The city has again reversed its decision regarding the living situation of the over 200 men temporarily residing at the Lucerne Hotel. Just about a week after Judge Debra James ruled to move the temporary residents to the Radisson Hotel in Lower Manhattan – another judge, State Appellate Division Judge Anil Singh – decided they can stay, for now.
LUCERNE HOTEL SHELTER TO CLOSE DOORS
The case was brought about by some of the Lucerne’s temporary residents along with Downtown New Yorkers, Inc, whose members have been fighting against the relocation.
The Appellate Division, F.D., of the NYS Supreme Court has granted a stay to Downtown New Yorkers, Inc., preventing the City from moving 230 homeless men from the Lucerne Hotel to the Radisson Hotel until a 5-judge Appellate Division panel can consider the case on Monday, Dec 14. pic.twitter.com/zrObv3ybc8
— Downtown New Yorkers (@DowntownNYCers) December 3, 2020
Theresa Vitug of Downtown New Yorkers stated “We are extremely gratified that the court recognized the seriousness of this situation and the potential harm a move will cause to both the homeless men and the Lower Manhattan neighborhood.”
Advertisement
In the meantime, those who have been most vocal continue to voice their arguments and concerns.
Every day is critical as the Lucerne men await relocation to a facility with fuller services and ample common space for indoor social distancing during recreation and service delivery. We look forward to reaching a solution that best serves the needs of this population. pic.twitter.com/M94Ab6zg75
— West Side Community Organization (@westsideco_org) December 4, 2020
A stay has been granted by the appeals court, and the Lucerne residents will not be moving Monday. The city should not leave the men in limbo through the holidays–they should let them remain as long as COVID requires, and immediately use the rooms at the Radisson to save lives.
— UWS Open Hearts Initiative (@UWSOpenHearts) December 3, 2020
I know we are the liberal westside, but REALLY???? These men are homeless- they are used to moving every day, every hour. That’s the definition of homeless. So they will move to another place that’s better than where ever they have lived previously.- that’s bad for them? To say these men will be affected? I don’t know. They will have a free, clean place to live with a roof over there heads. For free. And they are ‘in limbo’ over the holidays??? They are always in limbo- give me a break. As for the downtown residents not wanting them- of course, they see what they’ll get with these guys… so we should put up with them?
Not quite. They are not “street homeless.” They were living in congregate shelters, which are very densely populated and thus petri dishes for the virus. They City moved several thousand homeless into empty hotels temporarily in order to both provide social distance at the congregate shelters and create greater social distancing for those who were moved.
They already have a free, clean place to live with a roof over their heads” at the Lucerne. And despite claims to the contrary, they are receiving robust medical, substance use, and mental health services, both on-site and off-site, as well as many other services and programs, including paid jobs which help to keep the neighborhood clean. And also despite claims to the contrary, there are no current “quality of life” issues being created by the men, although there were some issues in the first two or three weeks after they moved in.
The men are safe where they are (from Covid), have a plethora of services, indoor recreation space, and, after admitted missteps, have been largely integrated into the community. Moving them would be unnecessary, and would actually put them more at risk, particularly given the huge spike in Covid right now.
agree
Julie, truer words have not been spoken, you said it perfectly! They were once homeless & now they are upset at having to uproot to another FREE hotel room. The real deal is they are now living in a 5 star luxury hotel suite in a very upscale neighborhood and to them, the thought of downgrading to a Radisson is not good enough for what they have become used to. They want 5 star accommodations. They say that having to move is detrimental to them BUT they were only supposed to be there for 4-6 weeks week & got 5 months out of it thus far. Instead of appreciating their $500 a night hotel suite for months longer then they thought they’d have it, that’s not good enough & want to stay there indefinitely. Hey, who wouldn’t want to stay in a fancy hotel suite with a 55 inch tv set & Jacuzzi bathtub. I’d love it too. They have shown ZERO respect for this neighborhood, none wear masks outdoors & do I even need to give a list of all that has transpired up here since they moved in? Sorry downtown, we had them for 5 months, it’s your turn now. Hopefully they won’t do to you all down there like they did to us up here. If the homeless don’t like the FREE room at the Radisson with 3 FREE meals a day, there are no locks on the door keeping them in. Maybe this sounds harsh, but the saying “give an inch, take a mile” holds so true in all of this. They got so much more than they were originally promised yet that is still not good enough for them. If they just came here, respected the neighborhood, minded their own business & didn’t cause any problems nobody would have cared. That is the plain & simple truth.
“The real deal is they are now living in a 5 star luxury hotel suite in a very upscale neighborhood and to them, the thought of downgrading to a Radisson is not good enough for what they have become used to. They want 5 star accommodations. They say that having to move is detrimental to them BUT they were only supposed to be there for 4-6 weeks week & got 5 months out of it thus far. Instead of appreciating their $500 a night hotel suite for months longer then they thought they’d have it, that’s not good enough & want to stay there indefinitely.”
You are wildly misinformed. Firstly, you are wrong about the Radisson. Whatever it may be as a hotel for tourists, it would provide exactly the same amenities for the homeless men as the Lucerne, including microwaves and TVs in each room. And since the City is claiming that the men will get the EXACT same services that they do at the Lucerne (which is not true), there would be no “downgrading” involved.
Second, the cost for the rooms at EITHER hotel is the same, since it is determined by the City’s contract with HANY. That amount is between $116 and $166/night, not $500.
finally, the original contract was NOT for 4-6 weeks; it was for six MONTHS. As well, the moves were made with the expectation that the homeless residents would NOT be moved out until it was safe for them to return to congregate shelters.
You can believe anything you want, but those are the FACTS.
You took what I posted totally the wrong way. I am NOT disagreeing with anything you said in regard to the services as the Radisson being better equipped with their needs. They had the time to properly set it all up & each time they were about to go down there, the plug got pulled last minute. That is exactly where they should be housed. I was telling my opinions on why THEY (the residents there fighting to stay at the Lucern) do not want to go. I don’t blame them. If I had a choice of living in a $500 a night hotel suite as opposed to another hotel that was 3/4 a night less in price, I’d pick the pricier hotel as well. Plus the nicer neighborhood. That is the problem, they got way too comfortable there & have now grown accustomed to that lifestyle & do not want to be downgraded. The better services at the Radisson mean nothing to them. They want luxury, they want a nicer neighborhood. I am sure a select few are trying to get help, but the majority are just taking full advantage of this & are riding the wave as long as they can. Originally it was said they would only be at the Lucern for a few weeks, 4-6. It was also stated that the contract with the Lucern would end the first week of October & that no matter what they would be out of there by then. I knew they’d find a way to prolong it & of course they did. They have no respect for being a guest in this neighborhood. They take off their mask the second they walk out the front door. I have myself seen them cause havoc at the Duane Reade across the street. There are police cars, ambulances, paramedics out there every day, sometimes more than once. This is what has become of our once safe & quiet neighborhood. I say it again, if they are able to receive a FREE hotel room with 3 meals a day they don’t have to pay a cent for, then they have great nerve to take to court that they want to remain at the Lucern over another hotel. They are given free room and food, they should be happy no matter what hotel it is in. That is my opinion. I truly hope they are finally transferred down to the Radisson (as the judge herself ordered) ASAP & put an end to this 5 month long drama already so they can continue to live for FREE down there & get the better help that is waiting there for them.
With respect, it is you who are missing the point. The hotels are exactly similar. In fact, the Radisson is the more “cushy” of the two. Take a look at pictures of the rooms. The rooms at the Radisson are significantly larger than the Lucerne. And again, what part of they will have the exact same amenities are you not getting? As well, what part of the cost are you not getting: it does not matter where they go, the cost to the City will be the same because it is a contracted amount.
They will NOT be better off at the Radisson. They will LOSE on-sit services (even the provider admits that), they will lose ALL of the programs provided by Open Hearts Initiative, and they will lose the paying jobs they currently have through Goddard Riverside.
You are wrong in every single regard. The men want to stay because they are safe, have robust services on-site and off, and every move causes further instability and trauma for them. The reason for the move is NOT for their betterment; it is entirely POLITCAL, based on a promise made by Deblahsio to his pal Randy Mastro. That is it. It has NOTHING to do with the men’s welfare. They are being used as political pawns.
At first Ian I thought you misunderstood or misread my post as I AGREED with you & your points on the hotels. Now I write a follow up & see you again find reason to disagree with me even though I again agreed on all your points. So I read more of others comments on here that others left & see that you comment to disagree with everyone on everything. You’re just one of those people who seems to like to argue with others, even if their viewpoint point is the same as yours. Some people just look for things to argue with others over, but when they agree with the same viewpoints you have, you then come across as unstable. But whatever floats your boat I guess. Good luck to you.
Please explain how your viewpoint is the same as mine. This was your original comment:
“They were once homeless & now they are upset at having to uproot to another FREE hotel room. The real deal is they are now living in a 5 star luxury hotel suite in a very upscale neighborhood and to them, the thought of downgrading to a Radisson is not good enough for what they have become used to. They want 5 star accommodations. They say that having to move is detrimental to them BUT they were only supposed to be there for 4-6 weeks week & got 5 months out of it thus far. Instead of appreciating their $500 a night hotel suite for months longer then they thought they’d have it, that’s not good enough & want to stay there indefinitely. Hey, who wouldn’t want to stay in a fancy hotel suite with a 55 inch tv set & Jacuzzi bathtub. I’d love it too. They have shown ZERO respect for this neighborhood,”
I agree with NONE of this. So how are our viewpoints similar? Or are YOU the one who likes to argue, particularly when you are called out for misinformation?
You are so right about Ian. He’s an evil person and not normal
Yes, just a sad person who looks to fight with others about, well, anything. I see his name on another blog site where he does the exact same thing to everyone on there too.
What I do, Dave, is provide accurate information, facts and truth in the face of so much inaccurate information and disinformation. What I see in response is willful ignorance and the need to have a scapegoat. This has been proven over and over on these thread. So yes, I go on all of the threads and try to provide accurate information, facts and truth. Sadly, many of you are fact-averse, and cling to your need for bogeymen.
There are not enough LOLs in the world to respond to that. That’s called “The pot calling the kettle black.”
It’s disgusting that our neighborhood has to be destroyed by these psychotic deviants who defecate and deal drugs in our neighborhood. Being liberal doesn’t mean that we hard working taxpayers and families have to bow down to all of your phony whims and allow our neighborhood to be destroyed. We can’t provide the proper care for these sick people who need serious help.
I really hope you will stop regurgitating old canards that are untrue. The people you see defecating and dealing drugs are NOT the residents of the hotel. They are “street homeless.” In fact, this has been confirmed by the 20th Precinct, and the service provider at the Lucerne has long since removed any “bad apples” from the hotel. You are conflating two populations, and scapegoating the men because it is easy for you to do, and you NEED ascapegoat.
And our neighborhood is NOT “being destroyed.” I have lived here for over 55 years, and I walk or bike every single day around the area. I have not seen anything at all that would lead me to believe that the neighborhood is “being destroyed.” You are engaging in hyperbole and hyperventilating over nothing.
And even if some of the men WERE still engaging in bad behavior, using a term like “psychotic deviants” says far more about you than it does about them.
Ian, we do not agree on the Lucerne. But can we agree to be civil to one another? These shelters have turned our neighborhood into a divisive community. Your pointed comments add to this toxic culture. You have positioned yourself as a leader on the UWS. Please, let’s figure out how to be civil, or even better align to find the best solution for our homeless challenges.
I am not bound to be civil to NIMBYs and thinly-veiled racists who care more about their property values than they do about other human beings. I am not bound to be civil to people who call homeless individuals “psychotic deviants.” I am not bound to be civil to people who proceed from false information and disinformation, and refuse to accept facts and truth when they are actually provided, and who scapegoat a specific group.
No, I do NOT have to be civil, nor WILL I be. Even Jesus had some choice words for some of the people of His time: jackals, vipers, fools. So okay, I will swap out some of my words for those. Satisfied?
No. I am not for NIMBY or racism of any level. I have black family members and friends and have been dedicated to diversity committees (gender, race and LGBTQ) well before it became the norm. I had the honor to meet Obama as a result of my work. I believe toxic leadership results in further destruction but it seems you are on your path. I wish you well.
You do realize that “some of my best friends are Black” is one of the oldest “covers” for racism in the book? I am not accusing you personally of being racist. And I am happy to be civil with YOU. I will NOT be civil with people like Harriet, who has proved time and again through her comments ion these threads that she is a blatantly racist human being, all her protestations to the contrary notwithstanding.
And it was not the men of the Lucerne who caused the “division” in our neighborhood. It was the NIMBYs, whose thinly -veiled racism led to the current situation. It was their hiring of the mayor’s pal Randy Mastro, and the mayor’s personal promise to him, that caused the division. The mayor, Mr. Mastro and his NIMBY clients are NOT concerned with the well-being of the men, no matter how many times they claim it. The men are being used as political pawns by the mayor. Period.
Ian has called me a blatant racist. he is a person who cannot deal with others having different opinions, very much like a 2 year old. he can be more dangerous to the cause of homelessness than anybody I know. he should be ashamed of himself
Harriet:
I don’t have to call you anything. You have outed yourself over multiple comments on multiple articles, particularly those about the men at the Lucerne. You have been given facts and truth that belie your claims, but you ignore them. Based on the things you say, and the way you say them, it would be difficult in the extreme NOT to come to the conclusion that I do. Safety is one thing; but you do not simply address that issue. You go well beyond that in your vitriol, vilification and mean-spiritedness. You are absolutely entitled to your opinion, But if in expressing that opinion you make racist or thinly-veiled racist comments, what is one SUPPOSED to think?
you are really off. first of all, you think I’m racist. there are lots of white men in the hotels for your information. racism has nothing to do with this, but in your puffed up and inflexible opinions, you can grasp at nothing better. black , white, green or yellow, what matters is that these guys aren’t getting what they need from those hotels and we, as residents of the uws are not happy with the quality of our streets. defecating, drug deals, cat calls, sexual abuse, this is not what we want or need here
“What matters is that these guys aren’t getting what they need from those hotels and we, as residents of the uws are not happy with the quality of our streets. defecating, drug deals, cat calls, sexual abuse, this is not what we want or need here.”
Let me try this one more time, although it is clear you are impervious to facts.
The men are getting EVERYTHING they need right now at the Lucerne; and this has been true for at least the past two months. They get on-site health, medical, substance use and mental health services; they have on-site social worker who help them with job training and searches, securing of benefits, and other social services. They have on-site meetings, including harm reduction. They have on-site recreational space and programs for it. And that is just what the provider offers. Open Hearts Initiative provides additional services and programs, including 12-step programs, writing workshops, a spiritual program with local faith leaders, and even housewarming packages for anyone who moves into permanent housing. And Goddard Riverside has provided 50 paying jobs for them, which they are taking advantage of.
So, yes, they ARE receiving “what they need” – and more – and will actually LOSE many of those services if they are moved. But you don’t want to hear this, because it goes against your certitude of what you WANT to believe.
As for the “defecating, drug deals, cat calls, sexual abuse,” I say yet again that you have NO idea which of those are being perpetrated by the hotel residents, and which by the street homeless. In fact, yo have no logic or common sense whatsoever. Who is more likely to be defecating on the street, a person with a private room and bathroom just steps away, or a homeless person on the street who has nowhere to go? Drug deals? Not any more. And the 20th Precinct can back me up. “Sexual abuse?” REALLY?! Please define that, since that is the single most absurd claim you have made thus far. “Cat calls?” Walk by an construction site and you will get more of them than you CLAIM to have received from….who? The men at the hotel or the street homeless? But again, you don’t want to hear this, because it goes against your certitude of what you WANT to believe.
Harriett, please, do not waste 1 second of frustration or a word typed back to Ian. His entire purpose is to fight, argue & upset others. Even if you agree with every word he says he will attempt to turn it into a fight. He does the EXACT same thing on another blog site for the UWS. By replying to him at all is doing what he is hoping you’ll do. If you read his other posts you will see he does this to everyone. He is a sad man with an even sadder life. Don’t give him what he wants & no matter what he says to any post you make, do not reply to it. He is not worth your time or the 2 minutes I just spent writing this out. But I did it for you (and others) so you know his motives and what he is attempting to do to everyone. Remember everyone a person who writes a nasty comment to anyone and everyone is here for 1 reason only. As the sign states at the zoo “please don’t feed the animals.”
Of course, this is belied by the fact that if you read through this comment thread, you will see that those who truly agree with me (as opposed to people like Dave who lie about it), my responses have always been “thank yous” and kind words. And I invite you to got through other comment threads on this subject on this site, and you will see the same thing. The proof is in the pudding, and is there for everyone to see.
Sandy, don’t even waste 1 second of time or energy trying to explain anything to Ian. What he is doing is “his thing”, he likes to argue and antagonize anyone who writes on these blogs. Even if you agree with him, he still argues back. If you look at any other comment made on here, he writes an argument & debate with them disagreeing on what they say & trying to provoke them. There is another blog, he does the exact same thing there as well. You could write a post calling him the greatest man in the world & he’d write back a typical nasty & provocative Ian comment. This is what he gets off on, so don’t waste your time feeding the monster. Sadly, there are people in this world who’s only sense of enjoyment are doing things like that. It’s sad actually.
And what, exactly, would you be “explaining” to me? And I have already proven you wrong on your claim that I disagree even with those who agree with me. In fact, you were too much of a coward to respond to my last post, which quoted you at length from your own post. Nice try, buddy. It’s called “projection.”
It says thAt I’m more concerned about the safety and quality of life in our neighborhood than you are
What is says is that you don’t understand that the two are not mutually exclusive. You can have both, if you are willing to work toward it. YOU are not willing to. YOU want what YOU want. YOU care more about your “quality of life” (even temporarily, since the men will eventually be gone once the crisis is over) than you do about other human beings. It is obvious what YOU are and what YOU care about. I happen to care about BOTH and have been working toward that – successfully. The conditions around the hotels are now almost entirely calm and without incident. What you see now with respect to “quality of life conditions” are “street homeless,” not hotel residents.
you are a person who pontificates and spews a lot of fantasy around to have something to pat yourself on the back for. when you can’t be flexible and have a debate you resort to abusive accusations and language which shows the stuff you’re really made of. as I’ve said before, shame on you.
I am sorry if that is the way I come across. That is not my intent. My primary intent is to provide accurate information in the face of so much inaccurate information and disinformation. But I do get righteously angry in the face of willful ignorance and closeted racism.
that said, what do you mean by “fantasy?” EVERYTHING I provide is accurate information, facts and truth.
Ian and other bleeding hearts should take some of these fine innocent men into their homes
You really are a piece of work aren’t you?
I have been doing street ministry to the homeless for almost two decades. And I have been actively involved in tying to solve this issue for even longer. What the h— have YOU done other than gripe, complain, scapegoat and vilify?
Let’s be honest, no one wants the homeless to “disrupt” their own neighborhood. So to be fair, they should split the 300 men and 150 will stay on UWS and 150 downtown.
That would SEEM fair, but it is not. There are already three homeless shelters downtown in striking distance of the Radisson. So that would still not be “fair” to them.
However, far more importantly, the very concept of “fair share” has been struck down in the courts over and over. It is a blatantly discriminatory process.
Ian let the paid professionals figure it out. Street ministry is noble but they need
more than that right now. Stay in your lane. Give it a rest.
Happy Holidays
With respect, this IS my lane. I have been working on the homeless issue for over three decades, including co-chairing one of the few multi-agency, multi-faceted attempts to solve the problem. My street ministry is only part of that, and my knowledge and expertise in this area is as solid as anyone else’s, and probably even more broad. it IS people like me whoa re going to “figure it out” – with no help from many here who would rather move all the homeless to another State.
Upper West Side liberals proving they’ve got more in common with Trump supporters than they’d like to admit. Honestly not sure some of you aren’t. I saw homeless people wearing masks while some of you yuppies walked around maskless and carefree with your children. Your rhetoric and visible contempt for the poor, who have been utterly failed by society at large, are identical. Guess what, there’s been homeless people and drug dealers in this neighborhood long before the pandemic and they’ll continue to be so long as we live in a society that is at best apathetic towards the downtrodden and more commonly just straight antagonistic. They’ve been here longer than all of you have, long before the wealthy gentrified the neighborhood and pushed people out. The neighborhood hasn’t gone to shit, the only thing ruining it are you NIMBY harpies who would be better off moving to the suburbs already so you don’t have to sully your vision by having to face the victims of the exploitative system you and I are lucky enough to benefit from. It’s fucking embarrassing to tell people you’re from the Upper West Side, people laugh at you people and your cruelty when articles make the news about bougious scumbags petitioning and fighting poor people with nowhere else to stay to leave your neighborhood because you don’t want to have to deal with the horror of poor people in the same zipcode as you. Normal people with an actual conscience and ability to care about others don’t like seeing homeless people because it’s exceptionally cruel there are literal children starving and dying on the streets in the world’s richest country when we have over 66 empty houses for every homeless person and there’s constantly new luxery condos being built and left empty instead of affordable housing, but you scumbags are concerned about your fucking property values and “people getting a free ride” as if being born into wealth isn’t the literal biggest free ride. And before anyone jumps on my ass about civility, fuck your civility and faux concern. Maybe save some for the poor and homeless people you regularly dehumanize and ignore. Not a single one of you give a damn about “what’s best for them” or you wouldn’t have such a problem with them being here and using that as a mask for your blatant classism is disgusting. I’d at least have some tiny modicum of respect for you if you were honest enough to say “I just don’t like poor people and don’t want them around me” because at least that’d be the truth.
Sam:
Thank you for this. All I can say is “Amen!”
i would make one correction. You say “Upper West Side liberals.” But I don’t think that’s the case. This is the formerly silent minority of Upper West Side conservatives. They have found something to rally around, and now they are a vocal minority. And this can be seen by the fact that they have turned this into an anti-Democrat issue, not just a phony “quality of life” issue. They are not simply targeting the homeless (who are 90% people of color) but also the UWS Democratic elected officials who actually have the heart and compassion you speak of, and dare to allow homeless people to live in the imagined gated community of the UWS that these oppositionists would like to live in (and you alluded to in your line about THEM moving out, not the homeless).
Otherwise, your comment is spot on, and I applaud your courage (obviously born of righteous anger and frustration, like mine) and willingness to be lambasted as I have been.
Thank you Sam! Well said and it’s about time.