Let Them Eat Cake?

I can't be reading that Bethlehem Inn story in the Bulletin yesterday correctly, can I?

I'm not going to put my own impressions here, just repeat what the story said.

"Less than a year after Deschutes county paid 2.25 million toward the purchase of a facility for a Bend homeless shelter, county commissioners heard Wednesday that the shelter has no immediate plans to pay back that money.

"The county also learned that the Bethlehem Inn board of directors thinks the former hotel purchased mostly with county funds in late July is inadequate for the shelter's long term needs. In a letter the County Commission received Wednesday, the boards' president wrote the Bethlehem Inn would prefer to buy vacant land and build a facility from scratch."

The above is word for word, the first two paragraphs of the Bulletin story.

That can't be right, can it? I mean, I must be missing something. It sound a lot like giving a car to a person, and having them say, "I don't want it. It isn't a Mercedes." Or like giving a house to someone, and them saying, "I don't want it. It doesn't have a hot tub." Or giving someone a T.V. and them saying, "I don't want it. It isn't a big screen T.V."

So I'm thinking, I must be misinterpreting somehow.

But it seems to just get worse.

"Given the Inn's increased operating cost at the facility, the change in funding priorities, and the prohibitive cost to purchase and remodel the facility into a homeless shelter, the Econo Lodge no longer appears to be a permanent solution for the Inn," board President Jonathan Basham wrote in the letter.

"The economic slowdown has increased demand at Bethlehem Inn on Third Street.

"It has also led to a decrease in donations from local businesses and individuals, said Executive Director Sandra Mears.

"The Bethlehim Inn in not meeting its operating budget and is having difficulty funding sponsors for its June 2 casino fund raiser."

Word for word on the next four paragraphs. Again, I'm confused. They want new land and new facilities but they can't even pay the operating costs of the one they have? I must be missing something....

And it gets worse and worse. So much so, that I'm still kind of in disbelief. It sounds, though, like the fund raising (which pays the directors and such) isn't going well. So they want to get more money for a different kind of program that the federal and state government is willing to fund.

But that makes it sound like they're more concerned about fund raising than they are in actually running a real live homeless shelter. That can't be right, can it?

It is a dangerous thing to cast aspersions on people who are volunteering to help people. But, a few questions should be raised, I'd think.

I had similar reaction when the Salvation Army closed their thrift store and now when the St. Vincent DePaul's is closing. The numbers don't make sense to me. The costs are too high, the income too low. Especially since they're getting their inventory for free.

I just don't get it.

But, well, I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. There must be something I'm missing.

And on a related matter; is it common knowledge you can stiff the county any time you feel like it? That there are no consequences? Just in my memory of the last decade of so, it seems like we've had the county fairgrounds, Royal Blend coffee, the senior center, Bethlehem Inn and our county sheriff pretty much take advantage of the county. Who's watching out? Who's drawing up these contracts?

No wonder Pronghorn feels like they can give Deschutes County the finger. When the commissioners seem to throw up their hands and say, "What can we do?"