Community compass: Waterville should direct federal funds to the most vulnerable

There’s a reason the Waterville City Council vote on December 7 to designate $ 400,000 in ARPA funds for the Mid-Maine Homeless Shelter was controversial, and that’s because it was flawed at both in the process and in the result. It was well intentioned, but we know the road to Hell is often paved with good intentions.

Let’s take a look at the process first. The council passed it by vote, but says the ARPA committee formed to allocate federal funds made the decision. It is clear to me how the committee made its decision; the only explanation I received was that there were “discussions” with various agencies. Discussions? With whom exactly? What was said? What data was reviewed? What parameters were used?

It is problematic that not all social service providers in Waterville were included in these discussions, as they were. Therefore, the decision to part with a service provider and speed it up to receive $ 400,000 could have only been based on a limited amount of data. The Interfaith Council and Starfish Village, two major providers of emergency care in the Waterville area, as well as other larger and more muscular service providers, were not consulted or invited to submit proposals. I looked carefully and I can’t find a call for proposals posted anywhere.

The question is not whether the funds for the shelter are deserved. It may well be that the shelter, a major service provider, deserves more funding. But how could it be known without knowing who else can be so deserving? There are services and programs that this money is earmarked for that are not unique to the shelter, such as primary tenancy and case management, but without casting a wider net around more providers, a only story presents itself.

It is wrong to justify this action by saying to those who are annoyed, “Oh, there is more money to give away, so don’t worry. Seriously? Is that the answer? If my department never got a dime, I would always argue that this cannot be the plan by which Waterville is handing out millions of federal dollars.

Let’s examine the result: it doesn’t appear that any of the $ 400,000 designated for the shelter provide an emergency response to the isolation, hunger and suffering associated with not being sheltered in the winter. that my ministry, Starfish Village and the Interfaith Council know so well.

More importantly, it says that some or all (it’s not clear) of the $ 400,000 donated to the shelter will be ‘administered’ by them and used to support people served by other agencies and will also include a training “.

Administered? The meanings of “collaboration” and “administration” are very different. The first is collegial, the second is hierarchical, holding power over another entity or being. What needs to be administered and why should it be administered by the shelter?

How was it decided which shelter is best to train other well established professionally run service agencies? How much federal dollars are allocated to the shelter to train the rest of us? What are the targets of this training? Certified clinical social workers? Chaplains trained in community service with decades of social work? Case managers with years of experience? Very experienced state welfare workers? About what? And when?

I am not asking only as a service provider but also as a taxpayer.

If any of these is true, or if it is true and cannot be expanded, it will not work. It is also reckless. It establishes one entity as a gatekeeper, creating a sort of monopoly, letting others ask for help, adding not speed or economies of scale but an additional layer of bureaucracy. The training element is so problematic that it deserves to be called ridiculous.

The ARPA committee should create a process that can withstand scrutiny. And the Mid-Maine homeless shelter should show the good grace that I know it has and agree that it’s not a good plan because it doesn’t show collegial respect for its many other partners.

What we need immediately is a daily hot sit-down meal program, similar to the one lost when the Catholic Church of the Sacred Heart closed. Waterville also needs a real emergency winter shelter overnight. Both are urgent needs that should have been prioritized before any other program.

I am exhausted by the endless series of meetings, discussions, research, lectures on data points and statistics and I think I am not the only one in this situation. Indeed, there are many complex problems that will take years, if not decades, to resolve. There are some issues, however, that are right under our noses that are much easier to resolve.

As you read this, people are cold, hungry, and living in fragile tents in the woods and along the river, including pregnant women and the elderly. Can you imagine being one or the other and relieving yourself in this weather? There are also the elderly, sitting alone and not eating well, and working families who could use a healthy, free meal. An overnight emergency winter shelter and meal program are low budget programs that are quick to set up, no rocket science to implement, and will provide immediate help to God’s children.

Someone accused me of being angry. I take it as a compliment. It is not at all a bad thing to be angry, especially when you are worried about the suffering of others. Please join me as I scream in anger and maybe together we can finally do some simple, inexpensive, but terribly needed things here.

Reverend Maureen Ausbrook works with Starfish Village, a ministry of the Waterville United Church of Christ and is a moderator of the Waterville-Winslow Interfaith Council.

” Previous