to see the homeless population be in a healthy enough state where they can successfully be reintegrated into society and support themselves.

If individuals have an environment that allows them to grow, they will have more access to mental health resources.

That is the second tier on the list of the priorities.

However, with creating a safe and livable condition for the homeless, a common concern is how much of a financial burden it will be on us.

And we can look to the past to provide us with some guidance.

In 2016, Denver wanted to see if providing permanent housing helped the homeless population that is seen in the city, and its eight private investors were willing to put in $8.6 million in upfront costs to house 250 people who had frequent interactions with the city's jail systems.

So far, they have seen between 83 and 87% success rates and housing stability for the people who have participated in the five-year program.

Kathy Ald., the vice president of communications 40 coalition for the homeless explained that the goal of the project was to demonstrate that if you house these individuals, it's going to cost less than leaving them outside to constantly cycle through emergency systems such as detox, jails, and hospitals.

Thus, the financial aspect of a stable living situation, will provide great benefits.

Providing stable housing should be our highest priority for helping the homeless population of Colorado get back on their feet allowing them to learn in an environment of safety and reentering society with the knowledge that they can use to benefit themselves and others.

Providing stable housing situations will provide a greater benefit then if we were to focus on mental health first.

I encourage us to focus on housing before anything else.

>> Thank you very much.

And now, you have two minutes for questions and cross-examination to Sahithi.

Go ahead.

>> Thank you for your speech.

You said that we can provide a safe environment for people who are experiencing homelessness.

How is it going to be safe if they are at risk to themselves because of their mental illnesses?

>> We can build a community environment.

People being around people that can help support themselves and also being monitored by other individuals to help create a compassionate, and sort of community that they can use to lift each other up and make themselves better.

>> How are we creating a community if we are just giving homes to the person that doesn't have one?

>> I said, in my case, that I believe that housing is the first step that we should take on top of that, I say that our second step should be to focus on providing those mental health resources.

I do think that they are beneficial.

I just think that our first priorities should be to provide a safe environment that people can thrive in.

>> So you are saying housing first and then focus on building that community.

>> Yes.

But, as I would like to reiterate, housing should be our first priority, not mental health.

>> What happens in the time period between, when we give people housing and then we start creating a community?

Don't you think that they could, like, people with mental illnesses could endanger themselves between that time?

>> I think that we can take preventative measures to ensure that that does not happen.

As, being under a sense of other people can make sure and hold people accountable.

It would provide a better environment than if they were to just stay out on the streets and stay in the status quo.

>> You also mentioned that in 2016 we had these investors who are willing to create housing.

Who says that we are going to have these investors now in 2021?

>> I mean, I think people who are willing to help this cause will always be there to help this cause.

So, it is a matter of finding the right people and finding people that are willing to support the cause.

>> All right, we are going to have to wrap up the questions right there.

Addressing mental health in Colorado should be the highest priority in tackling the problem of homelessness.

In the affirmative, Masha.

In the negative, Sahithi.

Masha, you now have two minutes for a rebuttal, go ahead.

>> So, starting with my opponents first point on addressing the shelter as a first priority.

Remember that evidence that I read to you, for example the E 20 that says that in California we have not been successful with housing first and the study from Western Meyer that talks about how the individuals that were placed in a housing first trial were readdicted to their drugs that they were on before.

This proves that it does not work.

Again, we cannot simply address the issue of shelter.

We have to address mental health first.

You can't put a person in a home, they could be a danger to themselves.

At that point, it's just counterproductive.

You are not helping these people.

Next, she talks about how we can provide a safe environment.

Remember, that environment isn't going to be safe.

Yes, it might be off the street but they could have access to all these basic necessities to survive.

However, remember that mental illness is something that you shouldn't have to go through on your own.

That's what we are forcing these people and experiencing homelessness to do.

We are forcing them to live alone in a home where they could endanger themselves because of their mental illness.

Now, she also talks about how permanent housing is affordable with these eight investors in 2016.

Remember, this was in 2016.

Nothing says that we will have these investors now.

Building housing is very expensive.

With a need to house every person on the street and that's going to end up costing more than investing in mental health services that already exist.

It is simply a matter of redirecting money.

Look at the counties in Santa Barbara and the evidence that I read you in the substance abuse and mental health administration that all say that mental health is a preventative measure and it going to be cheaper going to keep people out of hospitals and is emergency systems that my opponent talks about.

That's an option and housing isn't simply going to do that because it's not realistic to invest so much money into housing.

We are going to have to start all over again.

We continue, we have these services already.

We just have to address and implement them to those who need this help.

Remember that safety is their priority and we are not going to do that with housing.

I urge you to vote.

>> All right.

Now, three minutes to respond and close, go ahead.

>> I would like to start with my opponents first point.

With saying that housing is not, should not be the first priority as compared to mental health.

And I would just like to say that if people do not have a foundation to go off of they do not have a secure place to live in, they cannot simply just focus on their mental health.

We have to put ourselves in their shoes and understand that their circumstances are very different than ours.

While our first priority might be to improve our mental health to achieve a higher quality of life, there is is simply not the same they need that shelter because they don't have any sort of stability in their lives.

And along that path provide mental health resources in the future which would encompass my opponents plan but, just making sure that the plan is tackled second rather than first.

I think that we can provide a beneficial solution all around.

I would also like to touch on the financial aspect that my opponent mentioned.

Now, she says that she doesn't have a clear estimate of how much it's going to cost to implement these mental health resources.

I think that that puts her case at a significant disadvantage.

I have run the numbers and I know exactly how much is going to cost.

We have put in things before and we can improve those systems that we've already laid the infrastructure for.

We have a greater probability of improving this at a faster rate since we already have an idea of what we are doing.

I would also like to come to my opponents attack on my case saying people may not be willing to invest in this cause.

That study that I cited was from 2016 but I think with the amount of individuals that are living in dire situations I think that more people will be wanting to help.

If there is any way that they can help make a difference in people's communities, they will want to.

We see it all the time.

People going out to give people food and blankets.

They can use it to make it a little bit more comfortable.

If people are willing to go out of their way to do that, why wouldn't people who have the funds to do so, why would they not support that cause?

>> Sahithi, thank you very much.

Now, Masha, you finally have one minute for your close.

Go ahead.

>> I just want to start off by addressing some of the attacks my opponent brought up on my case.

First she talks about how we do not have a foundation if we are not focusing on housing first.

However, remember those studies that I cited that show that the foundation does nothing to actually improve mental health.

That's why we should be addressing mental health first.

Remember what I read you from the Denver Post about 65% to 70% of people experiencing homelessness have mental illness.

Then, she also talks about cost and how I do not have specific number.

Wall that is true remember that her study from 2016 the cost has gone up significantly.

We will not necessarily have these investors.

She talks about care blankets and how there are people that are willing to help.

But care blankets aren't the same thing is housing.

There are not just regular people who will be willing to put in $1 million into housing.

This was just a specific study that at that point, yes we had investments.

And remember, but mental illness, treating mental illness is going to be cheaper than what we have right now.

But to my third contention, this is how it decreased.

And to that I go affirmative.

>> All right.

There is our debate.

This is why it's great.

We have these facts.

We get research and we get accurate statements.

We way.

>> You are absolutely right.

I just want to complement, at the start, both of our students taking on a very difficult topic, as you mentioned, there are a lot of city and state officials that would love to tap into some of the wisdom on both sides today.

Debaters, as you know, our job is not done in your job is not done.

We will be asking you a few questions.

Kim, why don't we start with a question for Masha.

>> Okay.

I've a colleague who is dealing with funding housing in Denver that's affordable for them as well as dealing with a lot of anxiety and mental health issues.

This friend and colleague shared with me that they really feel like they have to find somewhere to live before they can deal with any of their other challenges.

How would you respond to my friend and colleague?

>> I completely understand.

I think that it also may very from person-to-person.

You have people that there mental illnesses are so extreme that they simply cannot be left alone in their home.

We need to be able to account for those situations where people are a danger to themselves and leaving them alone is the worst thing that we could do for them.

We need to address those mental issues first.

>> Marianne, your question for Masha.

>> Masha my question.

You mentioned an idea of rerouting money from prisons to mental health services.

Wouldn't that put greater strain on municipal city, county state budgets as well as lead to an inconsistent rash of solutions on how to fund and address these problems?

>> I don't think we are necessarily going to take away all of that money from those prisons.

What is happening with people experiencing homelessness right now is that they are just simply being put into prisons because we do not know how to deal with them.

However, the Santa Barbara County talks about how we could take money that's being used to put these people into prisons and we can allocate that to mental health resources that will end up being cheaper in the long run because, those people are not going to have to you know go to all these emergency room visits it's just going to be a stable process for the recovery.

>> Sahithi you are not off the hook, as you know your next.

>> Your question.

>> What would you say about the fact that sometimes the folks experiencing mental health issues cannot remain in housing, that they do find because of the severity of the mental health challenges?

>> I say that we adjust that situation and we find a place for them where they can adequately get those resources that they need to help themselves improve their life and make themselves better and improve their quality of life.

>> And, Marianne your question for Sahithi.

>>Hi Sahithi, you want to put homeless people, make sure that they have stable housing but there is a percentage of that population who are suffering from mental illness who won't go who would prefer to live on the streets.

How do you address their issues?

>> I would say that we offer the option to support people through housing.

But, if they are asking for something else, then we do what we can to reach them where they are.

There are people that are more comfortable where they are and that is their decision, ultimately.

We are simply putting forth the option and putting forth an environment that they can use in utilize to grow themselves into a better position to reintegrate into society and to create a better life for themselves.

>> You have both offered fantastic answers here.

Allen, give us a moment here.

The city has been tackling this for decades we need at least a couple of seconds to figure out who is moving on to the championship round.

>> All right, I have the coin over here if you want to flip it into it that way.

Right now, that gives me a moment to, by the way, to just let you know what's going on as our panel decides.

You know, this is part of our expanded seasonal both sides of the story.

That bracket.

We have students from George Washington high school.

We will see who will join tonight's winner in the 2021 championship.

You do not want to miss that one.

All right, panel, let's have that decision.

I'm fascinated by this one.

>> We really could've used a lot more time.

I need to be sure that both of you know that it is a split decision.

I think that we probably could have debated for another half an hour of how that went.

It is our job to come up with a winner.

So someone can move on.

Masha, we have decided that you will be moving on to the championship round.

You offered, in our mind, sharp answers when it comes to the rebuttal.

How you took care of your defense of your own case and your cross-examination questions were sharp.

But, you both did a fantastic job.

You made our jobs very difficult and we congratulate both of you on a great debate.

>> As you say, Dominic, a lot can be learned by those who are leading our state right now on the question of homelessness and mental health.

Congratulations, Masha.

You will now go on to compete in the winners bracket championship that comes up on December 17.

And, Sahithi, we will see in the third-place match.

That is coming up on December 3.

Now, you both gave our viewers a wonderful debate tonight.

Both should be very proud.

We are glad to have you here.

That is all the time that we have for our program tonight.

I want to thank our excellent students and our esteemed judging panel who had a tough job of deciding.

I want to thank you for tuning in.

It is the support of viewers like you and our sponsors that help us to make this show a reality.

You can catch up on past episodes of this program on PBS12.org and you can catch me on CBS4 for all of the latest news and information impacting Colorado.

For everyone here at PBS12 I am Alan Gionet, thanks for watching and that is Both Sides of the Story .

[ Music ]