Matthew Silver, CCEO, Esq.’s Post

Homelessness is a serious issue for most municipalities and police departments already face staffing shortages, so putting more responsibilities on departments that fall outside of their normal duties will lead to some very complex discussions. I do have some questions though, like where will these “camps” be located? Will there be a central location in each county? Will each city be responsible for its own encampment? Will people caught sleeping in a public area be transported there automatically? Can they refuse? Where is the funding coming from to feed, evaluate and medicate these individuals? I don’t disagree that something has to be done but I’m not sure this is the solution. I would love to hear your thoughts but only if they are constructive and add to the discussion…complaining without problem solving is not adding anything.

Wheeling’s new camping ban faces ACLU scrutiny, raising a vital question: how can cities balance public safety and quality of life with the rights and needs of the homeless? Is criminalizing homelessness the answer, or do we need more compassionate, legally sound solutions? Being on the enforcement I see some of the issues that cities are dealing with, such as discarded needles, human excrement, illegal dumping, and accumulation of trash, junk, and debris that create harborage for rodents and vectors. Helping communities clean up vacant properties that become homeless encampments through programs sometimes adds to the growing issues on public property. 4LEAF, Inc. #codeenforcement #unhoused

The discussion on the Supreme Court ruling on making homelessness a crime and giving local government control over enforcement and penalties is absolutely South Park material. On 1a NPR recently, guests and callers were discussing how counties will prioritize funding for programs differently and cause more homeless people to drift to cities where the restrictions and enforcement aren’t as punishing. How do we get other areas to share the burden of our homeless problem? That was their overall take away. Here’s mine. When we criminalize people for not having basic shelter, when we refuse to see homelessness as an outcome of our failure to address the mental health and chemical addiction problems that are exasperated by lack of affordable housing, stigma and push back of harm reduction clinics, and when our government allows encampment raids that rid people of glasses, medications, wheel chairs, shelter supplies, etc. and the “problem” only relocates and starts over with less than they had before the raids, we can’t continue to be shocked and appalled at the conditions that result a few blocks away from the last camp. Drive down 31st street at the overpass between Lake and Chicago for an example of the unthinkable conditions that approx 50 people are living under in a single block on the sidewalks, sheltered only by that cement tunnel and some tarps, boxes and salvaged tents. You feel sad, scared, shaken by the fact that this is anyone’s reality. We can’t put our efforts into “shifting blight,” without looking at the reasons that the systems in place have grossly failed our most vulnerable. Until we return the humanity and dignity in each person who is unsheltered, and see them as more than their conditions they are forced to live in, we are only going to see them as being the problem and reducing them to their behaviors and addictions. Please don’t be that person who gets conditioned to blame the victim, who callously calls them meth heads and other derogatory names and forgets that they are suffering individuals with trauma before being unsheltered and now dealing with unhealed pain and having very few resources to manage day to day survival for shelter, food, medicine, compassion and dwindling hope.

Alert: Phoenix has enacted a new law now in effect, camping is prohibited within 500 feet of schools, shelters, daycares, or parks. This measure aims to address safety and public health concerns, ensuring that the spaces most frequented by vulnerable populations, especially children, remain safe and accessible. Violations of this ordinance carry significant consequences, including a $100 fine and a misdemeanor booking. The implementation of this law reflects ongoing efforts to manage public spaces while balancing the needs of the community, including those who find themselves without stable housing. At A New Leaf, while we understand the intent behind such regulations, we also recognize the challenges they pose to our homeless community members. We remain committed to advocating for compassionate solutions that support all individuals affected by homelessness, providing them with the resources and assistance they need to secure stable and safe accommodations. We encourage community members to stay informed about these new regulations and to join us in supporting initiatives that offer real solutions and support for those in need. Together, we can work towards a community that upholds safety and dignity for everyone. https://lnkd.in/grmFTyre

Idiocracy, cruelty, desperation? Both people and cities are struggling with solutions that merely shuffle people around and mask a broader issue. A supply issue. The fact is that rates of homelessness are more directly tied to the price of housing and the inelasticity of a local housing market than mental health, the economy, or disability. What we are seeing now play out is the result of years of housing policies designed to drive up the cost of single family homes to the benefit of those who were able to afford them in the first place. It’s time we stop letting homeowners run the show, and allow more affordable housing and multi family housing in our cities. Or we can, you know, just ban blankets in public spaces.

Charles Lain Fehman reminds us that the purpose of camping bans is not, and has never been, to stop homelessness. Their purpose is to prevent public encampments, which at scale can and do cause serious harm to their residents and to the public. More fundamentally, he says, it is only possible to view such enforcement as “cruel and unusual” by focusing on the rights of the singular camping individual, rather than imagining the harms done by such behavior at scale, and the right of the community to prevent such harms. That dichotomy—between an individual’s right to deviate from commonly accepted norms of behavior and the community’s right to be free from the harms of systematic deviation — is central to the dispute about camping bans, and indeed to many disputes about social policy governing deviation. https://lnkd.in/gPq7tXwy

Evidence shows that #housingfirst works. Meanwhile, we have legislatures effectively criminalizing the complex, multi-cause problem of #homelessness, as though that is some magic approach to solving the problem instead of supportive #health and related services in permanent housing settings, or taking on the growing affordable housing crisis. Large firms are scooping up homes across the country and then charging higher rents, further depleting affordable housing stock. A couple of them own thousands of homes in Louisville. These firms send junk mail and phone calls, place signs and billboards that make it sound like it is an individual like Joe or Dave who wants to buy your house and will "pay cash today!!!" They prey on at-risk and desperate households. This is not the solution

Restoring local control and providing additional tools is a win for city government and our communities. Homelessness is a multifaceted issue and city’s know BEST how to address the issue in their community. Balancing quality of life, resource distribution, and housing is best tasked with those at the local level. #SCOTUS #LocalGov #LocalControl

Interesting paper on how to approach the pet-friendly housing issue from a legal perspective of weighing harms. Especially loved this little nugget: "In many countries domestic animals are deemed property at law. This legal status disguises the seriousness of the loss for pet-owning tenants who are forced to rehome their companion animal in order to obtain rental housing. Relegating the loss to mere property loss downplays the magnitude of the harm suffered and makes it easier for landlords, letting agents, courts, policymakers and lawmakers in the housing arena to ignore the interests of companion animals. As property, their interests can be readily trumped by human interests however trivial. Categorising companion animals as kin and family members emphasises the strength of the human-companion animal bond and its need for special legal protection in the rental sector."

This is a result of greed, low wages, and a lack of deeply affordable housing and bad policy. Food banks are doing their best, but they are not a solution but a bridge. Living wages and deeply affordable housing of many kinds are part of the solution. In the last two weeks we’ve seen new supportive housing solutions turned down in Aurora and Hamilton in a housing crisis. Projects that are part of the solution. This is shameful. We’ve also seen people rise up to join advocacy efforts to not accept this and to push for immediate action. We need deeply affordable housing and we need it now. Groups like Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness and Canadian Housing and Renewal Association have put forth ideas, policy options and plans to support all levels of government to move forward on this life and death issue. Let’s work with them and other advocates like Diana Chan McNally Lorraine Lam and Cathy Crowe to make sure the voices of our most vulnerable are heard, and that everyone realizes their right to housing. The time is now….be part of the solution! Blue Door