Neglected Aspect of Homeless Activism? Or Hopeless Patch-Up Protests Against Fundamentally Futile “Shelter” Programs?

Activists: Official Suppression of Peer Advocacy Worsens TB, Flu

by Teach Everywhere ABout Community Health Saturday, Mar. 23, 2013 at 1:40 AM
thefluguru@hotmail.com

Tuberculosis and influenza spreading in Southern California houseless blamed on official disruption of peer education in cough hygiene.Advocating for information that will allow shelter operators to contact persons who may have been exposed to infections.

Advent of the LA-tuberculosis situation problematizes the lack of training in good habits of hygiene amongst the homeless. Programs in WASH (water sanitation and hygiene) have been proven to reduce the incidence of disease in programs on a global level, but in the developed nations many vulnerable populations lack the kind of outreach and training that prevent disease in WHO programs around the world.

Homeless emergency shelter operators came under fire at the Santa Barbara Board of for failure to respond to well established internationally recognized disease control imperatives. In 2012, homelessness organizers were criticized on the basis that people were quartered on grounds of a local Episcopal Church without access to sanitation of any kind: no water and not even portable sanitation units.Subsequent peer advocacy training in Cough Hygiene were initially well received, but later led to bitter factionalization as warming center shelter operators, spurred by religious missionaries, rejected such measures as criticism contrary to staff morale.

TEACH Cough Hygiene Initiative project coordinator Geof Bard spoke to the county board about the problems exacerbated by Freedom Warming Center’s “foot dragging and obfuscation” with regard to infectious disease, citing the outbreak of tuberculosis in Los Angeles hot on the heels of an unusually active national influenza season.

Speaking to the bipartisan panel, he pointed out how [Community Development Block Grant] funding of the warming centers could lead to increased costs when otherwise-healthy homeless people are crammed one hundred to a room and end up with higher incidence of disease. “Everything I am advocating [is based on guidelines] from the Center for Disease Control” and the County Health Department.

With the SBCDPH Director Takahashi Wada, M.D., M.P.H. in the audience, he pointed out tension between the Department and the warming center staff, underscoring that their resistance to implementing any kind of infection control plan places them at odds with established health authority. Elsewhere, it had been noted that a Public Health employee had complained of an epidemic of “deafness” amongs homeless careeer specialists. Mr. Bard pointed out that lack of appropriate response led to more preventable “influenza, and now tuberculosis”, as reported widely with regard to the LA TB situation currently under investigation by the CDC.

In an earlier email, he had called for additional disease control protocols to include contact tracing information for homeless persons. Under current warming center policy, names, or nicknames, are taken only occasionally and sporadically, and no cellphone, address or email addresses are written down. Thus, if it were determined that one of the warming center guests or staff had been disseminating bacterial, viral or other type of infection, there would be no way to implement the standard contact tracing by which health professionals alert possible victims and direct them to diagnostic and therapeutic resources.

In separate communications, TEACH had advocated for confidential contact trace methods based upon STF testing, advocating for information that will allow shelter operators to contact persons who may have been exposed to infections.

Flower Felony: 18 Days in Jail, Thanks to a Take Back Santa Cruz Mob

Charges dismissed against man accused of stealing flowers from memorial to fallen Santa Cruz police officers

By Cathy Kelly
Posted:   03/21/2013 04:42:31 PM PDT
Click photo to enlarge

Ken Maffei ( SCS )
SANTA CRUZ — Charges were dropped Thursday against a Santa Cruz man accused of stealing flowers from a memorial to fallen police detectives Sgt. Loran “Butch” Baker and Elizabeth Butler.

As attorneys said in court, Kenneth Eugene Maffei, 53, bought the flowers March 1 and had been leaving a box of Allbright’s doughnuts at the North Branciforte Avenue memorial to the fallen officers. He lingered there for about 45 minutes when a woman spotted him picking the flowers up and walking off.

The woman called police, who stopped him. Maffei was too intoxicated to explain and made inconsistent statements, defense and prosecution lawyers said. He was arrested and charged with theft and public intoxication.

Maffei had been on his way to a motel with the flowers “for a lady friend,” defense attorneys said. They said he wrote “R.I.P.” on the $1 box of doughnuts.

His arraignment hearing March 5 drew more than a dozen Take Back Santa Cruz members as Judge John Gallagher kept him in County Jail with bail set at $5,000. Maffei was in custody for 18 days, said Larry Biggam of Biggam, Christensen & Minsloff, the primary public defender firm in the county.

“This case was a classic ‘rush to judgment’ — from the arrest, to the high bail (at arrest), to the harsh judgments in the media,” Biggam said. “Mr. Maffei has been demonized and has served 18 days in jail for a crime he did not do.

“Yes, these are difficult and sensitive times in our


community, and I understand people’s concerns.

But we need to address those concerns with facts, not fear, and with fairness, not prejudgments.”

Maffei was nearby when Baker and Butler were killed by a suspect Feb. 26. He went to the street-side memorial to pay his respects, Biggam said.

Another defense attorney, Jack Lamar Jr., came to court with a letter from Erika Hearon of the Davenport Resource Service Center stating Maffei had been a “valuable volunteer” for several years.

Biggam said Maffei was not a “transient,” as police stated, but has lived in Santa Cruz for 31 years.

The defense found a receipt for the flowers among Maffei’s belongings in County Jail, Lamar said.

District Attorney Bob Lee said follow-up investigation raised doubts as to Maffei’s guilt and that his office was “doing its due diligence to determine what had happened.” He said once prosecutors got the new evidence from the defense, it prompted a thorough investigation by inspectors who concluded the flowers belonged to Maffei.

Prosecutor Jennifer Hutchinson requested both misdemeanor charges against Maffei be dismissed. She said searching Maffei’s personal belongings in jail “is something we can’t do.”

“From the DA’s Office, this is a pursuit of truth,” she said.

Judge John Salazar said the District Attorney’s Office could have waited until the eve of the trial to drop the charges, and he said he thought it “was not an unreasonable conclusion” to believe Maffei had stolen the flowers given the circumstances and initial evidence.

“It’s a good reminder that sometimes people charged did not commit the crime,” Salazar said. “And we have a system that finds that out, at least eventually.”

Maffei attended the hearing, as a free man. When questioned outside court, he smiled and said he “probably shouldn’t say anything.”

Follow Sentinel reporter Cathy Kelly on Twitter
COMMENTS:
Brent Adams  · Video Journalist, Filmmaker at Subcommondante Films comments:
tbsc has their priorities wrong. They are creating and harvesting pain and fear and using it for a political agenda that hurts our community instead of helps it.
More than a dozen tbsc were in court for this?? Is this a “public safety issue”??
I think not. Where are they when homeless people are being cited for just sleeping? Where are they when people’s personal belongings are being trashed??
There is no place for 90% of homeless people to sleep tonight. Census stats show that 70% of local homeless are from here. And yet, they go after basic sustenance food programs at the Homeless Services Center.. is that about Public Safety?
Santa Cruz Sanctuary Camp. Join the conversation.
A special salute to Judge John Salazar for wisely reminding us of the generosity of the D.A.’s office in allowing this flower-filcher to be released after only 18 days when he could (and surely should) have been held until trial.
And to Judge John (“Justice is my Middle Name”) Gallagher for standing firm against any hysterical or hasty action and wisely putting Maffei, the petunia pincher, behind bars on $5000 bail.
Another to the D.A.’s office which has shown in other cases—like my own Santa Cruz Eleven prosecution—that money is no object in Keeping Santa Cruz Safe from marijuana smokers, homeless campers, and political protesters. Though it may cost tens of thousands more in the upcoming trials of the remaining 4 and caused one D.A. To flee town—Rebekah Young left for Texas last Friday– D.A. Bob Lee has assured us that the more trivial cases of murder, assault, and burglary aren’t being stalled because of his focus on ending the “culture of tolerance”.
We can’t be sure, but let’s give the benefit of the doubt to the Sheriff’s office for holding this rhododendron robber in stir where he belonged instead of embarrassing everyone by revealing the receipt (probably forged anyway).
And a shout-out to the Public Defenders who took only 18 days to find the receipt that showed the apparent innocence of this geranium-grabbing Maffei. These hard-working attorneys were plenty busy saving the County money by squeezing guilty pleas out of the riffraff cluttering up the court docket.
Not to mention the deep research done by the Sentinel in its even-handed investigation of this case (as shown by its wise commentary on the Menace of Illegal Campsites, the Dangers of Needle Exchange, and, of course, the Perils of Keeping Santa Cruz Weird)!
Let’s not forget the ever-vigilant SCPD who saw through Maffei’s clever act in concealing his obvious drunkenness from a crowd of mourners for 45 minutes and had him arrested for being unable to take care of himself (the legal definition of drunk in public). Puzzling, of course, is the disappearance of the surely-justified Drunk-in-Public charge. Perhaps this is another example of our soft-heated drug-tolerating, homeless-enabling community! We know the SCPD would never have labeled a person drunk and unable to take care of themselves without justification!
Finally, a slap on the back to the patriots at Take Back Santa Cruz who roused the crowd at court to demand the judicious Judge Gallagher hold this rose-loving rogue in a safe place. I understand they’ll be advancing the Keep Santa Cruz Straight campaign at City Council, making our community safe from needle-strewing homeless junkie-loving flower thieves and the bureaucrats who protect them.
One can’t but marvel at their broader many-pronged strategy to slash away the homeless cluttering the Santa Cruz landscape like so many toxic weeds: “starve ’em out” by cutting the funding of homeless services; “slap ’em awake” with more police sweeps; culminating in the “strip ’em naked” plan—with Parks and Rec crews confiscating their criminal clothing.
But while I stand shoulder-to-shoulder with those who want to Keep Santa Cruz Safe, I must insist that we show our own tolerance and good sense: Keep TBSC, the D.A., the Sentinel, the Courts, the Sheriffs, and the Public Defender’s Office Weird!

Let’s join TBSC’s march with COLOR, signs of positivity and compassion, costumes etc. [1 Attachment]

[Attachment(s)from Robert Norse included below]

NOTE BY NORSE:  Brent Adams is a musician, community activist, and for the last year, target of the SCPD and D.A. Bob Lee as a member of the Santa Cruz Eleven.  He has led protests seeking an end to the harassment of the homeless in the past, and is currently working on a Sanctuary Camp project (see his facebook page).  Below he calls for joining a march with the Banish-the-Homeless group Take Back Santa Cruz in a dialogue strategy.   He also has a radio show on Free Radio Santa Cruz at 101.3 FM every Tuesday night from 9 PM to 11 PM.

Hi friends,

As you know,
   over the past few years and especially recently, Take Back Santa Cruz has been repeatedly using news stories about violence and drug abuse to
focus attacks on our homeless population and Homeless Services.  Recently they’ve begun to lobby for a removal of the sustenance food program
at HSC that feeds hundreds of people daily.  They also want drug and background checks as a requirement for basic homeless services.
They are having a march from Harvey West Park to City Hall to parade their hatred of homeless people past the Homeless Services Center HSC.
The march will be at 5pm Tuesday March 26
I invite you to join me in this march as we engage in colorful, compassionate community.  Bring signs of compassion and love.  Costumes are
highly encouraged.  Let’s begin to transmute this negative energy into something beautiful.
—    —-    —-    —
This community group has had a large roll in the removal of a long-time needle exchange program, the virtual clear-cutting of the river levee and
a 3 month long homeless sweep of the woods.   At city council meetings they use “compassion” as a negative trait and they blame former
liberal politicians for the violent climate only to harvest the pain and fears to base proposed anti-homeless policies on.  The net effect is
an increasingly fearful and knee-jerk environment where fair practices and justice are at risk.
TBSC just filled the court room to protest the defense of a man who was held in jail for 18 days even though he had direct evidence of his
innocence in his pocket.  He had been detained for stealing a bouquet of flowers that he had just purchased.  Charges were dropped but with no
apology to the man who spent 18 days in jail before seeing a judge.
Let’s have fun out there,
Brent Adams
332-9040
Santa Cruz Sanctuary Camp
__._,_.___
Attachment(s) from Robert Norse
1 of 1 Photo(s)

Bad Times In Berkeley–A Lesson for Santa Cruz

Berkeley singer, performer, and activist Carol Denney, regular author of the hilarious Pepper Spray Times (to be found on-line at http://www.caroldenney.com/backissu.htm ) is a long-time fighter for the rights of those outside as well as those who are likely to find themselves outside next month.  Her story below was published in the on-line Berkeley Daily Planet, to be found at http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2013-03-22 .   She lays out the roots, background, symptoms, and causes of the homelessness/housing crisis that has been an ignored emergency for the last 30 years.  And talks about her own personal experience to boot.

–R. Norse

Berkeley Central – You Can’t Afford It

By Carol Denney
Friday March 22, 2013 – 02:39:00 PM

Carol Denney

Carol Denney

Carol Denney
It’s safe to say to 95% of the Bay Area goes to sleep every night with the secure knowledge that easily between 100 to 1,000 people within a five to ten mile radius are asleep nearby behind dumpsters and under bushes.

It’s safe to say that by now most of them have realized that every trip to the grocery store and the BART Station will necessitate walking past between two and twenty people with outstretched hands, shadowed by at least twice that number in severe, specific, and immediate need.

This isn’t the full picture. This is just their picture, the picture that colors their neighborhood, their day, their sense of community and fairness, and whether or not the world is a good place to be.

It’s safe to say most of them have hit the breaking point and can no longer imagine that handing out dollars and dimes represents any kind of solution to poverty. It’s safe to say that most of them recognize that a radical change in housing policy is not just a civic, but also a moral obligation.

None of them were protesting the policy of building housing specifically for the out-of-town Prada/Lexus crowd in front of the opening of Berkeley Central’s new luxury apartments on Thursday, March 21, 2013. They don’t believe homelessness can happen to them, or that squandering scarce square footage on pied-a-terre techies plays any role in the housing crisis.

On Berkeley Central’s ribbon-cutting Thursday, the San Francisco Chronicle ran a cover page story about the 264 homeless families hoping for shelter in San Francisco. The East Bay Express and the Oakland Tribune ran stories on the nine percent increase in rents in one year as Berkeley renters engaged in bidding wars over a limited supply of housing.

The crowd at the opening was full of wry comments about the few who could manage both the cost of the penthouse, one and two-bedroom apartments and studios currently available for lease and the lack of space for the stuff which would make actually living in them feasible.

Nobody was allowed to see the studio apartments. Both the public and the media tour excluded the studios, presumably because they are even more shockingly space-resistant than the one-bedrooms. The one-bedrooms are perfect for people who have no books, no instruments, no hobbies, and fervently wish to have no friends or parties ever in their lives.

Perhaps I am being harsh. But I live in a very small place. And I don’t really play the banjo, at least not very well.

And I have four banjos. My CD collection alone would barrel out the door of these space-free units with their special staged-home beds, bedswhich knowledgeable eyes know would accommodate only part of a sleeping human being but help give the impression of more space in a staged home for sale. “Don’t worry,” said one of the women on the tour. “The people who’ll be living here are on their second homes.

I’m not saying that to embarrass the hard-working, friendly, gorgeous crowd of young, mostly white women who shepherded the crowd through the tour with casual authority and aplomb. They were smart, responsive, engaging, and very patient with a crowd that grew more raucous with each of at least three alcohol stops.

There is no question that something is wrong with a hiring policy that manifests such racial and gender singularity, but those whom I met were talented, dedicated, and sincerely capable of both fielding critical questions and guiding drunks out of the shrubbery.

The officials, planners, and developers who pushed for the project are only partially at fault for plucking the ripe cherry that is – surprise – another luxury housing development in Berkeley, the city with the largest gap between rich and poor in the entire Bay Area.

Councilmember Jesse Arreguin, representative for downtown Berkeley’s district four, was there beaming along with Downtown Berkeley Association members, Chamber of Commerce representatives, and of course the Mayor Tom Bates for the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

I’m noting the second home theory to honor the theme represented by nearly every speaker at the ribbon-cutting ceremony and most of the literature as well. The 143 units at Berkeley Central were specifically designed to attract people from out of town.

I would have no problem with this if we weren’t in a housing crisis. Build for the rich, I would say. Build crazy stuff with gold-plated toilets and let them buy it.

But we are in a housing crisis. The Downtown Berkeley Association tried to outlaw sitting down on the sidewalk, for Christ’s sake. The money spent on that campaign would have funded a drop-in homeless center for at least three years.

It’s safe to say that using Berkeley’s precious square footage to accommodate the needs of the uber-class: the high-end tech workers priced out of San Francisco who can afford as many storage units as it takes to make sure they don’t have to live with their boxes of Christmas decorations or their old Occupy banners next to their beds is – dare I say it — unfair.

They may be making up apps by the thousands over in Silicon Valley, but ain’t nobody making any new land. We either build with an eye toward addressing the obvious need for low-income housing, or we sidestep acknowledging a housing crisis so obvious that perfectly sane, arguably intelligent people sit around board room tables discussing which of the array of attributes describing homeless or nomadic people would be best to criminalize next.

We, the taxpayers of Berkeley, pay for the City Council’s and the planners’ salaries. Why aren’t they building housing to accommodate our existing housing needs? Rich people, lovely though they may be, are just not at a loss for housing options. You should have seen the high-end bicycle in the bike rack in one of the staged rooms at Berkeley Central. This is not your father’s IT worker.

But oh, how well this policy works for politicians whose larger agenda is to simply eliminate poverty by eliminating poor people from the community entirely. Polly Armstrong of the Chamber of Commerce said it, Mayor Tom Bates said it, Councilmember Jesse Arreguin said it, and even the official literature echoes the obvious policy of addressing Berkeley’s income gap by tilting housing in the direction of rich techie youngsters who hopefully will never know that homes used to, as a practical matter of course, have pantries, linen closets, attics, basements, parlors, porches, etc.

Developers win when mini apartments get fondled and crowed over as “green” for having no place to put the basketball. But then, developers always win.

You’ll want to know, so I’ll tell you; $2,575 to $3,000 for a one bedroom, 3,775 to 3,900 for a two-bedroom, $5,350 to $6,300 for the penthouses. Door to door trash service (a mandatory $30 fee) and proximity to the BART Station.

Entirely smokefree, except that somebody was smoking on the penthouse floor.

But those two and twenty people with outstretched hands are right outside wondering how long they have to wait until we can have a ribbon cutting ceremony for the majority, the poor, who have somehow become wallpaper to the people who wandered through Berkeley Central’s luxury apartments sipping wine.

FW: Sin Barras Updates and Events [1 Attachment]

[Attachment(s)from Robert Norse included below]

It is my belief that many homeless people are in Santa Cruz jails for trivial offenses.  Activists from Sin Barras have been coming to HUFF meetings for the last month.  I think their events are likely to interest HUFF activists and sympathizers–hence this e-mail!

Robert Norse


Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:54:12 -0700
Subject: Sin Barras Updates and Events
From: ashnguye@ucsc.edu
To: gailpage@earthlink.net; rnorse3@hotmail.com

Hi Gail and Robert,

This is what’s happening on the Sin Barras front. We are in the midst of:
  • creating educational pamphlets/zines on the research we have done regarding the prison system in santa cruz county
    • the zine will be premiered at our Art Show Fundriaser this Friday
  • organizing an Abolition Art Show Fundraiser this Friday, you and friends are all welcome to come!
  • programming for our April 6th Speakout + March
  • communicating with Scott McDonald (Santa Cruz County Chief Probation Officer)

We have also:


We’re also coordinating ride shares for an event in San Francisco related to our work. Let us know if you’d like to join us:
    • We will meet up at 8:30 am outside the forum with banners and posters demanding an end to overcrowding, releases and real health care to save our friends and family in prisons & jails;
    • We will be making t-shirts of the same color with slogans like “overcrowding=death” and something punchy about healthcare for us all to wear;
    • We are gathering volunteers who feel comfortable holding banners up inside the symposium;
    • We will be bringing statements from people inside prison about the conditions/healthcare and pointed questions for volunteers to raise during Q&As or any other chances to speak;
    • We will ask that all supporters stand or raise hands or fists when our organizers are reading or making statements;
    • We will hand-out and collect more post-cards to give to Kelso at the event
  • We welcome your comments AND participation. As one CCWP member said, it is important for Kelso (Medical Receiver) and all of those law enforcement types to see a solid block of people standing up in solidarity with all of our loved ones inside.
As for further research, we are investigating the numbers of inmates still awaiting trial and we are still desperately looking for narratives and testimonials of treatment and conditions inside Santa Cruz County Jail.


Health & Happiness,
Tash Nguyen

UC Santa Cruz
Urban Anthropology & Environmental Studies
sinbarras.wordpress.com/
http://lostupnorth.tumblr.com/

“Let’s be gentle with ourselves and each other and fierce as we fight oppression.” 

– Dean Spade

__._,_.___
Attachment(s) from Robert Norse
1 of 1 File(s)

Olympia Activists Respond to Shelter Closing. What Will Santa Cruz Activists Do?

Breaking News: Homeless Shelter by Olympia Artesian Well

Yesterday · · Taken at Olympia Artesian Well.
Press Release for March 1st, 2013 Re: OMJP (Olympia Movement for Justice and Peace) organizes in response to the homeless crisis—hosts a Homeless Solidarity Rally & Community Pizza Party, builds an emergency shelter, and installs Olympia’s only 24 hour public restroom at the downtown artesian well. Attention! Our community is in crisis and the Mayor of Olympia has insisted that we not let it go to waste. On March 1st the Sacred Heart and Saint Michael’s men’s shelters will be closed for the season. The county-funded cold weather shelter at the Salvation Army is only sporadically open at best, and it too will soon be closed. Though shelter is a human right, there are hundreds of unsheltered houseless people in Thurston County. In response to this crisis, we have constructed an emergency shelter and installed Olympia’s only 24-hour public restroom at the downtown artesian well. It is our intention to maintain these facilities as a service to the community until an adequate alternative can be arranged. Furthermore, we draw attention to the fact that in January of this year, the Olympia City Council, with the sole exception of council member Jim Cooper, voted in favor of a reactionary ordinance which banned camping and camping related paraphernalia such as blankets from all city-owned public property. The criminalization of homelessness is a national worst-practice model which negatively impacts not only homeless persons, but also service providers, the criminal justice system, and the broader community. Olympia’s anti-homeless ordinances violate standards of fairness and raise moral questions about community values, priorities, and social and economic justice. They dehumanize the homeless, damage their health, and create even greater barriers to housing. These ordinances are a threat to the general health of the Olympia community and must be repealed.

Bigot Criticism Groundless But Real Concerns Remain at Homeless (Lack of) Services Center in Santa Cruz

Note by Norse:  The story below is followed by an afterword from John Cohen, who edits the local Homeless Persons (Disabled) Advocacy Site at http://www.facebook.com/groups/325916790824852/permalink/431317143618149/.

Cohen has advocated for several disabled people thrown out of the local shelter

The local Homeless Services Center is run by Executive Director Monica Martinez a Board of Directors headed by City Council member Don Lane.  I call it the Homeless (Lack of ) Services Center (HLOSC) because of their failure provide real shelter for more than a fraction of the homeless community, their collusion with law enforcement authorities, and their refusal to advocate for the restoration of civil rights for homeless people.

Our criticisms of the shelter management are many:  that it has destroyed and not replaced locker space, that its workers got to court against homeless advocates and homeless people challenging the local anti-homeless laws (such as the Sleeping Ban in the PeaceCamp2010 protests), that it refuses to provide documentation of those on its waiting lists (which might deter Sleeping Ban harassment of  folks), that it enforces its own anti-loitering policies during the day–destroying the original purpose of the shelter as a sanctuary,  It also has hired First Alarm Security guards to threaten homeless people “hanging out” in public spaces nearby–mirroring the attacks on human rights being done downtown by “Hosts”, police, and other uniformed thugs.

However, recent criticism from fanatics and homeless-haters on the right that it is a “Drug Den”, that it pollutes the neighborhood with trash, that it is a source of discarded needles, is simply part of a nasty Not-in-Our-Backyard agenda by NIMBYs in groups like Take Back Santa Cruz[TBSC], the Santa Cruz Neighbors, and the SCPD to enforce their own anti-homeless agenda as well as promote a new Drug Prohibition War..

HUFF’s criticisms of the HLOSC should not be confused with those of TBSC.   If you’ve had concerns about the HLOSC, plese post them at the HUFF blog at http://huffsantacruz.org/wordpress/ .

I Went Undercover at a Homeless Shelter — You Wouldn’t Believe the Shocking Abuses I Found There

Renee Miller was sexually propositioned by a staff member immediately upon arrival, and that was just the beginning.

February 18, 2013  |



Editor’s note: This post originally appeared on Tallahassee Grapevine. An investigation has been launchedinto allegations of abuse at the shelter. 

I work with the homeless every day at City Walk (and I mean Every Day, on Sundays when we are closed, my husband and I take a group of them to church.) One of my biggest goals is to show them God’s love for them, that there is hope, that they have value and they can overcome this trial in their life and get back on their feet.

We have a group of guys that stay at The Shelter that come every day to escape the drama of that area of town. They love to come help and pass the time blessing other people. We help them apply for jobs online or in person, counsel them and figure out where they need to be (sometimes this involves letting them work off a bus ticket back to family.)

Whenever I first heard complaints about The Shelter, I shrugged it off. I figuredof course they are going to complain about it. It is not supposed to be Club Med, but a place to sleep outside of the elements. If it was too comfortable, people would not be motivated enough to leave.

But as time went on, the complaints started coming from different sources about the same things. We give out backpacks, clothes and blankets at City Walk. I kept seeing the same faces come back for blankets or backpacks. When I ask them what happened to their other blanket or backpack, they tell me that staff at The Shelter threw them away.

After getting this “excuse” 10 times a week for several weeks, I decided to inquire with my daily volunteers. They told me that they won’t let you bring your own blanket. I figured it must be so people can’t sneak in any drugs, alcohol or weapons.

Many of the guys sleep outside under the polebarn, which is fenced in onShelter property. They told me that they are not allowed to bring their backpacks inside when they go eat. When they come back out to the polebarn their backpacks were collected by staff and thrown in the dumpster.

Many of these backpacks contained all the men had to their name, including important documents like their Birth Certificate, and photos and letters from loved ones.

The last straw was Sunday morning when we picked up 4 of the guys for church. I asked them how they slept and they all said lousy. Their blankets were taken away and staff would not issue any of the 42 men that slept outside a blanket at check-in.

When one of the men went back up to tell staff that they all needed blankets, the staff member yelled at all the guys, “You are not getting blankets tonight and I don’t care if you all freeze to death!”

This irritated me, but I know there are two sides to every story. As I inquired with others, the stories matched up too well. I also know that many good citizens of Tallahassee go out of their way to donate blankets to City Walk or directly to The Shelter, so to deny the men a blanket is spiteful to the rest of us whodonate. It’s funny they don’t have any problem collecting their paycheck paid for from our donations and tax dollars.

So I decided to go undercover and see for myself what it was like for a women to check herself into the Tallahassee Shelter.

Since many of the staff has seen me around there giving out blankets and Bibles, I knew I had to disguise myself. I put on an auburn wig that made my hair shorter and a baseball cap.
Sunday night, as I entered the area to check-in, an older black woman entered right behind me. The male staff member behind the counter yelled at the woman,”You’re late for check-in, you have to sleep outside tonight!”

The woman walked out. I wondered why he let me in as she walked in right behind me.

He asked me if I had been there before. I told him no. He asked for my name. I made one up. He asked me for my phone number. I thought that was odd so I made one up. He told me to wait outside.

I went out with the other ladies and children and a few minutes later he came out. He told me that the phone number I gave him did not work.

I told him it was dead and I needed to charge it.

He said, “Okay, well here is my number. Call me and we can hook up later tonight.”

Did I just get propositioned by a staff member? I was infuriated but did not want to break my cover.

I answered, “Nah, man, I just need some food and some sleep.”

“You don’t want to sleep in there. It’s dangerous. You can come sleep at my place. We can stop at McDonald’s.”

Seriously, a staff member – a person with some authority – was propositioning me – no, better yet, PREYING on a woman he KNOWS is in a vulnerable situation. A woman comes to

The Shelter to escape the insecurity of the streets, not to be thrown to the wolves. Now I know why he let me stay and kicked the older woman out. He didn’t want to get in her pants.

I wanted to stall him so I asked for a drink of water. He came back with his own half-drank bottled water for me.

He propositioned me again. He said, “It’s not safe in there for women. You are better off coming home with me. I get off at 11:45. Just meet me in that parking lot over there.”

I wanted him to leave me alone so I told him I would go with him later.

He asked me to be discreet and don’t tell anyone I was going.

Inside, as I was waiting for a bed number a different staff member needed to get to the dryer. As he passed me, he shoved me out of the way and I fell to the floor.

The man came back to remind me I was leaving with him at 11:45 and to be discreet.

I noticed a woman playing solitaire on her bed. I asked if she wanted to play a card game. She told me that they would get kicked out if they were caught playing cards with others.

The looks on the faces of the women were despondent. I felt depressed and I knew I could leave at any time and go home. These women and children had no where else to go.

Dinner was half an hour late as we got herded outside like cattle into what I call “The Cage.” The Cage is a chainlink fenced-in area adjacent to the building. There is only one way in or out, and that door could only be opened from the inside of the building.

As the women were told to come back in, the staff member that kept asking me for sex told me to “Wait here.” In. The. Cage…Alone.

My mind was racing. I’m never scared in Frenchtown. I’m around prostitutes, addicts, dealers, and mentally ill people all the time and NEVER scared. I never think twice. I’m usually armed with a Bible and known for preaching but tonight I’m just a homeless person. How could I explain to my husband that I was raped tonight at The Shelter. I immediately put my foot in the door just before he shut it.

“You’re still leaving with me, right?”

I nodded.

“You didn’t tell anyone, right?”

I said no.

I decided the stories I had been hearing are true. I experienced the abuse first hand.

I had two babies and a husband at home and it was late and I better get going.But to sign out, I had to get past the solicitor. I got scared.

I went into the bathroom and called the police. I told them what I was doing and to ask for my fake name at the front desk and have me come outside.

They arrived and my stalker wanted to come with me to talk to the police. I told the police I wanted to talk to them alone.

We went outside and I told them the story. They informed me there was no crime. A staff member can solicit a guest for sex if they want to. They agreed it was unethical, inappropriate and just plain wrong, but there was nothing they could do. So they gave me a ride back to my car.

As I was inside, I was able to talk to many of the women that stayed there, some with children.
I found out some pretty disheartening stories. I found out that in order to get your laundry done, you had to perform sexual favors to the staff or you would get put at the end of the list.

I found out that “the rules” depended on who was working at that time and it is common to be yelled at and berated right in front of your own children. Nicknames given to the women by staff are things like “Fat Ass” and “Heifer.”

If a woman decides to stick up for herself she is threatened with a call to DCF to have her children taken away. If she further complains, she is threatened with being banned from The Shelter, then a call to DCF because she has her children sleeping in the street. She just has to sit there and take the insults and cursewords as they are spewed out at her.

One women told me, “He knows we’re powerless here and he can treat us however he wants. I can’t go to anyone because I don’t want to risk having nowhere to go and losing my kids.”

A lot of the guys told me they choose to sleep outside because there is a Bed Bug infestation in The Shelter. At first I did not truly believe it, but everyday, our volunteers and their kids show up with bites all over them.

One woman told me, “We just learn to live with it. It’s better than having your kids sleep outside.”

I don’t believe in coddling people. It should not be “easy” to be homeless or that takes away the incentive of finding a way out. However, for many, finding themself homeless takes away much of their dignity. They don’t need to be verbally abused, assaulted or treated with such disrepect, especially from the staff that is hired to care for them – especially with your tax dollars and donations.

Don’t take away whatever dignity they have left.

That night, word got around at The Shelter about what I did. Monday morning, as we were opening City Walk, George (a homeless volunteer that stays at TheShelter) excitedly came to get me.

“Renee, come outside, hurry.”

I go out front and look up at 7th Avenue – a large group of women, men and kids were walking towards City Walk – some with no shoes, some pushing baby strollers, some I had never seen before.

George said, “They know what you did last night and are here to see you.”

I was already bawling my eyes out when they finally crossed Thomasville Road.

One of the women hugged me so long I thought she was not going to let go. She said,

“Someone willing to do what yu dd last night shows you really truly care about what happens to us. We want to volunteer here today.”

JOHN COHEN OF SANTA CRUZ COMMENTS:

We need some brave souls to go undercover at the Homeless Services Center (HSC) in Santa Cruz. From stories related to me by homeless people I advocated for, you might be shocked.

The social service workers and their supervisors who run the HSC shelters insist that homeless beneficiaries have no due process rights — in other words homeless people can be evicted immediately from the shelters without written notice or opportunity for appeal. This is illegal because the HSC shelters receive federal grant money to operate: they are providing federal benefits. It shocked me to hear social service supervisors echo the refrain that homeless beneficiaries have no rights.

I have asked federal agencies to look into these abuses at the HSC.

THE ORIGINAL STORY APPEARED AT http://www.alternet.org/i-went-undercover-homeless-shelter-you-wouldnt-believe-shocking-abuses-i-found-there?page=0%2C0

John Cohen’s facebook site can be found at

http://www.facebook.com/groups/325916790824852/permalink/431317143618149/

Homelessness Up For Discussion or Diversion? 7-9 PM Tonight–Monica Martinez & Don Lane

NOTE FROM NORSE:   Tonight Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom hosts a talk at the Quaker Meeting House, 225 Rooney St., east of Morrissey Blvd., in Santa Cruz (next to the freeway) 7-9 PM.Speaking are former Mayor and Board President of the Homeless Services Center (which some of us call the Homeless Lack of Services Center) Don Lane and Monica Martinez, its Executive Director.Their topic is “the current state of homelessness in Santa Cruz and calling for action in support of the 180/180 Initiative which provides permanent supportive housing for the most at-risk and vulnerable of our homeless citizens.”The 180/180 program seeks to raise government and private funds to house a fraction of the most costly homeless folks (i.e. those who scare the merchants most) with  no provision for the rest of the community and no let-up in the criminalization of the other 95%.  It seems to be a successor program to the Housing First! program and the Continuum of Care (“End Homelessness in Ten Years” shuck and jive) that got federal funding for the last decade and a half.

It’s not that providing housing and supportive services for 180 people in Santa Cruz county is a bad idea.  Obviously it’s not.  But focusing all attention and energy on a fanciful grant-magnet 180/180 program is done at the expense of immediate shelter and human rights needs.  It seems largely a self-justifying project for bureaucrats.  Meanwhile the same leaders (Lane and Martinez) counsel colluding with police and courts in their campaign to drive away and criminalize a whole class of people.  Focusing exclusively on 180/180 diverts the public’s attention from the recent smear campaign of anti-homeless warriors on the right led by Councilmembers Comstock and Robinson.  The massive “needles = homeless = illegal camps = crime” rage given unjustified credibility were recently echoed by the Mayor of the City (See http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/opinion/ci_22606878/hilary-bryant-public-safety-is-our-top-priority ).

Unfortunately Santa Cruz has several thousand homeless people (Santa Cruz County even more)–currently under rabid attack by vigilantes, police, sheriffs, rangers, security guards, city council, hired clean-up crews as well as courts and D.A.’s.   It is illegal to sleep in Santa Cruz after 11 PM at night, illegal to set up a survival camp site at any time.  The City Council (with Lane voting in favor and Martinez silent) has made “unattended” camping tickets into misdemeanors punishable by a year in jail and $1000 fine.

A prior “Homelessness Summit” on December 1st out at Cabrillo College, masterminded by the backers of the 180/180 program completely sidelined the real issue of the need for immediate shelter, campsites, legal support now and has resulted in no further action.

These “feel good” psuedo-positive initiatives sacrifice human dignity and human lives for what some politicians seem to consider the “politically possible”.  Fresno and D.C. are apparently experiencing similar problems as the stories below seem to indicate.

Fresno Activist Mike Rhodes writes:
This is from a Washington Post article published last Friday.  It is painfully obvious that the local government (both the city and county of Fresno) has had many of the same problems.  But, that does not stop them from continuing to push one program after another, even though they are doomed to fail. 
The current plan to build housing (The Renaissance project) houses a small percent (perhaps 5%) of the homeless population, with the vast majority of people left to fend completely for themselves. 
The city and county won’t even provide them with drinking water, portable toilets, or trash pick up.  I believe the reason they (city and county officials) do this is to give people (in the broader community) the illusion that they have a plan to end homelessness, but the bureaucrats in their cynical hearts, know what they are doing is not going to work.  Unfortunately, people who are not paying close attention have the hope that something is being done to solve the problem, when in fact they are being mislead.  In the meantime, the vast majority of homeless people are the ones who suffer, while the bureaucrats collect their fat salaries.
Why does D.C. still have so many homeless?By Colbert I. King, Published: February 15

More than 900 people, including 600 children, crammed into a makeshift D.C. homeless shelter? Things weren’t supposed to turn out this way. By now, we were told, homelessness in our nation’s capital would be a thing of the past. Let’s take a trip down memory lane.
In 1993, the Clinton administration persuaded Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly to enter into a partnership, called the D.C. Initiative, with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
The idea, hatched under HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros and Assistant Secretary Andrew Cuomo, was to make the District a national model for local governments on ending homelessness.
To get the city’s buy-in, HUD dangled a $20 million grant and other federal bucks, provided that the District kicked in some of its own funds for homeless services.
After weeks of meetings stretched into months, the cash-strapped District signed an agreement in 1994 transferring the city’s responsibility to an entity known as the Community Partnership for the Prevention of Homelessness.
In 1994, according to city estimates, approximately 3,400 single adults used the District’s shelter system. They represented about 60 percent of the people in the system.
It was thought that 1,200 to 1,500 of those 3,400 lived on city streets and used the shelters or public space intermittently or interchangeably.
About a fifth of shelter residents were families who turned to the system repeatedly because of their precarious and unstable situations.
Some had drug addictions or major health problems; some were victims of domestic violence.
The D.C. Initiative’s solution? Transition from a shelter-based system to a “continuum of care” approach that entailed creating a community network of agencies and programs to tackle not only housing needs but also the root causes of homelessness.
Over time, The Post ran a series of cautious editorials about the feds’ push for the initiative.
The District had been used before as a federal test case — with city officials often left holding the short end of the stick.
Vincent C. Gray, the director of the D.C. Department of Human Services under Mayor Kelly, testified before the House subcommittee on housing and community development on Oct. 26, 1993, as to the D.C. Initiative’s goal.
Yes, Gray has been at this for a long time.
He promised Congress that with HUD money the District would try “to create real, permanent, enduring solutions for families and singles who are homeless . . . and make a contribution to . . . the Nation in how to resolve, once and for all, the problem of homelessness in this Nation.” That was nearly 20 years ago.
The Post tracked the D.C. Initiative through the departure of Cisneros and Cuomo from the Clinton administration, and through Pratt’s leave-taking from the District government.
By 2000, the D.C. Initiative was over and done. But the homeless were still here.
In June 2004, Mayor Anthony A. Williams presented with fanfare: “Homeless No More: A Strategy for Ending Homelessness in Washington, D.C. by 2014.” He billed it as a “client centered” approach focused on bringing to the table all the key service providers to create a system that prevents and ends, rather than maintains, the problem of homelessness.
Williams left office. The homeless remained.
In April 2008 Mayor Adrian M. Fenty introduced the “Housing First” fund. “What we are proposing is a new approach to serving our chronically homeless neighbors,” Fenty said. “The systems of the past have not brought us closer to ending this humanitarian crisis.”
Fenty proposed moving chronically homeless people from the streets and shelters to housing where they could be provided comprehensive services to solve the problems that contributed to their homelessness.
Sound familiar?
Fast-forward to 2013.
Today, millions of dollars later and after years upon years of government, nonprofit and private-sector efforts, homeless families are still in the defunct D.C. General hospital shelter, in motels or on the streets.
Is it a question of funding or underfunding, management or mismanagement, commitment or lack of concern? Does part of the problem also rest with those without roofs over their heads? Is the answer some or all of the above?
The Post’s Annie Gowen reported this week that Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), chairman of the D.C. Council’s Committee on Human Services, said he would conduct hearings on conditions at the hospital shelter. That’s too limited a focus.
There is no better time to take a sober look at the persistent problem of homelessness in our nation’s capital, its causes, what has worked and failed, and what can realistically be done to get people beyond their plight to greater independence.
That may be a better D.C. initiative.

Old, Female, and Homeless in San Francisco

Old, Female and Homeless

Life on San Francisco’s streets for women over 50 is filled with hardships, small and large.
January 25, 2013  |

This story was produced with support from the Economic Hardship Reporting Project, and first appeared in The Nation

The doors of the Mission Neighborhood Health Center in San Francisco don’t open until 7 am, but on the Saturday morning I was there, a dozen or so people were already lined up by 5:30. The group included a middle-aged white man who had lost his job managing a high-end restaurant and a black man wearing a crisp security guard blazer because he had to be at work by noon. Each was there hoping for a bed for the night. The city assigns most slots in its homeless shelters on a first-come, first-served basis by computer. The people had shown up here so early because they know through experience that every last bed will be claimed by 7:10 am.


When Marcia has no bed, she is left with precious few options, none of them good. She can ride the city bus, hoping for a kind driver who won’t boot her into the street. That’s what a 55-year-old woman I met named Dorothy used to do until she deemed that strategy too risky. “If you don’t get a nice driver, you have to get off every hour or so and wait for another one,” Dorothy said. “If you have to wait for a bus at three in the morning, you’ll be waiting a long time. Anything can happen.”   A 56-year-old woman named Marcia, who has been homeless for six years, was one of the unlucky ones. She arrived while it was still dark, but not early enough to secure a bed. Because it was the weekend, her bad luck also meant two days of killing time. “Saturdays and Sundays are hell for those of us who are homeless, because most walk-in centers are closed,” she told me. “I especially hate Sundays. That’s when I ride BART.” For Marcia, riding the Bay Area’s commuter rail system is a relatively cheap way to get some rest during the day. She often falls asleep on the train, and it’s not uncommon for her to wake up and find herself an hour or more outside San Francisco.


And then there were the plastic chairs at the Oshun Drop-In Center, a public facility run by the San Francisco Department of Public Health. Marcia usually chose the plastic chairs at Oshun. It was hardly ideal, but at least she felt safe there and could try to get some sleep. “You can’t lie down on the floor,” she said. “You try, but you’re not allowed.” After a night spent contorting herself into an uncomfortable chair, her back would be killing her. “But I try not to think about it,” she said. “After a while, you get used to it.”


It used to be that homeless women over 50 were blessedly rare. Marie O’Connor began helping seniors find housing in San Francisco’s Mission District in 1992. “To see homeless elders back then was shocking,” said O’Connor, a volunteer coordinator with the St. Anthony Foundation, a nonprofit providing the homeless with housing, meals and medical care. “Today, it’s the norm.”


How widespread is the problem? Every homeless advocate and shelter monitor I spoke with told me the older homeless population in San Francisco is exploding. The problem is bound to get worse as the price of housing reaches new heights. San Francisco is the most expensive city in the country for renters, according to a March 2012 report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition. Small studio apartments are going for as much as $2,000 a month, which requires a salary of at least $70,000 a year.


And it’s not just San Francisco. The cost of living in most major metropolitan areas is on the rise, while wages are down. In states like California, ongoing budget cuts to services like the Supplemental Security Income, In-Home Supportive Services and adult day healthcare centers are making it harder for elderly people to pay for housing. According to the latest numbers from Hearth, an organization working to end elder homelessness, the country had 40,750 homeless people 62 or older in 2012. As the nation’s population ages, that number is expected to more than double by 2050.


To homeless advocates in San Francisco, those numbers sound way too low, given the problems they see just inside the city limits. But whatever the figure, there’s no doubt that life is miserable for older people without a home. Lugging suitcases or bags for dozens of blocks to and fro, from a shelter to a reservation center to the place that serves free lunches, can be incredibly taxing if you’re young and able. Doing so with the disabilities and ailments common to those in their 50s or older, from chronic back pain and arthritis to swollen ankles and gout, is that much harder.

And then imagine those women’s lives, when feeling safe meant another night spent contorted into a hard plastic chair.


Longtime advocate for the homeless James Powell seemed relieved when I mentioned that I’d seen the plastic chairs: maybe now someone would do something about them. “We’re talking about women sleeping in chairs. It’s a travesty,” said Powell, a case manager with the Canon Kip Senior Center in San Francisco. Bevan Dufty, San Francisco’s homelessness czar, told me people sleeping in plastic chairs was “not optimal, but we have to have places where people can go. It’s not an optimal place, but it’s safe, which is important. There are people who thrive in shelters; there are people who refuse to go in shelters. It’s complicated.” 


Sometime after I talked with Powell and Dufty, the plastic chairs were quietly replaced at Oshun (now officially known as A Woman’s Place) by more comfortable cushioned chairs.


Located in the Mission District, the drop-in center is basically two large adjoining rooms, the otherwise bare walls brightened by a single big-screen TV. When I visited Oshun, I found a diverse group of forty-five women, each sitting or sleeping in a chair surrounded by her belongings. Some had old suitcases with broken zippers, while others had stuffed their things into ripped garbage bags. The lucky ones found a spot near a wall. They’d at least be able to rest their heads by putting a blanket against the wall behind them. The rest had no choice but to let their heads hang. 
Yet what choices do older homeless women have? Despite a spike in older homeless clients, says O’Connor of the St. Anthony Foundation, there are still precious few services to help women like Marcia and Dorothy. “If you’re a homeless woman, you’re guaranteed to be assaulted on the streets,” said Paul Boden, organizing director of the Western Regional Advocacy Project (WRAP), a West Coast coalition of homeless organizations. Boden, who was homeless himself at 16 after the death of his mother, also served as executive director of the city’s Coalition on Homelessness. “Women try to double up with guys to be safe, but they usually get beaten up by those guys, so their options are limited.”


One of the regulars at Oshun is an Argentine woman named Zulema. She’s a 65-year-old who, when I met her, had been sleeping in the plastic chairs there for six years. “I stayed in shelters for four months, but the process is inefficient and I never felt safe,” she said. “The shelters are very bad for women, especially older women.” She told me she had become accustomed to sleeping sitting up on hard plastic. “You have no control of your life at the shelter,” she said. “At Oshun, I can come and go.”


You’d have no idea Zulema was a homeless woman who slept in a chair each night if you saw her on the street. She has flawless golden brown skin and a shiny gray bob. She often wears burgundy lipstick, khaki pants, a white button-down sweater and a jean jacket. She rides her bike for exercise and earns $400 a month selling flowers she buys from a wholesaler. She often drinks tea and reads the Bible at Starbucks. Advocates describe her as one of the few Oshun regulars who haven’t had the spirit beaten out of them.


A case in point is the older woman I spoke with who had served in the military and said she’d been homeless for several decades. She warned me that every person I was talking to was lying. “Why would you believe any of them?” she screamed. “Not a damn thing has changed since 1931. It never will. You’re wasting your time.”  


Then there’s the physical toll the streets take. “Most homeless women in their 40s or 50s look like they are 70 or 80 because homelessness takes such a toll,” said O’Connor. “I no longer know if a homeless person is 50 or 80.”


Marcia, the homeless woman I met in front of the Mission Neighborhood Health Center, is 56 and looks her age. Maybe that’s because she only became homeless at 50. She’s a black woman who walks with a cane. She throws a large backpack over her thick green jacket and often wears jeans and a black bandanna. She learned the hard way about navigating the chaotic and stressful world of homelessness in 2005, when her mother died. She and her sister were supposed to share the money from the sale of their family home, but Marcia had a stroke that left her visually impaired, and her sister took the money and left the state. Talking about her life since that time, she paused, shook her head and admitted that she’s still shocked to find herself living on the streets.


“I didn’t even know this world existed before I became part of it,” she said. “When you’re homeless, you lose control of your environment. Most of the people I meet have mental illnesses. You never know when they’re going to snap. A quiet room can turn into chaos within minutes. I don’t sleep much.” Last year, Marcia testified in front of the city’s Shelter Monitoring Committee and offered a lengthy prescription for improvements, including an end to co-ed shelters so women feel safe. She also argued that the mentally ill should be kept separate from everyone else. But nothing changed. “Right now, we’re all lumped together,” she said. “It makes no sense.”


Marcia lived in a single-room occupancy hotel for six months. But the rent ate up half of her $900 Social Security check, and because SROs generally don’t have kitchens, she spent much of the rest on prepared meals. By the third week of the month, she often had less than $10 left on her debit card. “I’ve never been that poor,” she said. “I couldn’t deal with it. I also didn’t feel safe on the same floor as men. The walls were thin and it wasn’t clean, so I left.” Life got much worse when she was hit by a car and injured in 2009. She reached out to relatives and friends but never got a response.


“When you need something, everyone disappears,” Marcia said. She told me her goal at that point was to muster enough cash to buy a bus ticket to Reno, where she hoped to find an affordable place. Meanwhile, she tried not to think about suicide. “You get so depressed,” she said. “I’ve been able to maintain my sanity because I know how to withdraw. Like most homeless women I’ve met, I was molested as a child, so I know how to go inside of myself.” According to the National Center on Family Homelessness and the National Low Income Housing Coalition, a staggeringly high percentage of homeless women have experienced severe physical or sexual assault at some point in their lives.


Homelessness czar Bevan Dufty told me he was willing to talk with the women I’d met over the past few months, to explore their cases and contact their case managers about permanent housing options. The real problem, though, is the lack of affordable housing. “I can show you 27,000 individuals on the public housing list,” he said. “We’re dealing with a very big problem. We’re talking about a city that’s very expensive.”
Of 155,000 seniors living in San Francisco, according to a report by the city’s Department of Aging and Adult Services, roughly 19,000 live below the federal poverty line: $10,326 per year for a single person age 65 or older, or $13,014 for a two-person household. Based on the Elder Economic Security Standard Index, 61 percent of San Francisco’s seniors don’t have enough income to meet their basic needs. Meanwhile, the country has endured years of trickle-down economics, welfare cutbacks, rising income inequality, attacks on unions and the privatization of public services. Those are only some of the factors WRAP spelled out as causes of homelessness in its report “Without Housing.” And perhaps the biggest factor affecting older homeless women: the government turned housing over to the private market in the 1970s, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s budget was slashed by 77 percent between 1978 and 1983.


No wonder Paul Boden of WRAP said that the situation for the older homeless population has gotten progressively worse since the 1980s. “Back then, I could get a senior a nice room in an SRO hotel within the Section 8 program,” he told me. “Today, you can’t get them shit.”


The city is now looking into ways to house homeless individuals with medical needs that exceed the capacity of the emergency shelters to handle. “The most vulnerable can’t stand in line for hours at a time,” said Amanda Kahn Fried, policy director at HOPE, the city’s Housing, Opportunity, Partnerships and Engagement office. Some of these people, she noted, “are at the point in their life where they can’t take care of themselves. They’re either too old or too sick and can’t get out of bed or get to the bathroom.”


The city’s current efforts have some homeless advocates feeling hopeful. But for others, like James Powell at the Canon Kip Center, they’re a reminder of earlier attempts that ended in frustration. Ideas would be floated, meetings held, solutions discussed—and then nothing would happen. Maybe that’s the silver lining in a situation that has gotten so bad, Powell said.


“This is getting above the point of focus groups and closed-door meetings,” he added. “We’re on the verge of an implosion. We can’t continue to ignore all of these people who are suffering. We have no choice but to listen and act.”


Addressing the problems of the poor is the mission of Nation.com blogger Greg Kaufman’s This Week in Poverty. His latest dispatch: “An Anti-Poverty Contract for 2013?

Rose Aguilar is the host of Your Call, a daily call-in radio show on KALW 91.7 FM in San Francisco and KUSP 88.9 FM in Santa Cruz, and author of Red Highways: A Liberal’s Journey into the Heartland.Tip of the hat to John Cohen for alerting us to this story from his Santa Cruz Homeless Persons Disabled Advocacy page at http://www.facebook.com/groups/325916790824852/ .

Fresno: Burning Out a Homeless Encampment?

Fresno has no Heart – Will Evict the Homeless on Valentines Day
by Mike Rhodes ( editor [at] fresnoalliance.com )
Monday Feb 11th, 2013 5:43 PM

The photo below shows the north end of the Monterey and E street homeless encampment.

 

 

An eviction of a significant number of homeless people at a downtown encampment will probably take place on Thursday, February 14. According to residents of the homeless encampment, located near Monterey and E street, they were told by the owner of the property they are living on that they have until Thursday to “move on.” The owner was accompanied by several officers from the Fresno Police Department and a truck & crew from the Fire Department.One homeless man told me this afternoon (Monday, February 11) that the owner of the property said he would be bulldozing the vacant lot on Thursday and everything would be destroyed. “He told me to get the fuck out of here,” he shared with me as he sorted through recycled items sitting in several shopping carts on the property. When I asked if he was sure it was the owner, he said “well, he had the police with him, so it looked pretty convincing to me.”

Unlike other evictions by the City of Fresno, there are no signs posted to notify the residents of the demolition that is to come. Julie (not her real name), said someone had posted an eviction notice about a month ago, but those were torn down within an hour or two. The owner told her that he did not have to post notices because it is his property.

There was an eviction that took place in the spring of 2012 at another homeless encampment, behind the grain silos near Palm and H street, that was similar. This was private property, the owner made numerous attempts to force the homeless to move, and eventually put a fence around the property to force the eviction. Many of the homeless people from that encampment moved about 200 feet south and occupied a different vacant lot. They have not been threatened with eviction again, as far as I know.

Most of the residents at the Monterey and E street homeless encampment who are being threatened with eviction said they were planning on moving, but I was told that not everyone would pack up and move. I was told that it is only the north end of the encampment that has been threatened with eviction. The dividing line is Monterey street. Everything north of Monterey street will likely be destroyed on Thursday. Everything south of Monterey street is said to be safe from the demolition.

Can the owner of a vacant lot take and immediately destroy homeless peoples property? Did the City of Fresno threaten the owner with legal action if he did not move against the homeless? Will FPD officers participate in the demolition or arrest anyone if they resist? Observers are needed starting early Thursday morning. If you can help, meet at the encampment starting at 7 a.m. on Thursday. Bring your video or still camera to document what takes place. If you can’t come until later, let me know so we can coordinate having someone there all day.

Demolitions of homeless encampments in October and November of 2011 resulted in over 30 lawsuits against the City of Fresno claiming that the city violated homeless peoples legal rights by taking and immediately destroying their property. Those cases are working their way through the court. Without this litigation it is likely that the city would have been more aggressive in their attacks on the homeless. A new strategy of forcing property owners to evict the homeless may be emerging as City Hall seeks to avoid additional lawsuits.

###

Mike Rhodes is the editor of the Community Alliance newspaper. He can be reached by email at editor [at] fresnoalliance.com .

§Another view of the norht end of the encampment

by Mike Rhodes Monday Feb 11th, 2013 5:43 PM

 

§This shows the entire area impacted by the evictions

by Mike Rhodes Monday Feb 11th, 2013 5:43 PM

 

§Typical Shelter in the Area

by Mike Rhodes Monday Feb 11th, 2013 5:43 PM

 

§This is the center of the homeless encampment looking north

by Mike Rhodes Monday Feb 11th, 2013 5:43 PM

 

 

Burning the Homeless out

by Mike Rhodes ( editor [at] fresnoalliance.com )
Sunday Feb 17th, 2013 7:10 PM

This is a follow up to an earlier Indybay article about an eviction of homeless people at the Monterey and E street encampment in Fresno.

 

 

As I drove toward the Monterey and E street homeless encampment on Valentine’s Day, I could see a huge plume of smoke rising into the sky. When I got a little closer I could hear and then see the fire trucks screaming towards the smoke. They got there about 5 minutes ahead of me, but they already had most of the fire under control by the time I arrived.I was going to the encampment to check out reports that the owner was going to bulldoze the vacant lot, inhabited by about 100 homeless people in downtown Fresno. See: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2013/02/11/18731822.php

After taking a few photos of the scene I headed over to the police and what looked to be the fire department supervisor. I asked the officer if there was anything suspicious about the fire. He looked puzzled. I told him that the owner of the property had told the residents that he was going to bulldoze the encampment today. More puzzlement in the eyes of the two guys I was talking to. I said, “have you looked into the possibility that the owner started the fire to force the homeless from this area?” This the police officer seemed to understand and he assured me that nothing like that had happened. “How do you know that?” I asked. “Well, these people out here would make a complaint if something like that had happened. Oh, they do all kinds of things themselves, but if something happens to them they will file a complaint.”

Seemed to me that the officer had some bias against the homeless and unlike any other house fire in this town, there would be no investigation of what happened here. After all, these were just homeless people, squatting on somebody’s land. Arson? An attempt to evict the people that lived there? Obviously, the police or the fire department were not going to be bothered to investigate what had happened.

This is one of the realities of the homeless encampments in Fresno. There are a lot of fires, some of which are caused by candles and other light or heat sources. Sometimes, as Gloria (a homeless woman who used to live in the area) told me, there are people who will burn your house down because you owe them $10.

Several people told me that the fire on Valentine’s Day was not due to the vigilantism of the property owner, but was the result of a personal dispute.

The eviction by the owner, who told everyone he was going to bulldoze their property, did not happen. This is not unusual and has become a pattern in Fresno. What usually happens is that you have a property owner who may or may not care that homeless people are living on his property. He or she is contacted by someone from the City of Fresno (usually code enforcement or the police) and they are told they have to do something about the homeless encampment on their property.

If the owner does not move to dislodge the homeless the city official will ratchet up the pressure. This could be in the form of telling the owner that if they don’t remove the homeless, the city will do it and send them a bill for the clean up. Another approach I have seen them use is to threaten the owner, saying that if they don’t remove the homeless, they will make life more difficult for them. In one case they told a home owner with obvious code violations that if they did not remove the homeless people from their property they would come and do an inspection. If the homeless people move, then there will be no pesky government officials turning over every stone at your house to make sure you are in 100% compliance of all local, state, and federal laws. You get the idea.

In this case, the owner came out to the encampment on Monterey and E streets, with the fire department and the police watching his back (from a safe distance) as he threatened them with eviction and a bulldozer on Valentine’s Day. This created enough anxiety among the homeless that at least ½ of them moved away. That was the desired result. If the city and property owner can get the homeless to leave, without bringing out the bulldozer, that is a win for them.

Most homeless people don’t want to be a part of a confrontation and they will move on when threatened with the destruction of their property. Of course, they usually just move over to the next vacant lot and the process starts all over again.

§Why was their no investigation of this house fire?

by Mike Rhodes Sunday Feb 17th, 2013 7:11 PM

 

 

 

 

All photos by Mike Rhodes