A (4:03)

So, yeah, I think it's easy when the tragedy or trauma is inexplicable. Right. So the weather event that you've talked about, immediate needs come to mind from the get go and there's no thought given to how or why it occurred. It just occurred. I think the difference when you deal with human tragedy is we often look at the why or the choice or the decisions that individuals make versus the weather event analogy. And relief is always pretty easy for organizations or cities or communities. Right. And after a while, you fall into routines or repertoires that work for your organization, your entity, or you as the individual. And it becomes a very comfortable place to be. And even though it may not be working all that successfully because there's not a plan to get to recovery or restoration.

C (5:07)

Yeah.

B (5:07)

Okay. So I didn't mean to jump, but like, so that's where Nancy and I. Relief, we've established. So would you say the relief phase in a meteorological tragedy. Okay. Has a finite timeline. You don't want to stay in relief forever. You want to move to recovery as quick as possible or what would you say?

A (5:32)

I think it's going to depend on the circumstances. Right. So relief comes pretty easy. I think most people in society generally have a, a good disposition, a good nature. They want to help, they want to help, but most folks don't realize that their help can only go so far. We may need some of these else's expertise involved to take us from relief to recovery. And then certainly restoration is probably the longest phase of that if you look at the tragedy that we experienced in 2024 with the tornado event that came to the city, you could argue for some folks we're still in that restoration phase. We haven't completed it for sure.

B (6:12)

Now, let me ask you on this. We're going to pick on you. Sure. And Nancy, I'm asking both you, okay. Because it's intriguing to me. So we're going to come to this place. I'm going to, I'm going to tell you the truth. Okay. I'm really struggling on the human nature side of this. Like in the topic specifically, like the homeless in our community here. Would it be fair to say in the meteorological scenario, if we have somebody who is still living in the house that was destroyed in the tornado and all we are doing is making sure they have bottles of water like the things that were acceptable in relief phase. Hey, I got a generator for them and here's their bottles of water. Never getting them to recovery, much less restoration. And we're two years past that date. We go. If we walked into a house and go, oh my gosh, nobody's gotten you the help that you need? Well, no, this person over here, they keep bringing me bottles of water and sack lunches and I'm good. Well, no, you're not. You're still in the day one phase. You're in the relief phase. So then would you say it would be kind or un. Unkind to just leave people completely in the relief phase?

A (7:33)

Well, I certainly think you would say that's unkind, but I would also say that that's unsafe.

B (7:38)

Okay.

A (7:38)

Given the circumstances. So if, if my house was badly demolished and it was during the weather event and I'm still living there today and the community or organizations aren't coming to provide a pathway for something else. I think certainly you would say that's unkind and certainly based on the conditions of wherever they're at, it's unsafe.

B (8:05)

Okay, so then let me ask you this. Now we're on the humanitarian side because this. So with it, if I ask a question, I'm not saying I disagree at all. Okay. There is a mindset, let's just say. So we're not picking on any in other communities when we're talking about the homeless, if they are in an abandoned building with no running water and it's not a. In our town, it's red tag, meaning it is not safe for habitation. Correct?

A (8:38)

Yes.

B (8:39)

Okay. So they've deemed it that this. Nobody should be living in this house because it's not Safe so that whoever originally owned the house, they're not there anymore because like it or not, it was deemed this is not a safe place for somebody to be. If we came across a homeless person living in that house, is it safe kind, or is it safe and kind to leave them there and go, man, that's, that's great. Or would you use the same line of logic to go, it's not a safe place for somebody to be. It's not a good place for to be. And oh, I see you there, and here you go. I'm going to give you a pat on the back and tell you you're great and keep living right there. Is that a right thing to do?

A (9:27)

Well, I would say in the broad sense, no. But is it better than living someplace else that's less unsafe? Right. So there's. I don't think it's a clear delineation line of this is unkind or unsafe that perhaps could be the safest place for them, given their set of circumstances where they've been before. And I think that's where the unique difference is between a meteorological event versus the human condition. Right. The human condition is fraught with sin, poor decision making, all those things that I think folks factor into their decision making as they go into. Into evaluating homelessness. And I think homelessness in and of itself isn't just homelessness. It's homelessness and mental health issues. It's substance abuse disorder. It's, you know, mental health issues that can run the gamut. And I think it's complicated, but it's not. Right. So the relief portion is pretty easy. The recovery and restoration, those are the two most challenging parts of that, of that modality.

B (10:44)

Agreed, agreed.

A (10:46)

And recovery can be brutal.

B (10:48)

Recovery is brutal.

A (10:50)

Recovery can be brutal. Restoration or preventing recidivism or taking somebody from a lifestyle that they've grown accustomed to, to a better life, whether that means they're homed now, they're employed now, those kinds of things. Restoration can take a long, long time.

B (11:08)

Long time. So recovery, very difficult sentence. If you're outside of this world, which that's fine. To understand the truth and the weight of that sentence. Relief. Maybe the easiest of, I would venture the easiest of the three.

A (11:27)

I would agree.

B (11:28)

Okay, so like here, feed my sheep. If you don't know, we. We provide a meal. You would say relief from hunger. Okay. Basic needs, bottled water, food, this, washing clothes. Relief. Okay. Recovery, whole different animal.

A (11:48)

Yeah, without a doubt. Recovery can be incredibly challenging depending on, you know, let's take for example, substance use. Disorder, somebody that's been a long term addiction. And let's pick a drug, let's pick methamphetamine. Methamphetamine was one of those drugs that when it first entered our society and it has a long history dating back to amphetamines. But when methamphetamine became such a highly addictive nature, part of the treatment plan was they had to build recidivism into the actual treatment plan, which is a bit unique from other treatment plans. They hadn't had to do that. They were generally able to get folks back on track. But methamphetamine has such a strong effect or impact on individuals that they had to go into it knowing that folks were going to relapse and they created different structures around that. Methamphetamine is a unique, you know, it drops dopamine, serotonin, all those kinds of good effects in folks and it's one of the few drugs that many, many clinicians will tell you it can be addictive upon its first use. Very challenging drug to overcome and recovery is brutal. So if you've been a long term addict, whether that's. And alcohol is another one, if you've been a long term drinker, your getting sober period is going to be painful. Very challenging just on the human anatomy, on the human physiology and body. So recovery as I described before, can be rather brutal in the short term and very challenging in the long term. And then the restoration to overcome those things, which is clearly possible. We've seen it, we know a number of stories. That's the long term, right. How do you keep folks on track? How do you keep them connected with the right folks, the right individuals, the right groups that they need to be a part of. So it is a very challenging process. But I would agree, I think relief is pretty much the easy part. Generally short term, for the most part, it's providing food, kind of following Maslov's hierarchy of needs.

B (13:59)

But it's also the easiest, easiest and then you would never go into any tragedy, like I would say, or let's say if I went when the tornado occurred. And my sole thing, all I'm going to do is I just want to make sure everybody has bottled water. That's all right. But I've forgotten two thirds of the important part of the equation. We need people to not just get their thirst quenched. We need to find a way that we recover from this as a community. We're temple strong, we're going to recover from this. We come for that and we want to Restore things back to better than they even were before. So now we're already at. We're hearing mentality, man. Look at how we are strong as a community. Look, we've used a negative to become something very positive. But if we would only have stayed if our only action was okay, let's make sure everybody has Red Cross meals and food for indefinitely. If we helped a community.

A (15:07)

Yeah. And I think even we're kind of simplifying it into three phases. But within those three phases there is probably 10 different subcategories that we can identify. Right. So relief's pretty easy. Are we providing the food, the water? You have a roof over your head. That's kind of the recovery phase. In the context of what we're talking about is is there a human connection with that individual? Do they recognize or are they willing to accept that how they've been living or what they're doing to their own body is negative and impacting everything else in their life? So there's a decision point. Right. For the individual as well as the organization or other person that's trying to help them. Do they recognize that? Do they want to get clean? Do they want to seek help? Do they want services provided? That there's a litany of decision points in all of those, beginning with relief, recovery and restoration.

B (16:04)

Yeah. And then what's so difficult, like in the topic we're talking about with an individual human, at any point of the map, they can opt out.

A (16:15)

That's correct.

B (16:17)

I mean, so we just saw like so for out there, we were just working with a person. Male, female, doesn't matter, whatever that. We are not doctors. There's nobody in this room that's a doctor. Doesn't take one to note she has a broken arm. I mean her. Your arm's not supposed to go at a 90 degree angle. Almost got broken arms, probably got broken ribs. She can't walk anymore. She will not. She will not go. This is way simpler. She will not go to the hospital and receive the medical treatment she needs. As we're recording this, there is an EMS over there and she is going to vehemently refuse unless she sticks with the promise she made that, that she would get on the ambulance because she promised me she would. But she doesn't want to go. She doesn't want. And it's blatantly obvious from the outside to go, whatever, Bobby, Susie, whatever the name is, you got to do this or you're never. You're going to die. You're going to die like this. So this is A physical. The things that we face and with it what is sad and difficult. We won't even go in that. She has every right to say, no, I don't want to go. And she's coherent. There's no way that I could argue, nobody could argue that she doesn't have the mental acuity to be able to answer for herself. There's no way. I mean she knows what day it is. Pretty much she'd been in a hotel. So she may be confused whether it's Monday or Tuesday. Who wouldn't if you've been in a room? Okay, so. But she knows what year it is, what month it is, who I am, what her name is, what her situation. She's not.

C (18:11)

I don't know though I would categorize that mindset of I would rather just stay there when I can't walk and with my arm in this awful place and in this terrible pain and all of that as self destructive behavior. That would, you know, if we look at someone who has suicidal ideology as like we need to intervene, we need to do what we can to try to prevent them from committing suicide. I mean I would think that that is pretty close to what where she's at. That she doesn't have the ability to see that she needs medical care, like really serious medical care.

B (18:59)

I would agree. So like in a whole other discussion we can go another two hours on this. We're not. Because we got things to do. I am not a doctor. I could be incorrect on this sentence. I would be willing to bet all the money I got, which is not a whole lot, if we leave the situation untouched, she will not be alive in 10 days.

C (19:19)

I agree.

B (19:21)

She will die on that same spot that we will, that we she is staying at. And I would, I can't speculate. She. So 10 days, I will bet you money she's going to have an infection. The arm is. She is going to die from that. She's already got bed sores coming because she's laying on the floor. She can't go to the bathroom. She can't. She stopped. She's not going to live.

C (19:45)

Yeah.

B (19:47)

So then in this discussion, which we're not, we can't solve this. So many people that we deal with every day came here have absolutely at this juncture, zero desire or understanding how desperately they need to move into this next phase. They got to get better.

C (20:12)

Well, I think we've got a segment that I would agree with. You just don't have the mental capacity to see that they need help. But then We've got another segment that we work with that do know, but that choose to remain in this situation in the relief, they want to stay in the relief phase. They're not interested in going to recovery, into recovery or restoration for whatever reason. And those are the ones that I think we would have an obligation to maybe change the way that we offer relief or manage the delivery of relief to motivate them to go to the next phase or you know, let me.

B (21:04)

Ask so for both y', all, here's a question came. Can some well intended actions from somebody on the outside, like so the tornado came, groups are going to come in from outside the community. So here even what we work with, all of us that are here, we all have houses, even Isaac's recording, we got houses. We're, we're so we are sort of in the community, but not really in the homeless community. Okay. Can the actions of people from the outside of a community that are truly their wanting to provide relief, that relief would lead to recovery and recovery leads to restoration. Can you inadvertently by action, do you think you could possibly enable people and you're actually harming them from moving towards recovery and keeping them in relief? You think actions and not empowering people by doing it solely for them and actually you're keeping them completely in the relief phase. Do you think that's possible?

A (22:08)

Yeah, I think it's clearly possible. And I think you've seen that occur in other states that have decriminalized some drugs or provided access to drugs or safe spaces to use drugs. And we've seen those policies that are currently being reevaluated. Right. So they're changing their mechanisms because it led to further death and destruction. So I think clearly you can do that. I relate it to my own children or family members. If I saw you habitually doing things that were going to harm you and I was facilitating that, I think it gets back to the axiom of you can't continue to do the same things and expect a different set of results.

B (22:55)

So then along that's the line of logic I've been using quite a bit. So my son, daughter, whatever, I'm not going to pick on any kid. So we don't have a son, daughter, whatever. If I watch actions and knowing they're adults, these are adult kids, These aren't five year old kids, these are adult kids. Pick whatever number they are legally adults and can make their own decision. But they're my kids. So if I see my son or daughter, they're making decisions that are perpetually keep Harming themselves. They're in a bat. Whatever you pick. Okay. I would find it hard to justify that I truly care about them. If I enable them to stay exactly. And do exactly what they're continuing to do, if I know it is going to harm them. I find it hard to say I really love my son, daughter. But yes, I allow them to do this. But as long as they do it in the house or they do it in the neighborhood or they do this, whatever, I just let them keep doing it because they want to. There's no way you could go, well, Jeff, I'm not sure you understand what love really means because you wouldn't let your son keep doing that if you truly loved him. And you go, you're right. And then you go, well, but he might not be happy with me. What does that matter? He may not do what I asked him to do. Still got to ask. And I still can love him, but I can't allow him to stay in this and keep saying, well, it's all right. Okay here difficult. So that's kind of the logic. You go, we look at our own family and you go, and there's no way I'd allow that to continue because it's killing them and I don't want to be have my hand in. I was part of my son, daughter. I was part of their death. I helped facilitate that, even though I didn't. But I did. It's even harder in this world because you can sit on the sidelines and to go, yeah, it's all right. They won't do. And they don't have to. I know my son, like when they get a certain age, they don't have to do one thing you ask them to do because they're grown adults. Yeah.

A (25:19)

But I think you have to also, at least for me, be careful not to judge.

B (25:24)

Fair enough.

A (25:25)

Lest ye be judged.

B (25:26)

That's right.

A (25:27)

And we've all made, probably every one of us has made horrible decisions in our life and recognizing that we're just a flawed creation going to make poor decisions. But I think having an in accessory approach to this I think is important. I think we also can't continue to do the same things we've always done and expect a different outcome. We have to be willing to try something different, something new in order to get folks from relief to recovery. I think that's quite honestly that's probably the most important step we're talking about at this point.

B (26:11)

Agreed. And just if nothing else, like at this, to begin the discussion like in the homeless Topic to look as a community, where are we truly at in this tragedy? Are we perpetuating, are we facilitating a never ending relief phase, which there needs to be relief because in it, there's what's complex on this and we get it. We're not oversimplifying the topic. When we go to the food line down there, there's going to be people all over the spectrum of where they are in this tragedy. There may be somebody on their first day because the husband just beat the crap out of them last night and they are now on the street for the first day. They are dead solid in relief phase. And there may be also the person right behind her has been in the line for 15 years and hasn't missed a meal for the last 15 years. They're in very different places.

A (27:11)

That's why I think it's critically important for those organizations, entities, individuals that are. It's great to provide relief, but you need to be thinking ahead of how do we get from relief to recovery?

B (27:24)

Agreed.

A (27:24)

Begin with the end in mind for that particular phase.

B (27:27)

Agreed.

A (27:28)

It's critically important because if not, we just as I stated at the beginning, we'll just follow it. We all have this. We fall into these habitual behaviors and norms and patterns because they're comfortable, because we get really good at them and that's what we want to stick with. But to truly help the individual who comes with a litany of issues or problems, you've got to be thinking of that next phase from jump street.

B (27:54)

Agreed. Okay. And like that, that mentality right there is. You must be truly thinking, we've got to get to the recovery phase. We're trying to get here. We provide relief, but this, all the steps are leading towards this. Because you can't get to restoration until you've got to recovery. You can't get to recovery till you've gotten out of the basic relief. So this mentality of individually. Okay, because now we got individual tragedies, there's individual hurricanes that are occurring in that line, individual tornadoes. We're not oversimplifying. Meth is a horrible drug, does terrible things. So all of these things. But individually, how can we get Bobby Joe? There's no Bobby Joe. I just picked that name out. Okay. So but how do we get Bobby Joe into the recovery phase and part of the. And then ready for you to reach the restoration phase. You must have, I believe, a truly active hand in your recovery with assistance from others.

A (29:04)

Yeah. And I think it actually starts maybe a little bit before that.

B (29:06)

Right.

A (29:07)

Being. Being willing and able to meet folks where they are, which is also really uncomfortable for most of us. I mean, it's hard for folks to admit I'm an addict. That's challenging.

B (29:19)

Agree.

A (29:19)

It's a great first step.

B (29:21)

I had an interesting discussion yesterday. We won't go in depth. I've talked to two of our high end users. Not high, they're just users. Okay. And one of them said, why you always say we're addicts? I don't know what you mean. I mean, like, we've got places we can get you. There's help for your addictions. I'm not an addict. I'm just a user. Can you explain to me what the difference in addiction, an addict or a user is? And somehow there was validation and I'm just a user. It just helps me. I'm not an addict. I'm not one of them guys that. What in the world are you talking about? You know, you're living in an alley because you're choosing drugs over anything else. But then you're a really good user. We got places for users as well. Okay, so you're great. I'm going, oh, I'm not an addict.

A (30:17)

But that's a base condition of humanity.

B (30:19)

Right.

A (30:19)

All of us mitigate those bad choices or decisions we've ever been made. So I always use this as an example. Have you ever been in an argument and you've said some things that you probably shouldn't have said?

B (30:30)

No, sir.

A (30:30)

And then none of us have. Right. But then we've shared that same story with a friend of ours. How did we tell the story? We probably told it in a light most favorable to us as the individual. And I think we as human beings do that. We mitigate our own poor decisions. We. We excuse. Make, we relabel, we. We give it a different identity so that I don't have to admit that I'm an addict because I'm just a user?

B (30:57)

Yeah, Fair.

A (30:58)

I think we all do that.

B (30:59)

No, Agreed. And like all this topic, we're not picking on anybody. It is interesting. Like we're just keeping on with this, the logic model that we need to be working and that I think we can get better at in temple is to focus on the end. It's to getting people to recovery, to get to restoration. And you focus backwards and how to do that with the individual people. And because there's no blanket. I can't. We can't walk in there. Sean's very brilliant guy, as you can hear, very smart. None of us in here, even in this room of three. There's not a blanket solution to what's going on in this room of three, the struggles that we have and all of this. And we would find it greatly offensive if somebody just walked through this door right now and goes, guess what, y' all three white people over there. I've got the solution to all your problems. Come follow me. Okay. I've got all your problems fixed. And if you just do what I say, they're done. And we're going to go. You don't even know what you're talking about. And they don't. And so we try to do that some. It's an easy one. Hey, this is what all the homeless need. It's not that easy. Individual people. And then to begin the lot first is to establish, I think if you go into a tragedy mode first you got to establish of how. What recovery looks like and how are we going to get there. First you assess the situation. Oh, this is so and so's house here. Okay. They need this. They don't have electricity, they don't have water, they don't have this, they don't have this, they don't have this. And you look at that. And then we go backwards from there. Okay. We're about having to shut down because Nancy has to go to a meeting. Yeah. And then John has to go to a meeting. But out of there for y' all to ponder, we're going to keep maybe moving on. I do appreciate Sean's perspective on this and what he said, the logic model, keep doing the same thing is going to get us perpetually stuck in the relief phase.

C (33:02)

Yeah.

B (33:04)

And then out there, it's not like we're going to slide in this last little sentence of, oh, we got all the answers. We're trying, we're discussing, we're looking and to see what it even means. And if we are not so ready, we're not absolute morons. If there was a model that we could look at that solved everything on these topics we were looking at, we would copy it through and through. I ain't too proud to say we're going to duplicate that. But there's not. There's little bits that are working here, little bits that are working here, little things that aren't working here that you can learn. So we're trying to look at because you don't want to come at some point and realize possibly well intended ideas of getting a community restored. You've actually just kept them in a place of just reliance. That is, let's just pick On Somalia, let's pick on Ethiopia. The UN trucks pull in for year 30 of food deliveries and this little tribe comes over and robs the stuff. And the stuff doesn't get where they are. Perpetually in relief mode because we've never really had the tools and the stuff to get them. We don't want that.

C (34:20)

Yeah.

B (34:21)

As a community, we want to be on the front side where we're not going, oh, the blue trucks are pulling in. Let's go eat. Because we don't eat unless they come and bring the food. That's not recovery.

C (34:35)

Right.

B (34:37)

Figure out farming practices, water retention, government policies, municipality. How can we do the steps. That may be slow, but to get to them where we need to get them to go for recovery. That's what we're saying. We don't want to be evaluating, but in it, the UN or whatever, all these relief organizations. Here's the other tricky thing. We're not going to go down that path. There's a lot of money to be made in providing relief because those are pretty nice little TikTok videos to put out there. And people donate to that recovery, which is truly transformative. Doesn't look as pretty.

A (35:27)

No, it's brutal.

B (35:28)

It's brutal and it's wrought with failure.

C (35:32)

Yeah.

B (35:34)

So metrics in these things. But if you don't have these things because. But it's to never waver from the mentality of we're trying to get to recovery. We're not satisfied. Because I would also say there's It's a. It's a decent trap that we as a society and individuals can fall into unintended. To keep people solely in the relief phase. They are dependent on you. And the feel good factor gets pretty big. Thank you so much. I wouldn't have eaten today if it wasn't for you. Okay. Maybe some truth in that, but 15 years you might have been able to figure out how to eat on your own. I'm pretty sure that would have occurred. And he's maybe better off because he's figured out what did they say? Give a man a fish, he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a lifetime.

C (36:29)

Yeah.

B (36:32)

We're not serving fish today, but it's that. And we're trying to just evaluate and hearing and getting smart people and to look, this topic is very complex and I do appreciate Sean contributing here. Nancy, good to have you. And I think we continue a little bit more down the path of looking at this and to hear different because I would love somebody's going to say, jeff, you're completely wrong. Completely wrong. Biblically, you're supposed to keep everybody in the relief phase. I don't. I'd love to hear that and hear how we're wrong in that discussion. And I'd love. I love good discussions. And they go, no, you're wrong. You know, okay, great. Let me be wrong. So we're going to go. I want to tell everybody out there all of these things we're talking about. You're somewhere in this. We're all. Everybody, I hate to admit it. And all of us out there, you are in some point or another in this disaster phase of this spectrum. And the good news for all of us. Okay. Is. Is that is not where we're called to live. And then recovery, because we do believe in this faith deal. Recovery is absolutely dumb as it sounds. It is not that dumb. True recovery and true restoration only lies in one place.

C (37:53)

True.

B (37:53)

And it ain't in the meal that we're going to serve at Feed My Sheep. True recovery, true restoration, it is painful, but it only lies in one place, and that is that God is who he says he is and Christ is who he was. The restoration lies in that. And so we live in that truth. We're trying to respond out of that here and try to navigate what it truly looks like as a society and as people.

A (38:19)

Yeah.

B (38:20)

Because, like, what we saw today, I'd like to. It has to end. We have to have places that people. I don't even know we're going to walk out of this door. I don't even know what we're going to walk into over there.

C (38:34)

Right.

B (38:35)

I don't know. It has to change. We have to do things differently. We have to understand what caring and kind truly mean for individual people. So, Isaac, appreciate you recording another one. Appreciate everybody out there. I hope you all have a great day and do be thinking about what this means and what we're truly just talking about. So thank you all for joining us, and I hope you have a great day.