4-3 (b) Initial Screening: The Homeless Problem

II. The City of Ashland and its “homeless problem”

A problem in my town continues to vex citizens, tourists, businesses, police and city government. There are people who live downtown: some are homeless, some are just hanging out. Some folks panhandle, and a fraction of them can be aggressive or verbally abusive to pedestrians. There are reports of individuals urinating and defecating in public places, theft and similar breaches of public order. Business owners are concerned that tourists will be dissuaded from shopping downtown. In the past year, there were two incidents where people set fires: one resulted in the destruction of a number of homes, the other damaged a business and the building that houses it.

It seems to me there are number of problems that become conflated in the minds of many. The situation is generally called the “homeless problem downtown.” But it seems to me that there are a variety of people downtown. Some simply have a different culture than the tourists and the bulk of the city residents. These folks dress differently, play music, enjoy lounging in public places etc. There are some formerly middle class people whose economic life has taken a severe down turn. Some people prefer living simply and don’t want a home. There are some people who earn a livelihood panhandling. There are others who appear to be mentally ill and probably there are some criminals.

Businesspeople and residents who have been confronted by aggressive individuals want “the city to do something,” which implies they feel powerless to change the situation. The city and the police would love to make the problem go away, but they are unsure how. They can’t outlaw panhandling because that is protected free speech. The council has erected a ban against camping in public places. The police cite violators of city ordinances, but the citations result in fines levied in municipal court which are unpaid and hardly a deterrent. The council wants to ban people for several months who have been cited for violating city ordinances more than once.

There is a interfaith coalition and peace groups who set up a listening project to speak to folks and find out their needs and motivations. There are now several times during the week where the hungry can share meals with the “homed” (what do you call someone who lives in a home?), and one church has opened up a shower facility once a week. However, there is concern that if our town provides better services than other towns, it will become a regional magnet for folks who are destitute.

Some of the problems are a local manifestation of national attitudes toward the poor, the unemployed and the mentally ill – the safety net is skimpy compared to European countries. These issues are not going away. An appropriate balance is called for between support and generosity on the one hand, and not taxing city and private resources by attracting more and more people. There are some competing visions of the city: “we a generous and affluent community with a responsibility to those less fortunate” vs. “we are a tourist town and we exist to provide a stimulating, easy and aesthetically pleasing experience for our guests.”