>> Eric: U.S.

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT IS PLANNING TO MOVE BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN FUNDING FROM HOUSING TO OTHER SHORT-TERM PROGRAMS TO ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS.

ADVOCATES AND HOUSING PROVIDERS ARE CONCERNED THAT THE STRATEGY SHIFT WILL ONLY FURTHER ADD TO THE PROBLEM.

AND WE'VE INVITED OUR NEXT PANEL TO LEARN SOME MORE.

JAMIE HEADS THE CATHOLIC CHARITIES TWIN CITIES.

IT'S A PROVIDER SERVING ACROSS THE METRO.

NANCY CASHMAN IS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT THE CENTER CITY HOUSING, WHICH OPERATES IN GREATER MINNESOTA AND THE METRO.

AND JOINING THEM IS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FROM THE STATE COUNCIL ON HOMELESSNESS, KATHY TEN BROEKE.

THANK YOU ALL FOR JOINING US.

JAMIE, HOW MANY PEOPLE MIGHT GET AFFECTED BY THIS?

>> WELL, NATIONWIDE IT'S 170,000 IS THE NUMBER THAT THEY PEGGED.

>> Eric: WHAT ARE YOU THINKING IN THE STATE HERE?

>> WELL, FOR OUR OPERATION, WE HAVE A THOUSAND UNITS OF PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.

AND EVEN THOUGH THE FUNDING IS NOT SPECIFIC TO ALL OF THOSE UNITS, THE WAY THAT THE FINANCING WORKS TO BRING IN SOURCES SO THAT WE CAN DO THIS, IT PUTS EVERYTHING IN JEOPARDY.

RIGHT?

BECAUSE YOU PULL OUT A KEY PIECE OF THE REVENUE AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS THREATENED BY IT.

>> Cathy: I THINK WE SHOULD PROBABLY DEFINE WHAT IS SUPPORTIVE HOUSING?

>> SURE.

>> SURE, I CAN SAY, AND I JUST WANT TO ADD TO THAT ANSWER THAT STATEWIDE, SO BEYOND JUST ONE ORGANIZATION, STATEWIDE WE THINK IN THE SHORT TERM THESE CUTS COULD IMPACT ABOUT 4900 MINNESOTANS.

AND OVER THE LONG TERM EVEN MORE TO THE POINT THAT JAMIE MADE ABOUT IT DESTABLIZING ENTIRE PROJECTS AND ENTIRE ORGANIZATIONS.

PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING IS ESSENTIALLY HOUSING THAT'S AFFORDABLE.

THAT HAS BEEN LINKED TO THE KINDS OF SERVICES AND SUPPORTS PEOPLE NEED TO BE SUCCESSFUL AND STABLE IN THAT HOUSING.

>> Cathy: SO IT COULD BE TREATMENT FOR ADDICTION, IT COULD BE OTHER SUPPORTS THAT SOMEBODY WOULD NEED THAT THEY NEED HELP WITH?

>> RIGHT.

BASICALLY THE IDEA IS YOU GET SOMEBODY CONNECTED TO THE STABILITY OF HOUSING, AND THEN THE ABILITY TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT MAKE THEIR LIFE, YOU KNOW, MORE STABLE IN THAT HOUSING ARE SO MUCH EASIER.

>> Cathy: I SEE.

AND, NANCY, YOU WOULD AGREE, YOU NEED TO GET THE HOUSING PIECE DONE FIRST?

>> YOU KNOW, I THINK A SIMPLE WAY TO PUT IT, IS THAT LIVING ON THE STREETS IS NEVER A GOOD TREATMENT PROGRAM.

PEOPLE DON'T GET BETTER THERE.

AND, SO, PEOPLE NEED A SAFE PLACE TO BE WHEN THEY'RE IN -- WHEN THEY'RE IN HOUSING, THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE CHANGE IS AVAILABLE.

BUT BEFORE THAT, TREATMENT IS NOT GOOD IF YOU'RE LIVING ON THE STREETS.

IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.

AND THE OTHER PART I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THINK ABOUT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN CATHY SAID 4,900 PEOPLE, I THINK PEOPLE GET PICTURE OF 50-SOME-YEAR-OLD MEN ON A PARK BENCH.

YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY 40% OF THOSE ARE CHILDREN.

AND, SO, IT'S NOT -- SO IT'S MORE -- IT'S FAMILIES, IT'S CHILDREN, IT'S UNACCOMPANIED YOUTH, LIKE THE RISK IS HIGH IN THE STATE.

>> Eric: WHAT'S WRONG WITH HAVING BOTH APPROACHES, THOUGH?

CAN'T IT BE DONE -- DOES IT HAVE TO BE ONE SIZE FITS ALL?

>> YOU KNOW WHAT I WOULD SAY, NOT TO AGE US, NANCY, BUT NANCY AND I WORKED IN DIRECT SERVICE THREE DECADES AGO ON THIS ISSUE, AND THE PHILOSOPHY AT THAT TIME WAS THAT WE -- EVERYONE NEEDED TO BE READY FOR HOUSING.

SO THEY NEEDED TO SAVE UP A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY, THEY NEEDED TO BE ENTIRELY SOBER, THEY NEEDED TO TAKE ALL THESE MEDICATIONS, AND, SO, FOR PEOPLE THAT HAD COMPLEX HEALTH NEEDS, THEY WOULD THEN JUST LANGUISH ON THE TREETS OR IN OUR SHELTERS FOR YEARS AND YEARS.

WHEN WE CHANGE THAT PHILOSOPHY AND SAID, LET'S JUST START WITH HOUSING AND MAKE SURE PEOPLE ARE STABLE, AND THEN SURROUND THEM WITH ALL THE SERVICES AND SUPPORTS, THAT CHANGED EVERYTHING.

AND WE SAW THE NUMBERS OF PEOPLE WHO WERE HOMELESS THE LONGEST GOING DOWN DRAMATICALLY.

>> Eric: ARE WORK REQUIREMENTS PRODUCTIVE?

>> WELL, I THINK YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE FOLKS THAT WE'RE SERVING.

AND WHAT THEIR CAPACITY IS TO MEET THOSE TYPES OF REQUIREMENTS, RIGHT.

FOR US, WE KNOW THAT ABOUT 80% OF OUR RESIDENTS HAVE A LEVEL OF DISABILITY, WHETHER IT IS MENTAL OR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, PHYSICAL IMPAIRMENT, OR SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER, RIGHT, AND I THINK TO CATHY'S POINT, THE BEST THING THAT YOU CAN DO TO MOVE SOMEBODY OUT OF HOMELESSNESS IS TO GET THEM STABLY HOUSED.

AND THEN ONCE YOU DO THAT, THEN YOU CAN BRING THE RESOURCES TO HELP ADDRESS THE ISSUES THAT CONTRIBUTED TO BEING HOMELESS IN THE FIRST PLACE, RIGHT.

SO I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS SOMEBODY'S ABILITY TO ACCEPT THOSE SERVICES WHEN THEIR PRIMARY CONCERN IS WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO SLEEP TONIGHT.

>> Cathy: I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT SOME PEOPLE -- A LOT OF PEOPLE WATCHING WOULD SAY, IS THIS WORKING, THOUGH?

BECAUSE WHEN YOU GO INTO DOWNTOWN -- WE'RE HERE IN DOWNTOWN St.

PAUL, THERE'S CLEARLY AN ISSUE WITH FOLKS WHO ARE UNHOUSED, AND IN GREATER MINNESOTA, FOR GOODNESS SAKES, I MEAN, DULUTH COMES TO MIND.

SO IS WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW WORKING?

>> I THINK IT IS.

IT ABSOLUTELY IS.

>> IT ABSOLUTELY IS.

>> YEAH.

>> WE ALL AGREE ON THAT.

>> YEAH.

>> AND THIS NOTION THAT HUD SAYS PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ISN'T WORKING BECAUSE HOMELESSNESS IS INCREASING IS JUST A FALSE NARRATIVE BECAUSE WE'RE HOUSING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING OUT OF HOMELESSNESS.

THE FACT IS, HOMELESSNESS IS INCREASING FOR ANY NUMBER OF ISSUES, BUT IT ISN'T BECAUSE OF THE SUPPORTS THAT PEOPLE ARE RECEIVING.

>> Eric: I'VE EVEN HEARD SOME TALK OF RE-OPENING THE INSTITUTIONS.

>> I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY'D DO THAT.

YOU KNOW?

AND THE MODEL THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT IS EVERYTHING'S TEMPORARY, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING IS UP FOR TWO YEARS, AT HE END OF TWO YEAR, THEN WHAT?

AND WE ALL KNOW THE HOUSING CRISIS IN MINNESOTA, ALL THE COMMUNITIES, WHERE ARE PEOPLE GOING TO GO?

EMERGENCY SHELTER USED TO BE 30 DAYS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT'S BEEN EXTENDED.

BUT IT IS TIME LIMITED AND THEN -- SO THAT'S WHAT PUSHED US TO THE PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING BECAUSE IT IMMEDIATELY ENDS HOMELESSNESS FOR THAT HOUSEHOLD.

>> ERIC, I THINK ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND WATCHING THIS IS THAT HOMELESSNESS IS SOLVABLE, HOUSING ENDS HOMELESSNESS.

TO TAKE AWAY THE VERY TOOL THAT HAS EVIDENCE AT ENDING HOMELESSNESS AND REPLACE IT WITH TEMPORARY KINDS OF INTERVENTIONS THAT DON'T HAVE EVIDENCE TO END HOMELESSNESS DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

THE REASON WE SEE MORE PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN THIS COUNTRY IS BECAUSE WE HAVE AN AFFORDABILITY SSUE.

PEOPLE CAN'T AFFORD A PLACE TO LIVE, THEY'RE SPENDING 60, 70, 80% OF THEIR NCOME ON HOUSING, AND THAT MAKES THEM VERY VULNERABLE TO HOMELESSNESS.

THESE FOLKS ARE ENDING HOMELESSNESS FOR PEOPLE EVERY DAY, BUT EN MORE PEOPLE ARE FALLING INTO HOMELESSNESS BECAUSE OF AFFORDABILITY ISSUES.

>> Cathy: I HAVE A HARD QUESTION THEN.

NEU WONDER, WHAT ARE THE POLITICS OF THIS?

WHAT'S PURRING THIS IDEA FORWARD THEN?

ARE THERE ANY THEORIES ABOUT THAT?

THAT YOU WISH TO SHARE.

>> IN MY MIND, IT FEELS LIKE WHAT HUD IS DOING IS CREATING A POLICY FOR HOW THEY WISH THINGS WERE AS OPPOSED TO INVESTING IN EVIDENCE-BASED, OUTCOME-FOCUSED WORK THAT HAS PROVEN TO BE EFFECTIVE.

AND, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE POLITICS OF WHAT'S BEHIND IT.

I JUST KNOW THAT WHAT WE ARE DOING IS WORKING.

>> ONE THING I DO WANT TO SAY, THOUGH, IS THAT HOMELESSNESS IS A NONPARTISAN ISSUE.

I MEAN, WE HAVE HAD BIPARTISAN SUPPORT TO END VETERAN HOMELESSNESS IN THIS COUNTRY AND IT WORKED.

AND THEY INVESTED IN HOUSING AND SERVICES.

THE VERY THING THAT THIS IS PROPOSING TO CUT.

AND, SO, CONGRESS STILL HAS THE ABILITY RIGHT NOW TO STOP THIS FROM HAPPENING, AND I THINK THAT'S THE OTHER IMPORTANT THING FOR PEOPLE TO -- >> Eric: WELL, GOING BACK TO THE PAWLENTY ADMINISTRATION, THERE WAS THIS BIG EFFORT, WE'RE GOING TO END HOMELESSNESS.

>> PLANS.

>> Eric: 2008 I GUESS CAME ALONG.

BUT IT'S BEEN A LONG-TERM GOAL.

I DON'T KNOW HOW CLOSE YOU ARE TO IT.

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, IT GETS BACK TO WHAT MIKE WAS SAYING, IS THAT HOW OES HOMELESSNESS HAPPEN?

IT'S WAY UPSTREAM, WAY UPSTREAM WHERE WE NEED TO BE DOING STUFF FOR FOLKS.

I MEAN, MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT WE'RE HOUSING WERE HOMELESS WITH THEIR FAMILIES WHEN THEY WERE KIDS.

IT'S NOT THEIR FIRST TIME OUT, NOT THEIR FIRST EPISODE.

YOU KNOW, OST OF THE KIDS THAT COME INTO OUR AMILY PROGRAMS, THEY'VE BEEN HOMELESS, THREE, FOUR, FIVE TIMES.

THE SYSTEMS AREN'T WORKING.

THE AFFORDABILITY IS AN ISSUE ON HOUSING, ON FOOD, ON TRANSPORTATION, ON JOBS.

BY THE TIME THEY GET TO US, WE'RE THE SCOOPIN' 'EM P FOLKS.

WE'RE TRYING TO GET THEM OUT OF THE MOST DESPERATE SITUATION YOU CAN BE IN.

AND MOVE THEM ON TO SOMETHING BETTER.

>> Cathy: SO, JAMIE, IF THIS HAPPENS, WHAT HAPPENS TO THE FOLKS THAT -- THE INITIAL NUMBERS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT HERE WHEN WE STARTED OUR CONVERSATION?

>> THAT'S A REALLY GREAT QUESTION.

>> THE 4800, 5,000 OR SO PEOPLE IN MINNESOTA.

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

THERE ISN'T AN OPTION.

FOR A COUPLE REASONS.

MOST OF THE ESIDENTS THAT WE SERVE HAVE VERY LOW INCOME.

AND, SO, THEY DON'T HAVE AN OPTION OF AFFORDING MARKET RATE OR EVEN LOWER THAN MARKET RATE, VERY AFFORDABLE, BECAUSE WHAT THEY CAN AFFORD IS THE KIND OF HOUSING THAT WE'RE PROVIDING.

AND THEN YOU'RE NOT ADDRESSING THE ISSUES THAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH THAT MAKE IT EVEN MORE DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO STAY STABLE.

AND I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE THINK ABOUT WHO IT IS THAT WE'RE SERVING, RIGHT, AND THERE MAY BE A PERCEPTION OF WHO THE HOMELESS POPULATION ARE.

THE FASTEST-GROWING GROUP OF PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS ARE OLDER PEOPLE.

RIGHT?

AND, SO -- YEAH -- SO THE ECONOMIC PRESSURES RIGHT NOW ARE PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL.

I WAS JUST TALKING TO ONE OF THE FOLKS WE SERVE, WHO IS ABOUT 70 EARS OLD, HAS NEVER EXPERIENCED HOMELESSNESS -- >> Cathy: AND THEY ARE NOW.

>> THEY ARE NOW.

>> Cathy: THERE'S SO MUCH TO TALK ABOUT.

WE SO APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

WE WISH WE HAD MORE TIME WITH YOU ALL.

>> Eric: THANKS FOR COMING OVER.