Danbury’s moral imperative to house the homeless
As the executive director of the Association of Religious Communities, one of the shared values I see in all religions is a moral imperative to help those who are genuinely unable to help themselves.
In a recent letter to the editor, dozens of Danbury religious leaders cited Jewish, Christian, Muslim and Buddhist scripture in support of the shelter operated by Pacific House at the former Super 8 Hotel.
There are currently over 80 souls residing there, with dozens of Danbury residents waiting to get in. After exhausting all other legal options, the shelter’s doors remain open only by virtue of Governor Lamont’s emergency powers, which are set to expire Feb. 15.
To be clear, the city of Danbury is facing an urgent crisis of unprecedented proportions. In one month, Danbury’s only remaining homeless shelter may be forced to close its doors, flooding Main Street with Danbury’s entire homeless population in the dead of winter.
This is a housing crisis, this is a health crisis, this is a moral crisis. I say this without judgment of anyone, but rather to raise awareness about our collective moral imperative to do something about it immediately.
How will we want to see ourselves, when we look back on this moment years from now?
In years past, there were several small shelters in town that each did their part to serve the homeless community. Dorothy Day Hospitality House, Jericho Partnership, the City Shelter and various overflow locations collectively sheltered about 100 homeless individuals on the coldest nights of the winter. All of these shelters are out of operation, either due to zoning issues or the fact that congregate housing is not COVID-safe. The question is, come Feb. 15, when there isn’t one single shelter left in Danbury, where are we going to put Danury’s homeless population of at least 100 people?
The fact of the matter is that we could end homelessness in Danbury entirely, if we only had enough affordable housing.
Shelters play an important role as a temporary solution, but Danbury hasn’t got a single shelter left. We can get vouchers to cover the cost of placing Danbury’s homeless population into affordable and supportive housing.
Rather than being concentrated in one area, they could be spread out over the whole town, in safe residences, with case managers working assiduously to connect them with services and employment opportunities.
The problem is that the vouchers only cover up to a “fair market rent” established by HUD. What landlord would rent a single-bedroom apartment at HUD’s $1,412 price point, when they could get $2,000 on the free market from a commuter recently relocated from New York?
There are, in fact, some serious advantages to providing affordable housing.
First of all, there is the virtue of housing the homeless, which literally saves lives.
Secondly, unlike taking a chance on someone whose employment could be lost at any moment, most clients on vouchers come with support from non-governmental organizations, who can help ensure the rent gets paid no matter what.
There have been times, for example, when ARC has paid a client’s rent to keep the landlord whole, while we help the client find a new job.
Beyond the advantages of affordable housing, there are also disadvantages when a city falls below affordable housing benchmarks.
Under CT Statute 8-30g, if Danbury’s affordable housing stock falls below 10 percent of our total housing stock, then new affordable housing developments could circumvent local zoning regulations.
Danbury recently fell from 12 percent to 11 percent affordable housing. With households growing at 1.5 percent while the population is growing at 6.6 percent, Danbury is on a trajectory to fall below 10 percent affordable housing very soon.
Meanwhile, in the wake of the eviction moratorium expiration, a rising tide of evictions has flooded the market. Without more affordable housing for these families, Danbury’s homeless crisis will surely be exacerbated.
The only way to solve this problem is to increase Danbury’s affordable and supportive housing stock. If every landlord in Danbury offered one or two units at the HUD “free market rent” for vouchers, we could knock out Danbury’s entire homeless population while simultaneously increasing Danbury’s affordable housing stock, not to mention, the value of doing a truly “good deed.”
If every home with a vacant in-law unit were to rent that out to one of these clients, it would have a big impact.
If every religious congregation were to support the landlords in their communities, helping them to reduce their rent to accommodate clients with vouchers, this would make a huge difference.
If developers were to add to Danbury’s affordable housing stock, we could fill those units overnight.
There are infinite solutions to the crisis we are facing. The one thing we cannot do is to put our heads in the sand and pretend that Danbury is not facing an urgent crisis of homelessness and affordable housing.
At present, there is no plan to accommodate Danbury’s homeless population. If the governor’s emergency powers expire, and Danbury’s only remaining homeless shelter is forced to close its doors one month from today, what will we do to ensure there is a safe place for every lost soul? The clock is ticking.
Rabbi Ari Rosenberg is the executive director of the Association for Religious Communities at 24 Delay St. in Danbury. He can be reached at execdir@arcforpeace.org.