Solutions Must "Feel Good"

          In the spirit of reinvention, and proactivity, and dire
          need, this is offered.

          My Department has an execrable reputation in some quarters.
          Part of the reason for that is that many people don't
          understand that HUD is a bank, not a social service agency.
          I am certain of this, because 99% of my training was
          financial-related.  The only counselling or social service
          training I've had was paid for out-of pocket.

          That line is being blurred.

          I would like to suggest that many of our goals are simply
          too unimaginative, and too small.  "Drug Elimination" is a
          wonderful one.  That is a negative goal.  Drug-related
          activity is a symptom of dysfunctional community, and diet.
          Even the office of RIGI says that just going in and
          arresting dealers accomplishes very little.  It is like
          getting rid of weeds by mowing them at 8" off the ground;
          they just get denser.  The problem is not drugs, it is lack
          of imagination in the solution.  All our efforts seem
          piecemeal.

          We have $11.9 billion of troubled properties, as cited in
          the NY Times.  Many of those properties are found in the
          most troubled communities in the nation.  The Secretary, and
          others, don't apparently want to just walk away from them.
          Problems with projects aren't project problems, they are
          neighborhood and community problems.  I hear this coming out
          of RIGI and PIH.  Only an organic, all-encompassing goal
          will work.

          We need a larger goal, one that excites the emotions, one
          that concentrates on the positive, one that can bring most
          players to the table to get creative about finding
          solutions.

          I've found that "Community Healing" seems to work well.  I
          am a Resident Initiatives specialist, yet the job
          description I read would much better be entitled Community
          Healing Specialist.

          "Community Healing" cuts across divisional lines.  It almost
          requires input from every HUD office, and also excites
          otherwise jaded state and local agencies.  It is an exciting
          goal, one that people willingly put their own time into,
          even now.  Resident Services coordinators are just about to
          be allowed for family projects, which is EXCITING to those
          of us who've had to dampen the ardor of agents who wanted to
          address these problems.

          Asset-based Community Development, really the same thing, is
          cutting edge CD.  They have conferences on it in this area
          independent of HUD; I found out about more than one after
          the fact.

          As a flash-in-the-pan idea, it is easy to sell.  It looks
          GOOD.  One could retitle RIS's as Community Healing
          Specialists, and perhaps even retitle Services Coordinators
          something similar.  We have a program that can be made to
          look good in news releases.

          AND, it has the potential of really doing some good.  It
          would:
          1. excite employee emotions, and raise morale
             [one learns in the military that morale is everything]
          2. excite the public about HUD
          3. focus and align HUD and other organizations around a
             positive goal
          4. it sounds great.  How could one oppose it?
          5. Selling it to Congress would be easier than now...

   I have been working on a DRAFT Community Healing resource list.  I
          need a "trading card" to trade for information from other
          agencies, and when I finally get it into decent form, it
          will make us look good.  That is important.  We need to
          lead the field, I think, to ride the wave instead of being
          left out.

  [The above was originally an internal communication]