Sometimes it takes a defeat to get
everyone’s attention and gather more resources to start
building toward a victory. That is an optimistic assessment of the
battle over the location of the proposed Salvation Army community
center and homeless shelter. Fortunately, it is shared by both
sides of the controversy. Here’s what we’ve learned so
far. • My
backyard is important. The people who
castigate others for being NIMBYs are probably NIMBYs themselves,
who happen to not live where a homeless shelter is proposed for
their back yard. We who live in low-income neighborhoods get tired
of hosting more than our fair share of social services. Agencies
say that they want to locate in low-income neighborhoods because
they serve low-income people but also because the property is
cheap. Well, the property is cheap because low-income people live
there, social-service agencies locate there, and real-estate agents
won’t show there. The only thing that’s going to break the cycle is for well-organized neighbors
to stand up and say, “No. This is a fine organization proposing a
fine facility, but it needs to go somewhere else.” That’s
what the Oak Ridge Neighborhood Association did in this instance,
mustering all the arguments, interest groups, and legal clout at its
command, just like Panther Creek going after Wal-Mart. They seem to
have beaten the proposed J. David Jones Parkway location on the north
edge of town. Good for them. Springfield needs to respect its
neighborhoods. • Springfield needs to find the Salvation Army a new home. Defeat of the current proposal, which appears
likely, doesn’t settle the matter. “
‘No’ is part of the answer,” says Capt. Deon
Oliver, head of the Salvation Army in Springfield, “but only
part.” After receiving little City Council support for the
Jones Parkway site, Salvation Army officials admit that zoning
approval is a long shot now. They seem ready to move on toward
finding a different location. “Are we open to being on a
different property? Absolutely,” says Oliver. But they need
help. “This is not just the Salvation Army’s
concern,” says Oliver. “City of Springfield, we need to
address this problem.” The debate over the current proposal
has made everyone aware that the Salvation Army has
outgrown its 1950s building on Sixth Street, that the problem of
homelessness is growing, and that the Salvation Army is proposing a
fine facility, a true community center of which the shelter will only
be a part. “Springfield can no longer plead ignorance,”
says Oliver. “The entire city will need to deal with this
issue.” The Oak Ridge Neighborhood Association has
already offered the Salvation Army a list of alternative sites that
might work, and the city’s homelessness task force is working
on its own list. The Salvation Army has been working under the
notion that for zoning reasons, it must locate in a residential
area, but there’s no good reason that requirement can’t
be changed for the right site, which should be in the central part
of the city. This is going to require more than lists of vacant
properties and a zoning change. To avoid a repeat of the opposition
met by the current proposal, leaders need to step forward and help
the Salvation Army make things happen. Oliver says that,
nationwide, the Salvation Army is no stranger to opposition, but in
other cities a philanthropist will step forward to donate land or a
civic leader with enough influence to bring parties to the table will take on the project. That
hasn’t happened in Springfield — not yet. “Maybe
that’s because we haven’t reached a crisis yet,” says
Oliver. Because he’s heard so much praise for the work of the
Salvation Army during the controversy, he remains optimistic.
“While this has been a very stressful time, it has also been a
very affirming time,” he says. “I believe the end result
will be good.” “We need to get to work now to turn
this into a positive,” says Phil Douglas, president of the
Oak Ridge Neighborhood Association and a friend of the poor while a
defender of neighborhoods. “We need to move on now and help
the Salvation Army grow.” I tell him that the Salvation Army
says that talk is cheap. “It’s going to be more than
talk,” he replies. “We’re going to get involved
and stay involved.” These former foes will make good allies,
and I bet that neighborhood leaders will soon be out on the streets
with bells and kettles, trying to make good on their pledge. Maybe
this controversy will get the rest of us out there, too.
This article appears in Nov 3-9, 2005.
