In Grants Pass, the Oregon city that launched the Supreme Court case that reshaped how communities can approach homelessness, city councilors voted unanimously on Wednesday to designate four spots for camping, in a new effort to address local homelessness.
In three spots, camping is only allowed for 24 hours before a person must move to a different spot. In the other, campers can remain for 96 hours at a stretch.
Any person camping on any other public property will be given 72 hours’ notice to move, as per Oregon state law. The penalty will be no more than a $50 fine.
The vote took place after passionate public comment, where some residents believed the measure went too far, and others not far enough.
“I don’t want them in our parks, but I also don’t want to create more of what we already have,” said Grants Pass resident Mike Pelfrey during the public comment period.
“Everybody wants to sit up here and talk about where they should go and how many times they should move, how ’bout give them a home?” said Helen Cruz, a Grants Pass resident who also spoke during the comment period.
“There is no perfect plan, we’re just doing the best we can, no matter what we do, no matter where we site these things, there are people who are going to be upset,” said city councilor Brian DeLaGrange.
A Supreme Court ruling at the end of June said that penalizing someone for sleeping outside when there is not sufficient shelter available is not cruel and unusual punishment.
RELATED STORY | Triple-digit heat triggers excessive heat warnings in the Southwest, increased risks to the homeless
Since then, state and local leaders in the West and beyond have been cracking down on homeless encampments.
That includes California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who last month urged state agencies “to move urgently to address dangerous” encampments, which he says present threats to public health and safety to both the homeless and to others.
Escondido, California is set to do that, enacting a ban on camping in a couple of weeks.
Des Moines, Iowa also recently gave initial approval to fines for sleeping on public property. Camping bans have also been introduced in a couple places in Minnesota.
Proponents believe it’s the communities themselves that should have the power to decide what’s best in handling homelessness.
“You go and you enforce these bans, but you don’t provide an alternative for folks, then they’re just going to be displaced,” said Sarah Hunter, the director of the Rand Center on Housing and Homeless.
She says the center’s research in California shows that encampment sweeps did not result in long-term decreases in unhoused people. In another study, researchers found that displacements from sweeps increase mortality and hospitalizations.
“What we’re going to see is just like an increased cost to society, not only for the enforcement of the encampments, but also folks then cycling in and out of emergency rooms, people dying prematurely because of these displacements,” she said.
Hunter hopes that while communities work to address camping, they also make efforts to create housing opportunities and follow research-backed approaches.
RELATED STORY | DC charity helps those who are homeless get housing
