Sad to see that there are councilmen in place who clearly would rather uphold subjective opinions (No subsidized housing! - why???) than encourage diversity or economic growth in a city with so much potential. This is no different from (recent article) opposing opinion on having Front Street vendors for a bike rack rental, bottled water/snowcone, after-hours hotdog stand. How else would you encourage SOME foot traffic, activity, or new business in the dead, old, tired downtown area? I suppose keeping small businesses afloat in the area is none of their concern, as they would rather preserve a "historic image" without regard for sustaining storefront income & growth. The mentality really stifles growth, and I feel Washington is being anti-business.

I can not believe that any sane person would state there is no demonsrated need for subsidized housing in this area. Maybe all of the homeless and at risk homeless individuals and families in the area should have a special meeting to voice thier need. Subsidized housing in this area would gaurantee economic growth.I'm at risk homeless and I have not seen one public notice of a meeting in which would solely allow me and others like myself to speak of our struggles. Everyday,in every city,state,and country low income and homeless people are crying for help yet thier voices are never heard because the wealthy politicians are decididing our fate. People who have no inkling of what a daily struggle it is to be poor and disadvantaged. We remain poor and homeless,judged and ignored because of this ignorance.It truely discusts me that a board would oppose any action that would help it's less fortunate citizens. I'm guessing it would be safe to assume that image is a major contibuting factor to this decision.Ironically,what kind of image will this beautiful and free spirited city now adopt when potential developers and residents discover they close doors to the needy. It all stems back to the common stereotype that a person must reside in a cardboard box to be considered homeless and that is what the MHDC funds are meant for.To rapid rehouse all homeless types or populations.The Mckinney-Vento Act has also been reinstated(supposedly) and little evidence shows this. I'm sure I speak for several others in stating that we will stand up and speak,petition,and appeal if possible. The anti-housing portion of the council just needs hard evidence of need and should have had a heaping pile of it. I would personally love to see supportive documents.Every single church,agency,organization,and individual who uses thier own funds and time to help low income familes and individuals would beg to differ. if there is no housing need in the area,why is there even a waiting list at our local community action agency? Im willing to do all the leg work and find out why an alternate site would or would not be the solution. Washington is beautiful because of it's diversity. Low income does not equal low class.Most of us are merely victims of circumstance. So our stories need to be heard and will.

"Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

That is a pretty bold statement: by Rhodes: "We don't want subsidized housing in the city" I wonder if the Stae or Federal government will bring suit against the City of Washington for those discriminatory remarks. Will Kurt Unnerstall bring suit against the City because he lost a sale of his property that was already zoned for multi housing. Maybe Rhodes is right, keep those low income kina people out of here. People better take not of his short man's syndrome!