LETTER: Armory shelter could be a partnership rather than a rushed solution

October 26, 2024 | By Patrick Blanchard

To the Community:

As winter approaches, families in Vermont face an increasingly uncertain future with the potential use of the Waterbury Armory as a family shelter. While the idea of repurposing the armory to offer shelter is commendable, especially as the state pulls back on its emergency hotel housing, the ongoing lack of clear communication from the state has sown unnecessary confusion and frustration among local residents and officials alike.

The absence of direct communication with Waterbury officials —who found out about the armory’s proposed use as a shelter from the news rather than from state authorities— is disappointing. Local representatives, town officials, and school districts are not only caught off guard but are also left with insufficient time to prepare for an influx of families who may need access to schools, transportation, and community resources. This oversight risks undermining community support for a shelter project that is, by all rights, desperately needed.

Furthermore, while Gov. Phil Scott’s administration acknowledges that community engagement is essential, the vague assurances without solid planning details raise questions. Who will manage this shelter? How will the staffing challenges be met? With the clock ticking down to a Nov. 1 opening, it’s disconcerting that answers remain elusive. Waterbury has expressed a readiness to help, but the state’s approach of “announcing, then figuring out” risks alienating a community that has previously extended goodwill.

As Waterbury’s representatives pointed out, the state’s reliance on last-minute disclosures only stirs up public anxiety. Vermont deserves a state government that not only initiates solutions but actively collaborates with communities. If the Waterbury armory is to truly serve as a safe haven, the state needs to break its cycle of delayed communication and keep residents, officials, and service providers informed every step of the way.

The prospect of transforming the Waterbury Armory into a family shelter could be a positive step, addressing Vermont’s housing crisis and aiding families as winter looms. However, the state’s lack of clear, timely communication with Waterbury residents and officials is frustrating, particularly as these same residents contend with rising costs of living. If the state hopes to earn the community’s support for housing individuals in need, it must offer a transparent partnership and tangible benefits for the people of Waterbury.

One way the state could foster goodwill is by providing direct support to offset the economic impact this shelter could have on the town. For instance, assistance with local infrastructure—like grants for maintaining roads or improvements to the local school system—would address the anticipated increase in community use. Additional funds to support public services, such as police, fire, and healthcare resources, would also signal the state’s commitment to keeping Waterbury a safe, welcoming place for both its current residents and those seeking shelter.

Moreover, the state could explore incentives such as tax relief or direct utility assistance for Waterbury residents who are feeling the squeeze of inflation and may fear that additional social services could strain local resources. Investment in affordable housing projects for long-term residents, job training, and employment initiatives could also support economic stability and demonstrate that this isn’t a one-sided arrangement; the state has as much to offer the residents of Waterbury as it’s asking them to provide to vulnerable families in need.

While housing individuals in need is a crucial goal, the state cannot simply assume Waterbury will take on this responsibility without meaningful incentives and transparent planning. With these efforts, the state could transform this shelter from a rushed solution into a mutually beneficial partnership that strengthens Waterbury for all who call it home.

Patrick Blanchard

Waterbury 

Previous
Previous

LETTER: Concerts for a Cause looks to schedule more performances

Next
Next

Op-Ed: We need a willing affordability partner, not just talk