The Lucerne Hotel will be closing its doors to the homeless men who have been residing at the 79th Street building since July 2020, a court ruled on Thursday. Patch was the first to report this update.
Three former Lucerne Hotel residents who’ve now secured separate housing accommodations had filed a petition to prevent the men who are still there from being relocated to the Radisson Hotel in the Financial District. But because these petitioners are no longer Lucerne residents, the judge presiding over the case dismissed their petition.
Towards the end of September, it was determined that the men would instead be transferred to the Radisson Hotel downtown.
Get The Upper West Side Newsletter
In January 2021, a court ruled that the Lucerne Hotel residents could determine whether they wanted to stay put or relocate to the Raddison.
A group called the West Side Community Organization (WestCo), represented by attorney Randy Mastro, had formed early on in an attempt to relocate the homeless individuals living at the Lucerne Hotel as well as Hotel Belleclaire on West 77th Street.
When Mayor de Blasio visited the Lucerne, he stated that conditions were unacceptable and agreed that the men should be relocated.
Both WestCo and the mayor also argued since the men who were filing the appeal had already moved out, the case should be dismissed, which it now has been.
Regarding the court’s most recent decision, WestCo General Counsel Melinda Thaler said “WestCo has always been concerned about the twin consequences of inadequate support to the MICA clients: jeopardy to their health and well being, and jeopardy to neighborhood safety. We are gratified that a fully-supported facility with on-site, wrap-around services will now be available to guide these men toward recovery.”
“West Side Community Organization (WestCo) prevailed today in a nearly year-long court case, allowing the City to transfer hundreds of homeless drug-addicted and mentally ill men from the Lucerne Hotel on the Upper West Side to a proper shelter with full services. The City, joined by WestCo in the appeal, argued that this vulnerable population would be better served at a shelter facility downtown (52 William Street) that offers the onsite medical and psychiatric supportive services, detox and drug testing, common space for recreation, jobs counseling and training that the Lucerne lacked.”
In the third paragraph of WestCo’s press release, the organization further stated that “The initial trial was heard in November 2020 by Judge Debra James, who ruled in favor of WestCo and the City’s position that the men, while guaranteed a right to shelter, were not entitled to demand the location of their choosing. She dismissed arguments made by three of the men residing at the hotel who sought to control the City’s decision-making as to where the homeless population should be housed. In today’s ruling, the Appellate Department held that because the three homeless men who resisted the City’s transfer had al transitioned to permanent housing, the men could not continue their challenge to the trial court’s holding that shelter client placement is in the sole discretion of the City, and the litigation must be dismissed.”
“While we are disappointed the court did not consider the merits of the case and the irrational and harmful nature of the city’s decision-making, we also think it’s important to look back on *how much was won* because @homeless_hero and 2 others stood up to fight. They stopped the displacement of the men at the Lucerne based on the whims of a few wealthy and powerful NIMBYs. They preserved jobs, ensured people were moved into permanent housing, and won better services. The city has now announced an imminent move back to congregate shelters. It would be beyond irrational for the city to displace people to the Radisson now, only to move them again a few weeks later, and thus we expect the <100 people left at the Lucerne to remain there, pending the move back to their permanent shelter. But, we also want to appeal to the city to use EVERY tool at their disposal to get people into permanent housing. Men at the Lucerne are taking remote classes, and doing work-from-home jobs. They are utilizing on-site services; Drug and alcohol use has substantially dropped vs the congregate setting. To force them back to shelters where they would lose all this progress would be cruel. The city has choices: They can use emergency section 8 vouchers and a fast-track of Intro 146 to get people into HOUSING, saving the city money AND doing the right thing. We hope they will.”
This article is WILDLY inaccurate. The men will NOT be moved to the Radisson. What the Court decided was that the men would be returned to congregate shelter as the larger move of ALL “hotel homeless” back to congregate shelters begins soon. there will be no “second move” to another hotel. And this is not surprising; this had been expected from early on, as the Appeal Court “stay” was only six months from the date of filing, which was always going to be early June. So, ultimately, the men and their supporters accomplished EXACTLY what they set out to do: prevent a second move, and allow the men to stay until it was safe to return them to congregate shelter.
BELLECLAIRE HOTEL ?
The people who support this, should invite them to live in their own buildings. Having a metal detector in the lobby, tells you the type of people that are being placed here. No ventilation, no proof of vaccination, or proof of testing, putting long term senior citizen residents at risk… it’s like living in a prison, security guards unmasked, sleeping on the stairs etc. This is NOT a safe or healthy environment.
Your compassion is touching.
It is City policy to have metal detectors in homeless shelters, whether they are congregate shelters or hotels. There is plenty of ventilation in the hotels; I doubt actual hotel guests would stay there otherwise. The permanent residents of the Lucerne and Belleclaire have had little or no problem with the homeless residents, and none of them considers it a prison.
It is a far safer and healthier environment than the congregate shelters during a pandemic.
Like to regurgitate right-wing talking points much?
Monday afternoon outside the Lucern there was a police car, ambulance and fire truck because of some sort of havoc caused by one of the residents. You know, the ones who were put in a luxury hotel to live for free and are working so hard to better themselves. If these men had showed gratitude for being there and respect to the neighborhood, none of these groups would have fought so hard to get rid of them. I myself look forward for the rest of the ones living in there to leave. My opinion and I am entitled to it.
“Monday afternoon outside the Lucern there was a police car, ambulance and fire truck because of some sort of havoc caused by one of the residents.”
Please note that emergency vehicles use hat space even when the call does not come from the hotel, since it is the only empty space on the block, being hotel parking normally. So just because you see emergency vehicles outside the hotel does not mean there is an issue there. I am not suggesting there are NEVER issues, only that assuming the issue is at the hotel is wrong.
“You know, the ones who were put in a luxury hotel to live for free and are working so hard to better themselves. If these men had showed gratitude for being there and respect to the neighborhood, none of these groups would have fought so hard to get rid of them.”
That is simply malarkey. A great many of the men expressed gratitude and tried to be good neighbors. But all of YOU folks (i) focused only on the few bad apples, rather than the majority, and (ii0 often conflated the men there with the street homeless. So you are full of it when you say that people would not have fought so hard against them. You and others were going to have that fight no matter what, and you can lie all you want about it.
“I myself look forward for the rest of the ones living in there to leave. My opinion and I am entitled to it.” Absolutely true; you are entitled to your opinion. and you are also entitled to be a discompassionate, mean-spirited jerk.
Homeless people don’t get to choose where they live! They should be thankful they are paying attention to them. Ideally, because of their behavior, they belong in the Bronx or Yonkers!!
Your understanding and compassion are touching.
Ian, since you are so compassionate, perhaps you would like to house some of these homeless people in your own apartment! Personally, I have been spat upon by one of them. Why should I constantly be fearful for the safety of my wife and kids? I show compassion to those who deserve it.
That, of course, is silly. It is not about whether I would or could house any of them myself. And while being spat upon is horrible), why would it make you feel “unsafe?” Did one of them pull a knife on you, or a gun, or menace you in some way, or threaten your children? While what happened is terrible, you are overreacting
And compassion is not something that is “earned”; it is for EVERYONE, PARTICUARLY those with severe “issues,” such as lack of housing, or mental illness. Those are EXACTLY the people who deserve your compassion.
I feel sorry for you.
For real, move to California and sleep with the homeless in San Francisco on the streets that has caused a major exodus from the city… I am sure they could use someone like you who has time to leave negative rants, without any course of action to which signifies you help the men in recovery… this was meant to be temporary placement in hotels in NYC during COVID.. and that was granted.
Time to move on and stop bashing people who realistically confirm that hotels were never built to house homeless long-term, and it’s time to deal with the reality that they need to be situated in an environment built to offer them the services they need. Have you been in the hotel to witness the situation? Obviously not.. as others have and deemed it “unacceptable”…
I gather you haven’t lived in NYC long enough to learn from the history of what brought this City back from disarray during the 70s.. irony how you and others came here when it was cleaned up and think you know how it should be run.
There’s more you can do in the community if you do so care to do than constantly barrage commentators who sensibly respond in saying that this is not the solution..
So yes, I call you the naïve idiot.. we’re all sick of your rants “ian”…. small cap, because that’s what you are..
“For real, move to California and sleep with the homeless in San Francisco on the streets that has caused a major exodus from the city…”
Please provide a single source for this claim. The “exodus” from SF was due to the pandemic, not homelessness. https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/exodus-study-reveals-dramatic-san-francisco-population-change/
I am sure they could use someone like you who has time to leave negative rants, without any course of action to which signifies you help the men in recovery… this was meant to be temporary placement in hotels in NYC during COVID.. and that was granted.”
I have been helping them by providing spiritual comfort during a time when houses of worship are closed. And I have been involved in the homeless issue – including actively, in helping hem find housing, and in several organizations that are seeking SOLUTIONS, for 30 years. And my “rants” are neither “negative” nor rants.”
“Time to move on and stop bashing people who realistically confirm that hotels were never built to house homeless long-term, and it’s time to deal with the reality that they need to be situated in an environment built to offer them the services they need. Have you been in the hotel to witness the situation? Obviously not.. as others have and deemed it “unacceptable.”
Just like you, the mayor (who made the “unacceptable” comment) conflating those in the hotels with those on the street. While there have obviously been some “bad apples” at the hotels, the overwhelming majority of the “quality of life “conditions are being affected by the doubling in size of the street homeless population when they closed the subways.
“I gather you haven’t lived in NYC long enough to learn from the history of what brought this City back from disarray during the 70s.. irony how you and others came here when it was cleaned up and think you know how it should be run.”
I have lived here for 55 years. And I have been actively involved in the community on several issues for 40 of those. And I have been providing service to the street homeless since I became a minister in 2002. What have YOU done?
“There’s more you can do in the community if you do so care to do than constantly barrage commentators who sensibly respond in saying that this is not the solution..”
And I do. But I am sick and tired of people like you who don’t care about facts, but only go on feelings. Feelings are certainly important. But to ignore the realities and facts surrounding the current situation – and to constantly spread lies and misinformation – is wrong, no matter what your feelings might be.
“So yes, I call you the naïve idiot.. we’re all sick of your rants “ian”…. small cap, because that’s what you are..”
Neither naive nor an idiot, I am a 55-year UWSDer who has done FAR more than you, or any of the actually complainers here, have done, to help our community, including the homeless.
Sure…
Let’s start with the NYT… As Homelessness Surges in California, So Does a Backlash
Tent encampments across California are testing residents’ tolerance and compassion as street conditions deteriorate. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/21/us/california-homeless-backlash.html
City officials explain plan to address homelessness, drug abuse — https://abc7news.com/sf-homeless-crisis-covid-drugs/10430765/
San Francisco Mayor London Breed acknowledged that when it comes to the homeless population in the city there are a lot of mental health challenges, a lot of drug addiction and other issues that are impacting the quality of life of San Francisco residents,
https://www.city-journal.org/san-francisco-homelessness
Exits from San Francisco from late March 2020 until year-end soared by 649% compared to 2019.
The statewide trend showed a change in the fourth quarter of 2020 when 267,000 people left the state and only 128,000 moved in. The movers leaving the state has grown slightly to 18% from 16% since 2015 and that trend continued in 2020.
The city is paying $61,000 annually to house formerly homeless people in tents. The city’s current budget for its Dept. of Homeless and Supportive Housing is $852 million, more than the city of Sacramento’s total budget of $650 million for more than 500,000 residents.
The city estimates there are 8,000 homeless people there which works out to $106,500 in city costs per person.
Set aside for a moment that the last encampment in SF has been dismantled. The article specifically states that that “649%” exit rate in SF is due to the pandemic, NOT the homeless situation (or did you miss that?).
Also, NYC does not pay a single cent for the street homeless, except in as much as there is a program to reach out to them; once they leave the shelter, the City does not pay for them. The “60,000” figure you provide (it is actually closer to 65,000) is the number of people in shelters; it does not include the street homeless.
Finally, there is a homeless crisis in virtually every large city in America. And no city has been able to solve the crisis to any significant degree. Clearly, throwing money at it is not the answer (though money is certainly PART of the answer). What is clear is that there needs to be a more comprehensive, multi-faceted approach, implemented by a more efficient bureaucracy (or is that an oxymoron?) and more competent political leaders (whether Dem or GOP).
I think you can agree with that. So why do you and others blame the homeless themselves, and vilify them so intensely? Why do you “blame the victim” instead of blaming the system that is supposed to serve them? And why do you respond in such a mean-spirited and discompassionate manner, and simply snipe from the sidelines, instead of getting involved and at least attempting to be part of the solution?
You say it Mike! Ian just likes to fuel the fire by telling everyone how wrong they are for not wanting them continuing to live at the Lucern. I myself was almost assaulted by someone in front of the Duane Reade last summer and it was a very scary thing I still have nightmares about. They took over and turned this neighborhood into a totally different place within a week of their arrival. I agree with your sentiments, if Ian wants these men to be housed for free, he should take them in to his own apartment to live with him.
“You say it Mike! Ian just likes to fuel the fire by telling everyone how wrong they are for not wanting them continuing to live at the Lucerne.”
It is supremely ironic that you accuse ME of “fueling the fire” when it was you and your ilk who lit that fire to begin with with your discompassionate, selfish NUMBY attitude from the outset.
“I myself was almost assaulted by someone in front of the Duane Reade last summer and it was a very scary thing I still have nightmares about.”
“almost assaulted.” Is that like being partly pregnant?
“They took over and turned this neighborhood into a totally different place within a week of their arrival.”
Still lying. You are still completely deaf to the facts. (Sadly, that does not surprise me.) The men were moved in in May. At the exact same time, the subway was closed, forcing all the homeless to the streets, thus doubling the number of street homeless – in every neighborhood, including the UWS. And while there were admittedly some “bad apples” at the hotels, you STILL conflate the two populations and blame the Lucerne residents for things they had nothing to do with. This is where the entire problem began.
“I agree with your sentiments, if Ian wants these men to be housed for free, he should take them in to his own apartment to live with him.”
That, of course, is simply a stupid thing to say. If my landlord would allow me to do it, I probably would. But that’s beside the point, and you know it.
You would do better just to “own” that you have little or no compassion for those less fortunate than you, no understanding or care for how they get that way, and think only in selfish terms about what is good for YOU and YOUR quality of life. How sad.
My compassion has been tested and like many on this thread I am happy to see the Lucerne closed. After watching people use the streets as their bathroom, use drugs across from a playground and the endless shoplifters at CVS. Who is accountable? The city, the hotel? Or are we suppose to be quiet and OK with it? Giving these men a place to sleep with nothing to do all day is not healthy or productive. Do better for these men, the community & the business owners of the UWS.
Compassion is always tested, and it can be a difficult thing to hold on to. But you are still conflating the homeless in the hotels with street homeless. What need do the former have to urinate or defecate on the streets, when they have clean bathrooms just steps form where they may be hanging out? And how do you know the drug users are from the hotels and not street homeless? Do you have photos of every hotel resident to identify them? You are using neither logic nor common sense.
The street homeless were able to use bathrooms in libraries, parks, Starbucks, etc. But these were all closed off to them during the pandemic. What do you expect them to do? The “hotel homeless” have clean bathrooms they can use, and they do so (despite your accusation). The street homeless do not.
If you used a little logic and common sense, you might be able to maintain your compassion without becoming so frustrated that you simply throw accusations around.
And conflating street homeless to homeless in hotels? You lost everyone on that thread… they were only placed in the hotels due to COVID… again, your reasoning is irrational..
Work on the congregate shelter situation… that’s where they need your help.. have the shelters work on “clean bathrooms” and improve their services..
If everything you so-call see the hotel offers them in improving their lives… well then, be an advocate at the shelters to lead to similar reform.
“And conflating street homeless to homeless in hotels? You lost everyone on that thread… they were only placed in the hotels due to COVID… again, your reasoning is irrational..”
It is simple. The homeless were moved into the hotels between March and May. The subway closed in May, forcing all of the homeless to the surface, thus doubling the number of street homeless. So it became all too easy to conflate the two populations; i.e., to blame the “hotel homeless” for situations created by the street homeless. Yes, there were some bad apples in the hotels who can be blamed for a small part of it. But the overwhelming majority of the problem was caused by the increase in street homeless, not by the homeless placed in the hotels? Why is that so hard to understand?
“Work on the congregate shelter situation… that’s where they need your help.. have the shelters work on “clean bathrooms” and improve their services..”
I have been doing so for over 30 years and will continue to do so. What have YOU done?
“If everything you so-call see the hotel offers them in improving their lives… well then, be an advocate at the shelters to lead to similar reform.”
Again, I have been doing this for most of my adult life. What are YOU doing other than sniping from the sidelines?
What a waste of our hard-earned tax dollars…
City’s Unaudited ‘Homeless Hotel’ Program Is Nearly Four Times as Expensive as First Estimated
https://www.westsiderag.com/2020/09/29/citys-unaudited-homeless-hotel-program-is-nearly-four-times-as-expensive-as-first-estimated
So tell me, what would YOUR brilliant idea have been? They couldn’t stay in the congregate shelters because they are virtual petri dishes, given that the men are just a foot or two apart, and Covid was spreading like wildfire. So they had to go SOMEWHERE. And there were hundreds of empty hotels (because there was no tourism). And those hotel owners were THRILLED to have an income source during the pandemic. So, okay, it cost far more than estimated. That’s obviously sad. So what would YOU have done?