Month: May 2021

by Travis Mateer

This week’s episode of Zoom Town continues to examine local dynamics of Missoula’s political season, while veering off into more meta conversations about substance abuse and narrative control.

Thanks for listening!

by Travis Mateer

Today’s post is going to pair this NBC Montana article about rising alcohol use in Montana and this MC article about Missoula County inking a new contract with a different mental health provider for civil commitments.

With my decade of experience working at the Poverello Center and Missoula Aging Services I have seen first hand how our various systems of protection, like our legal system, deals with the combination of alcohol abuse and cognitive decline.

To put it bluntly, it can be a real shit-show.

Here’s how bad Montana’s alcohol problem has become:

The Department of Public Health and Human Services reported in 2019, the average number of adults over 25 who died from alcohol surpassed 101,000.

“When we begin to analyze the overall data from state by state, you do see that there are increases in almost every state,” noted Miller.

In Montana, the DPHHS reported over 3,100 deaths related to alcohol.

“(Montana) saw a 38% increase in alcohol deaths, deaths due to alcohol,” said Miller.

Miller stated Montana showed the highest alcohol increase compared to all other states.

Alcohol abuse makes assessing a person’s cognitive decline VERY difficult, especially if the aging alcoholic refuses to comply. In this kind of situation you would HOPE that the County Attorney’s office would use their powers of civil commitment to force an assessment, but from my experience the County Attorney’s office has been almost negligent in their reluctance to do this, even when the person is a CLEAR danger to themselves and others.

Apparently the problem identified by the Missoula County Attorney’s office is “predictability”. At least that is what we are being told as an explanation for why a new provider is getting the $375,000 dollar contract instead of Western Montana Mental Health. From the second link:

In the past, Conley said, the county has contracted with Western Montana Mental Health for its MHP services. After a request for proposals, however, the selection committee chose United Minds LLC for the service.

The contract runs three years and includes $120,000 the first year, $125,000 the second year and $130,000 the third year. The service begins in July.

“It’s an interesting contract because they have to be available every single business day of the entire year for us,” Conley said. “If we don’t have an MHP, we don’t go to hearing because we don’t have a witness to prove the person meets the criteria for commitment.”

Conley said that in the past, the MHP professionals have seen a lot of turnover. The contract with United Minds is expected to bring more predictability to the process.

I have NEVER heard of United Minds LLC and haven’t been able to find much about this mental health provider online. I think it used to be called Rising Phoenix Counseling Services.

The timing of this contract change is curious. Is it just a coincidence that Missoula County is giving Western Montana Mental Health Center (WMMHC) a major economic hit at the same time WMMHC is trying to sell off a property because of continued economic challenges from the Medicaid slashes Bullock ok’d a few years ago?

Maybe I’m reading too much into this, but the problem with how the County conducts civil commitments didn’t seem, at least to me, to be a matter of NOT having predictable Mental Health Professionals available for court. It was a matter of the Missoula County Attorney’s office using excuses for NOT using their commitment powers, like adults have the RIGHT to slowly die and put others at risk with their alcohol abuse.

This is a topic I’m hoping to discuss in a future episode of Zoom Town, so stay tuned.

And thanks for reading.

by Travis Mateer

I found a podcast about affordable housing that features Blue Line Development cofounder Nathan Richmond that I am listening to right now. It’s definitely worth a listen.

Richmond discusses how Montana has very few resources for his company to exploit for the ostensible benefit of homeless people, unlike other states where his company operates, like Colorado.

For example, the Arroyo Village in Denver is a project that combines over 130 affordable housing units with a 11,000 square foot homeless shelter. This is what Missoula’s Trinity Apartment complex project is based on, according to Richmond.

The financing of this $30 million dollar project used a tax-exempt bond, a 4% tax credit and a bunch of grants from Denver’s version of the Missoula Redevelopment Agency. Richmond acknowledges that much of Colorado’s financial support of affordable housing projects like he’s building is coming from taxes derived from Cannabis sales.

In Missoula the Trinity Apartment project DID NOT use any TIF money from the Missoula Redevelopment Agency, but I’m not sure if the reason for that is the project wasn’t eligible to use TIF, or if the family relationship between the Missoula Redevelopment Agency’s director, Ellen Buchanan, and the project manager of Trinity, Keenan Whitt (Buchanan’s daughter), created a unique barrier to utilizing this potential revenue stream for Blue Line Development.

The role of Blue Line Development at the now TRANSITIONAL Safe Outdoor Space is much murkier, and I haven’t found any podcasts featuring Nathan Richmond discussing how to put a piece of property under your wife’s name in what appears to be an effort to avoid scrutiny.

The land where Missoula’s FIRST official homeless encampment exists is a piece of property that would be difficult to develop, according to a source I talked to. The main reason is that the city sewer doesn’t extend beyond the river at Buckhouse bridge, so the land owner would need to apply for a variance of some kind.

Will “creative” solutions to the regulatory constraints of sewage disposal be a future area of inquiry for out County Commissioners? I don’t know, they currently appear too busy using the United Way and other private sector partners (read Blue Line) to hide their scheming from pesky stakeholders, like the media and the tax-paying public.

Despite the cowardly act of hiding behind the lived experiences of homeless people, a fuller picture of our illuminated braintrust’s plans is beginning to emerge.

I just hope our legacy media and online upstarts can translate this emerging picture into critical questions for our political establishment as they line up behind Mayor Engen for his fifth term.

Thanks for reading.

by Travis Mateer

This is what damage control looks like.

Missoula County officials and some non-profit collaborators are hitting back after SOME of their email scheming got exposed to sunlight thanks to Missoula citizen, Mackenzie Smith.

Before getting to the damage control it’s important to note that one private entity you will hear NOTHING about is Blue Line Development. Why is that?

Recent claims contend Missoula County officials are trying to keep our constituents in the dark by working with private nonprofits to find solutions to the homelessness crisis, presumably to avoid public involvement and input.

Putting aside the cherry-picked narrative, the fact is that Missoula County has collaborated with United Way, and many other community partners, in numerous capacities over the years, including on issues like homelessness.

The irony of this statement framing the criticism as “cherry-picking” can only be appreciated when you understand how much effort has gone into NOT discussing the role of Blue Line Development in the TSOS. That is why this statement specifies private nonprofits.

Let’s continue:

These partners often have the expertise and relationships necessary for finding solutions to complicated problems, and these collaborations ensure we work toward solutions as efficiently and effectively as possible without duplicating efforts.

This part of the statement seems to reference United Way, but if United Way had the expertise and relationships necessary for finding solutions to complicated problems, like homelessness, then the 10 Year Plan To End Homelessness wouldn’t have been moved from United Way oversight to the City.

Let’s continue:

If solving homelessness were easy, we would have done it already. The reality is that homelessness is complicated, and people find themselves without a home for numerous reasons. As we work toward community-wide solutions to homelessness, both short- and long-term, we must consider the perspective of those who’ve experienced it, not just assume we can find the answers on our own.

Here we see the beginning of the setup to justify public officials discussing how to hide their scheming from the public and the media. Since homelessness is such a difficult issue our lofty officials must seek out that “lived experience” and since they are discussing individual situations, then they have to occlude their emails from public scrutiny.

The problem, though, is if we had functioning systems, like a robust Coordinated Entry System, then our public officials should NOT have to be getting into the weeds of individual situations.

But it’s those individual situations our public officials are exploiting in order to circumvent public involvement in their schemes.

Here is how homeless people are being used as shields for our elected leaders and nonprofit influencers:

The county’s community partners, which include agencies like United Way and Hope Rescue Mission, have developed trusting relationships with these folks. The vulnerable, emotional conversations that must take place for us to get below the surface and to the root of the issue can only occur in an environment of comfort and trust.

Is Dave Strohmaier a License Addiction Counselor? Is Susan Hay Patrick a psychologist? Is Jim Hicks an expert on Adverse Childhood Experiences?

If the answer to those questions is NO, then what the fuck are they doing having emotional conversations with vulnerable individuals? That is NOT their role and it is NOT appropriate for them to be engaging in the direct delivery of services to homeless individuals.

It gets worse when you realize that homeless individuals were publicly trotted out recently in a PR event to help cover the asses of these same officials, which they of course reference in their rebuttal to the critics:

We had the privilege of hearing some of these stories first-hand during the most recent public forum on the Temporary Safe Outdoor Space, where several residents spoke about how the space is helping them get back on their feet and into permanent housing and the workforce. We applaud these individuals for sharing their experiences in such a contentious setting. It’s not reasonable or compassionate, though, to expect those experiencing homelessness to share their personal stories with a public audience at every turn.

I agree that our officials are NOT acting in a reasonable or compassionate manner when they hide behind homeless clients to avoid accountability. That’s a bunch of cowardly bullshit and it needs to stop yesterday.

At least our officials use some of their PR real estate to THANK their human shields for the role they are playing in this charade:

We’re grateful for these individuals who share their experiences, as well as for the staff, both public and private, who work hard to develop and maintain their trust. Knowing them and their stories have helped our community develop effective strategies like the TSOS, about which the county has held four public meetings since it was announced in November.

That’s about all the analysis I can stomach for today. You can read the rest of the rebuttal at the Missoula Current and the Missoulian, but for some odd reason NBC Montana had to request a copy:

Earlier this week, we told you about email communications between top Missoula County officials and nonprofit leaders planning a second homeless site.

It would be in addition to the temporary tent camp south of Missoula on Highway 93.

Some of the emails show a discussion over keeping talks of a second site from the public and the media and state that two other plans derailed because of public involvement.

Now the county commissioners, Chief Administrative Officer Chris Lounsbury and the heads of the United Way and Hope Rescue Mission wrote an opinion column which was published in the Missoulian and online at the Missoula Current.

We requested a copy of it.

I bolded that last part because I think it’s significant (and petty) that our elected officials and nonprofit influencers are so weary of NBC Montana’s reporting that they (purposefully?) withheld a copy of their damage control op-ed.

Are these adults we’re dealing with or petulant children?

Here’s an idea: if you don’t like scrutiny from the media and the public, then maybe stop soliciting votes and donations from us, because when you derive your existence from public votes and public charity, you better expect some public curiosity about what you’re doing with the time we pay for and the resources we help generate through giving.

by William Skink

I am VERY saddened to announce I do NOT live in Dave’s district. I was SO hoping to give our community LINCHpin a run for his money, after all he did for my kids and the functionally obsolete bridge they used to travel over to get to school.

I guess that frees me up to compose odes to our community LINCHpin, which I did recently as the skies kept a steel cover over the valley.

Dave is linchpin, it is true
a fastener from me to you
umbilical our tax blood flows
choo-choo training from head to toe

without Dave it falls apart
public legs and private hearts
without his pin pushed in our hole
his usefulness could not be sold

linchpin Dave no twist and shout
private hands squeeze public cows
applying pressure until they spurt
now C'MON, public, BACK TO WORK!

if you do you'll get a shot
at loving Dave's linchpin A LOT
an extra service he provides
while shifting talk from public eyes