Friends of Refugees

An article in the New York Times mentions that the International Institute (a USCRI affiliate) proposed to resettle 300 refugees in Manchester this fiscal year, but that the State Department trimmed that down to 200 while rejecting City officials’ request for a moratorium (only last summer the plan was to resettle 400-600 refugees). William J. Gillett, chairman of the Institute’s board claims that his agency does the best they can within the price constraints they have, and that they would try harder to work with the city.

MANCHESTER, N.H. — This city has long been a resettlement site for refugees, sent here by the State Department for a chance at a better life. ..

…But this year, after decades of taking in refugees, Manchester said, “Enough.”

In a highly unusual move, Mayor Ted Gatsas and the city’s Board of Aldermen asked the State Department in July to halt resettlements here for now…

…The mayor, a Republican who just won a second term, says he has nothing against refugees. His problem is with the International Institute of New England…

…For the International Institute, which has been resettling refugees in New Hampshire for decades, the moratorium request came as a shock, said William J. Gillett, chairman of the agency’s board…

“We did not believe the numbers we were suggesting were in any way inappropriate,” Mr. Gillett said. “We didn’t see any evidence of undue strain on city resources.”

Although refugees are also resettled in other New Hampshire cities, including Concord and Nashua, far more come to Manchester, the largest city in northern New England, because it has more jobs, affordable housing and public transportation.

“It’s one of the most fabulous places in the world to resettle,” said Carolyn Benedict-Drew, the institute’s president and chief executive.

But the institute admits that affordable apartments have sometimes proved unacceptable. In 2009, a bedbug infestation at a former mill building that houses refugees grabbed headlines and raised awareness of the squalid conditions some were living in. Patrick Long, a Democratic alderman who voted for the moratorium, said the institute “just wasn’t there to help” with the bedbug problem, which led to a city task force that came up with recommendations for improving refugee housing, education and other needs. “The apartments they were putting them in were shabby,” he said, “and their employment numbers were misleading.”

On housing, Mr. Gillett said, “We do the best we can within the price constraints we have.”…

…Mr. Bartlett said that after hearing the city’s concerns, his office had decided to send some 200 refugees to Manchester this fiscal year, which began Oct. 1, instead of the 300 proposed by the International Institute. While the State Department often tinkers with the numbers proposed by resettlement agencies, he said, “this was probably a more significant reduction than we would normally make.”

A moratorium would make no sense, he said, partly because virtually all refugees scheduled to arrive in Manchester this year have family here and would likely end up in the city even if they were initially sent somewhere else.

Meanwhile, leaders of the International Institute said they would try harder to work with the city. Michael McGandy, who started in March as the institute’s site manager in Manchester, said high staff turnover… had perhaps kept the agency from communicating with the city as much as it should… Read more here

An editorial in the New Hampshire Herald speculated that the real reason for the moratorium request was perhaps the $4 million dollars per year that the City is spending on special needs children (many refugees being in that group due to the language barrier and/or a lack of earlier education). The editorial staff thought that the City may have been trying to save money due to budget problems.

I’m disappointed, however, with Mr. Gillett’s claim – in regard to the squalor that people have found refugees living in – that his organization does the best it can within the price constraints. Its much less a matter of money than it is the nature of the refugee experience and their psychology. Due to their earlier experiences of abuse by authorities in the circumstances they have fled from, most do not trust authority figures. Without help from refugee contractors, such as the Institute and other organizations, many of them will not demand improvements in substandard living conditions. Unfortunately, there are many landlords that will take advantage of that.

Mr. Gillett also claims that the moratorium request came as a shock. What that tells me is that either he was completely out of touch with the worsening relationship with City leaders, or that he was fairly certain that there would be no consequences for that. Neither of those positions would have been in the refugees’ best interests.

I also note that the International Institute of New England’s disingenuous claim on their website that they have “…in partnership with the U.S. Department of State, decreased the number of placements from 300 to 200.”