As first reported by amNewYork, Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Sabrina Kraus extended a temporary restraining order that blocks the city from relocating to the East Village facilities while legal challenges continue.
The lawsuit, filed by neighborhood coalition V.O.I.C.E. (Village Organization for the Integrity of Community Engagement), argues that the city rushed the approval process and improperly used emergency powers to move the intake center from Bellevue to the Project Renewal building between the Bowery and Second Avenue. (Public records list the V.O.I.C.E. members as Trisha Goff, Caleb Berger, David Bonnouvrier, Niki Donohue, Diane Nye, Michael Rayden and John Ruha.)
According to court filings, the city has since proposed scaling back the planned capacity from roughly 175 beds to 117, while adding security measures and indoor processing.
Josh Goldfein, a staff attorney with the Legal Aid Society, told amNewYork that he didn't see anything new in V.O.I.C.E.'s arguments, calling them similar to other efforts to block shelters, which he said are often rooted in racist assumptions.
"I've been in this business a very long time," Goldfein told the outlet. "I've seen a lot of cases like this. They are all the same. They raise all the same issues. There is no merit to any of these issues. The petition will eventually be dismissed and the [intake center] will open."
Housing advocates, including the Legal Aid Society and Coalition for the Homeless, have defended the site's use at 8 E. Third St. as a shelter while also raising accessibility concerns about the accelerated timeline.
The two groups released this statement after the V.O.I.C.E. lawsuit was filed last month.
Project Renewal was founded in 1967, and the organization has used the spaces at 8 E. Third St. and 333 Bowery for decades.
Of course legal aid will say that any objection to this project is "rooted in racist assumptions". So our East Village community that cares about safety and the well being of its community is racist..... how absurd and disgraceful of Legal Aid to throw in the race card.
ReplyDeleteIt’s pretty racist for Mr. Goldfein to assume all the clients will be people of color
DeleteAgree 100%.
Deletealso agree 100% !
DeleteSo, no one can identify a real problem with locating the site here & this is all just an effort by a slapdash band-of-rich-neighbors to stall it while bullying the city, which costs all of us money and keeps clients going to a known decrepit building on 30th Street.
ReplyDeleteWhat part did I miss
Josh Goldfein - You have NOT "seen a lot of cases like this". We are not against a homeless shelter. If you think this is the case you have not done your homework. We've had this shelter in our neighborhood for 50 years. We are against turning this homeless shelter into an INTAKE CENTER which will bring 150 men daily.(as estimated by the DHS) into our neighborhood. That's 1,000 a week. This building occupancy level is 200. There is no way 1,000 men can be processed in a week and housed inside this building. Instead they will be walking, sleeping, panhandling and stealing from our local stores (crime statistics from the 13th Pct (Bellevue shelter) vs the 9th Pct for retail theft is triple for the 13th Pct. We would welcome back the poor residents that were uprooted from our shelter. One even committed suicide because he was relocated too far away from his family for visiting.
ReplyDeleteHow many shelter does the East Village/ Lower East Side have to endured. We are overly Saturated with shelters. Put it somewhere else!
ReplyDeleteThanks for the providing the names of the V.O.I.C.E. members, which are worth Googling for a sense of which communities they represent.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the work of the VOICE organization who is fighting to keep the LES/EV safe from the onslaught of mentally ill homeless people who will saturate our neighborhood.
ReplyDeleteCiting racism is a badge of courage in some circles. But it only confuses the issue... in this case the location is not helpful to the community seeking its services. And the fact that the EV has been disproportionally burdened with the clients involved.... which in itself is discrimination.
ReplyDelete