two decades of "spitting into the wind" on homelessness

---

If you recall, Measure 110 made it legal to possess small amounts of narcotic drugs, like fentanyl.  But the results of 110 were a surge in drug addiction, causing an increase in fatal drug overdoses and more homelessness.

So, the state is funding and letting each Oregon County set up what are called Deflection programs, such as Clackamas County's Deflection Program, for those caught with small amounts of these addictive drugs.  The idea is to put some teeth into nudging people into getting off their drug addictions, and hopefully getting "back on their feet."

I am not sure this new attempt, Deflection, is still enough to do a good job at reducing drug addiction and related homelessness.  I think one big thing missing is creating a low-cost compound - say a fenced off area of individual tents - to confine (i.e, jail) those that refuse or fail deflection, the term of confinement would be for those drug addicts who refuse or fail deflection and then later show up in an unauthorized homeless encampment - in such cases, the drug addict would have to go to this compound for homeless drug users for at least say a month or so.

I believe this compound, jail concept, I brainstorm about here, would be permissible by the recent U.S Supreme Court decision in the Grants Pass court case, allowing cities to restrict, designate areas where unauthorized public camping may take place.

Here's the link to Clackamas County's brief description of its deflection program:   Deflection | Clackamas County 

Here's what I consider the key parts of Clackamas' description of its Deflection program:

>  "When a person with drugs is identified by police, the officer now has the ability to refer the person to deflection program, which will be discussed before or when they appear for community court." 

> "...will not be charged with a crime if they are eligible and willing to participate in the deflection program."

> "If a person is unsuccessful with deflection, or is not offered deflection, they will have an opportunity to enter a conditional discharge process. "

> "The terms of the conditional discharge will be specifically defined in the court's order..."

> "Someone who rejects either deflection or conditional discharge will be able to have their case set in Clackamas County Circuit Court for trial or resolution."

> " Those who fail their conditional discharge process or elect to try their case in circuit court and are convicted will be subject to a formal probation of 18 months monitored by community court and supervised by community corrections."

You can see from these conditions set out for Clackamas County's Deflection program that those homeless refusing to get off of drugs - that they are free to continue living in unauthorized tent encampments on what should be shared public space.  Hence, this is why I think the next step, if the Deflection program, as is, is not hugely effective, is to add a compound phase to the Deflection program, designed for holding those homeless who refuse to get off drugs - holding these folks for perhaps a month or so.

But the current Clackamas County Deflection program is a start anyway and maybe it surprises and turns out very effective in sharply reducing drug addiction and associated homeless encampments.  We shall see.

(posted by Elvis Clark on September 7, 2024)

Here's the link to KGW's reporting on the shortage of money now holding back Portland from enforcing homeless encampment bans - the shortage of money is highlighted starting about mid way through this KGW video:   Lack of resources limits Portland's ability to fully enforce its homeless camping ban (youtube.com) 

Oregon government like other Westcoast state governments have been hamstrung by the need to build reasonable accommodations for those living on the streets or other public spaces, as up until last week's U.S Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruling, the 9th Circuit Federal Appeals Court had required cities and other governments to secure reasonable accommodations for those homeless folks targeted for relocation.

With the SCOTUS ruling, overturning the 9th Circuit with regard to homeless accommodation, I should think that the cost of establishing designated camping areas to which homeless encampments may be forced to relocate...becomes much lower.

But despite the SCOTUS ruling, Metro government is wanting to shift some of the homeless services taxpayer monies into building more affordable housing (ironically, Metro government's affordable housing projects are relatively expensive) - Metro, thus, proposes to shift public monies away from treating and working with the homeless to transition them out of tents and other temporary make-shift shelter.  But this Metro proposal seems very wrong headed in the light of the SCOTUS ruling. 

If Oregon is ever to get a handle on homeless encampments, spending hundreds of millions of dollars building expensive housing for the homeless does not seem to be the answer especially since public monies for addressing homelessness are scarce.  With the SCOTUS ruling, these scarce monies can now be directed towards nudging and helping those homeless with drug addictions to right their lives.  Also, treating those homeless with mental illness.  

So, Portland should be able to access a portion of the monies now going to building expensive housing for the homeless, instead, towards setting up designated areas for encampments with wrap around homeless services.  

There also needs to be a residency requirement for dealing with homeless folks, because Oregon cannot afford to treat homeless that move to Oregon - those attracted to Oregon because of its handouts.  For those homeless who have migrated to Oregon from other states or countries, maybe a one-way bus ticket back to where they came from is the blunt answer.  If from another country, then demand the federal government pay for their treatment or relocation out of Oregon.

(posted by Elvis Clark on July 4, 2024)

The 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals ruled that the City of Grants Pass, and cities in general, could not criminalize people that are found living on the streets or other public places, if the City did not offer transients a place to take shelter as an alternative to living on the streets or other public places.

This last Monday, April 22, 2024, the U.S Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard arguments for and against this 9th Circuit Court decision - this 9th Circuit decision stopping Grants Pass and other cities from outlawing living on the streets or in other public places.

If SCOTUS were to overturn the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision against Grants Pass' non-authorized camping laws, cities would become a lot more empowered to address unauthorized camping.

As it is now, cities in the western U.S must provide public shelter to a person living on a street in order to have any legal right to levy fines against and/or jail those living in public spaces (on the street).

But if SCOTUS overturns the 9th Circuit Court on homeless encampments, cities will gain a whole lot more flexibility on nudging people who are found living on the streets - into their having to find other living arrangements.

From the reporting of this last Monday's SCOTUS deliberations, it seems SCOTUS judges collectively may be leaning towards overturning the 9th Circuit Court decision against the Grants Pass' laws against living in unauthorized camps.  SCOTUS accepted hearing the case, and one would think they have possible reason(s) for overturning the 9th Circuit on City homeless encampment bans. 

 The three "liberal" justices on the Supreme Court definitely want to uphold the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision against Grants Pass.   And it is hard to tell from the questions raised by the 6 "Conservative" judges on the Supreme Court, whether or not they will come down on the side of freeing Cities/states to have the ultimate power in addressing homeless encampments.

Here's the link to CBS' news reporting on the Grants Pass homeless encampment case heard by SCOTUS this Monday (4/22/24):

In major homelessness case, Supreme Court grapples with constitutionality of anti-camping ordinances - CBS News

If SCOTUS does overturn the 9th Circuit Court decision against Grants Pass' laws against homeless encampments, then states will probably want to develop a new set of guidelines on how cities are to treat those living on the streets or in other public space encampments.  This is because if one City is very hard on the homeless, then homeless people may move to those other cities with easier accommodations for homeless people.

The SCOTUS decision is scheduled for some time this coming June 2024.

(posted by Elvis Clark on April 25, 2024)

Here's the link to KOIN News' reporting on Clackamas' success in reducing homelessness in the County:

Clackamas County records 65% decline in homelessness over 4-year period (koin.com) 

 The key for Clackamas I believe is that the number of homeless people is relatively small, making for a much more manageable problem.  Multnomah County I think makes the mistake of handing out free stuff (like tents) and that this attracts new homeless arrivals to Multnomah County.

Rumor has it that Milwaukie's City Manager is hoping to set up a 23-hour shelter for homeless people, funded with Clackamas County government monies.  Non-profits will supposedly staff this shelter complex.  The proposed shelter would be located in Milwaukie's North Industrial zone -which would help keep a buffer between the homeless and Milwaukie's neighborhoods. 

Still, I am very much hoping that Milwaukie does not provide lots of benefits to those coming to its proposed shelter - as being generous to the Homeless tends to attract more homeless from other regions and states.

(posted by Elvis Clark February 24, 2024)

The Great economist Thomas Sowell (photo to the right) said something like this about how not to solve homelessness:  "You can buy a lot of homelessness, by spending on it."

What more evidence do the people of Oregon have to have about the failure of current government homeless programs/policies than the City of Portland which continually spends more and more on homelessness, only to attract more homelessness.

Despite all the spending on homelessness in the last few years, PSU estimates Oregon's homeless population has only increased by yet another 8% this last year.  Here's the link to KOIN news reporting on the last year's increase in Oregon's Homeless population: 

   Kotek cites homeless progress after disappointing PSU report released (koin.com) 

Notice Kotek and other politicians just wash over the disconnect between spending on homelessness and the homeless population trend.  It ain't working, because the more you just blindly spend on reducing homelessness, the more you attract homeless from other regions, states, or even other countries.

Our politicians suffer from a bad case of myopia, and the naive electorate who elect them suffer dystopia as a result.

Here's the Oregon Catalyst's take on the disconnect between Oregon's increased spending on homelessness and the results of this spending:

Homeless +17% after State gives away $1,000 monthly checks | The Oregon Catalyst

Meanwhile, I hear rumors that Milwaukie's City Manager wants to open a homeless service program in Milwaukie, which doesn't have such services now.  What good will this do most existing residents but end up probably increasing Milwaukie's homeless population, if only to just look at the cities of Portland and even the City of Beaverton?

  Milwaukie's City Manager will talk up her experience with the homeless program in Salt Lake City, Utah.  But after some initial success, homelessness is increasing in Salt Lake City after just a few years after the city's homeless program starts up.

Here's Beaverton's recent experience with its homeless shelter, as reported by KGW:

Beaverton residents express safety concerns over homeless shelter | kgw.com

(posted by Elvis Clark on February 8, 2024)

Based on KATU News' reporting it sounds like Kevin Dahlgren (photo to right here) broke some of his former employer's rules.  He was formerly a lead Homeless social worker for the City of Gresham (his former employer), interacting with homeless folks and helping steer them into more self-supporting lifestyles.  It appears that he may have used the City's credit card to buy a homeless woman some fresh vegetables.  There may be other such incidences in which Dahlgren went over the line ethically with his employer(s).

Here's the link to KATU's reporting on Dahlgren's arrest:   Former Gresham homeless outreach worker, internet famous for homeless stories, indicted on theft charges | KATU 

But I'm a bit suspicious that the City of Gresham (and maybe coaxed by some "non-profit" homeless service organizations) isn't actually just trying to put a muzzle on Dahlgren by running him through the wringer of lawsuit(s). 

 You see Dahlgren has been very public about his criticism of local government and non-profits in their approach to "serving" the homeless.  He criticizes both government and non-profits for using homelessness to take public monies for their own enrichment - spending on employees and administrators - while not really doing much to reduce the homeless population in areas like Multnomah County and Gresham.  He sees this homeless services' industrial complex as enabling the homeless to continue in their self-defeating behaviors - so as to maintain homelessness as a preeminent issue justifying continued public money takings for homeless "services."

Governments increasingly use the courts to ruin the finances and/or freedom of their critics.  Governments have increasingly weaponized the judicial system to silence their critics and/or critics of their favored organizations (non-profit homeless services, in this case).

We shall see if Dahlgren is another example of government's weaponization of the judicial system.

(posted by Elvis Clark on November 1, 2023)

Seeing how fentanyl is leading to open air drug use in the aftermath of voter approval of Measure 110, Clackamas Commissioner Ben West is asking the state of Oregon legislature to amend Measure 110 so that those addicted and living on the streets, or on other unsanctioned public spaces, are forced/nudged to some degree to get treatment.  Here's the link to Commissioner West's KATU news interview (video):   

YVYV: Clackamas County Commissioner Ben West on Measure 110 | KATU

Commissioner West is fostering the creation of a new approach to treating addiction and homelessness.  This approach is called "Recovery-Oriented System of Care."  To the right here is a photo of the initial meetings trying to launch this Recovery-Oriented System of Care approach in Clackamas County (and perhaps leading to other areas of the state also adopting it).  Notice at the southwest corner of the photo that Milwaukie Mayor Batey is participating.  So, there maybe is a bringing together of both left and right on the political dial to try reducing addiction and homelessness.

The Clackamas Board of Commissioners is hosting an on-line town hall this Tuesday evening (9/26/23), discussing this new approach called Recovery-Oriented System of Care.  The Public is invited to send written questions/comments in advance of this town hall.  Here's the link to registering and attending this on-line town hall:     

Town Hall - Sept. 26, 2023 | Clackamas County

We shall see.  So far it is mostly talk, but Commissioner West is relatively young, energetic, experienced having been an emergency center nurse; and then too, Clackamas County itself seems more realistic than neighboring counties about approaching the homeless and addiction issue.  So, there is the beginning of some hope.  

It might also help that Governor Kotek may have some practicality to her, even though it is not demonstrated when she approved the House Bill this year that takes away some critical parent rights   - those being the rights of parents to steer their children in gender choices and treatments without government interference.  (She shouldn't have allowed underage folks to be messed with by unionized government schools regarding their physical sexuality.)

(posted by Elvis Clark on September 21, 2023)

There has been a lot of criticism of the Clackamas Board of Commissioners for turning down state monies to buy and convert a motel into a homeless shelter - where those with drug addiction would be sheltered and offered treatment for their addictions.

But Willamette Week newspaper reports on the Burli Apartment complex for low income people built only a few years ago now in Portland (Multnomah County).  This complex is now badly hurt by those selling and using drugs on the premises.  Here's the Willamette Week report link:  https://www.wweek.com/news/2023/06/07/a-28-million-low-income-apartment-complex-descends-into-chaos-in-just-two-and-a-half-years/

So, Clackamas Board of Commissioners don't look wrong in their declining to buy and convert a Sunnyside Road Quality Inn motel into a shelter for drug addicts.  The Clackamas Board appropriately weighed the risks of this motel becoming a haven for drug addicted users and dealers - a risk now highlighted by Portland's experience with the Burli low income Apartment Complex.

Meanwhile, KGW reports that Multnomah's tiny home (pod) public shelter project dies of neglect by who else.... but Multnomah County government.  Here's this KGW report link:    

https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/multnomah-county-backyard-tiny-homes-homeless-program/283-3000856b-1235-465e-918b-6f73185d1056

(posted by Elvis Clark on June 9, 2023)