A man sleeps in the closed gazebo at Eighth and Ellsworth on Feb. 19, 2021.
Is there a way Albany could provide enough temporary housing space so that no homeless person would ever have to sleep under a bridge or on the street — or be allowed to do so?
The idea popped up briefly during Monday’s two-hour city council session. With the help of a consultant, council members were talking about goals to include in their strategic plan for the next two-year budget period and beyond.
Councilwoman Matilda Novak brought it up, calling for a facility and other help to put an end to homelessness, and she said she was very interested in pursuing it. She would like the city to provide a facility for the homeless so that “being on the street would not be an option.”
Albany has two nonprofit homeless shelters: the former Signs of Victory Mission now called Second Chance, and Helping Hands. Still, from time to time apparently homeless and evidently helpless people wander about or settle down for a nap in public during the day.
In a case from Idaho, a federal appeals court has held that cities cannot legally arrest people for camping on public property if there’s no other place for them to be. The ruling implies that cities can still outlaw vagrancy if they do provide enough shelter space.
In Portland, Mayor Ted Wheeler recently proposed setting up three 1,000-bed shelters in order to force a solution to his city’s huge problem with homeless camps. Since then he has modified his proposal in the face of criticism.
Albany Councilwoman Bessie Johnson seems to back Novak’s idea. She mentioned something like a Quonset hut. If the city set up something, she said, it would then have “leverage to do whatever needs to be done.”
The implication is that if homeless shelters are provided, homeless people could be forced to go there or face charges for camping in public.
Councilwoman Marilyn Smith and Mayor Alex Johnson II were skeptical. Smith mentioned “free will,” and the mayor worried that forcing people into a shelter might amount to kidnapping or subject the city to claims of false arrest.
The homeless discussion took up only a few minutes of the council’s goal-setting talk, which lasted from 4 until past 6 on Monday.
Other ideas, among many, were to encourage more preschools in Albany and to support the development of walkable neighborhoods. (Nobody mentioned that all new neighborhoods have sidewalks and thus are “walkable” already.)
Another notion that got attention for a few seconds: Work with Linn County on a parking structure and justice center.
To get the full flavor of the discussion, which went all over the place and back again, you’ll have to wait for the recording to be posted at www.cityofAlbany.net, and then spend two hours of your life. (hh)
The homeless need a safe place to stay, and regular interactions with people who can offer them treatment for their ills, whether medical or mental.
A camp of 1,000??? Absolute lunacy. Locking them up??? More absolute lunacy.
While every local communities bears the burden, it’s a state-wide problem.
It’s a national problem. And, to date, NO one has a plausible, palatable, and cost-effective solution…
Homelessness is a blight problem.
So add a Quonset Hut or two downtown, enable easy access to public transportation & treatment, and re-purpose the $25,000,000 river front money.
CARA is the sugar daddy.
You and the council just need to wean yourself off the gentrification drug.
And by community he means government. And by government he means your money.
When government takes on the role of care giver it weakens the personal sense of obligation most of us voluntarily feel to help.
Creating a dependence on the anonymous generosity of local government will not solve the problem.
It will just desensitize the average citizen and lead to resentment amongst most of the taxpayers.
GS
Balderdash
Community translates to residents, not gummint.
Government likely began with the need to care for assets held in common, that fell into disuse because no ONE was accountable or responsible.
Nonsense, Pure nonsense. Gov wasn’t created for charity purposes. Too much given weakens society, as purpose by community is succeeded by entitlement.
You’ve missed my point entirely
Perhaps I did…..vague as it was.
No , it is a national, international problem.
You want a law suit? Because that’s how you get a lawsuit. :)
Quick intertubes search:
Quonset hut can cost $30,000-$400,000 or more.
Who is gonna pay for that? Especially the upper end. HA! ha ha ahah ah ha
Whoa,
Just hold it right there. There is only one Barry N. on here. The whole thing is Tomfoolery. You want a Quonset Hut? I believe we can get a 10 cent one at the Fort Lewis surplus. You bring the trailer, I’ll provide the gas.
What if I don’t want your help, I just want to be left alone. I don’t want your rules and don’t care what you want. Help the one’s who want help and the rest can’t be choosers. Helping someone who isn’t looking for help only creates codependency. You just doubled the problem.
Spot on sir.
Providing available shelter would be commendable but where is the budget? Who will sustain that budget?
What about those who are unable to feel safe under the cover of a building?
Fining them? Where would they get the money? Incarcerating them? Again, who will pad the budget for that?
I am right at the cusp of being homeless myself. I cannot afford any more taxes on stupid stuff, raising rates on utilities or being held under lien because I cannot afford my $400 in property taxes.
Walkable neighborhoods? What about all the kids that have to walk in the streets on Geary Street because there are no sidewalks? The places along there where there might be a few feet are in such disrepair they are not safe to walk on. Focus on current issues that need to be fixed. Stop beautification of the waterfront and fix our city.
Here we go again…
Every politician everywhere bandies about their solution to “end” homelessness.
In Albany it has been happening for decades. One ex-Mayor writes 20 page missives bragging about her “compassion” and all that she has done for the homeless.
So it’s not surprising to hear current Albany politicians think they have the best 10 year plan to solve the problem.
A 10 year plan is not grounded in reality. This is a “one-life at a time” problem with many contributory factors.
So here is ONE hard answer that starts early in life and applies to everyone – don’t throw away your family members.
Don’t expect someone else to pick up the inevitable mess when you kick a family member to the curb.
Ultimately, it is up to each person to not screw up. But when they’re young there is no better solution than to provide a stable, loving family bond.
Government is not your family.
Hasso writes: “Albany Councilwoman Bessie Johnson seems to back Novak’s idea. She mentioned something like a Quonset hut. If the city set up something, she said, it would then have “leverage to do whatever needs to be done.”
Sounds a great deal like the Japanese Internment Camps of World War II…with the words “Internment camp” reminiscent of prison. Having the “leverage to do whatever needs to be done,” reminds one of Mob Boss chatter or an order to a seated Vice President to overthrow a government. Bessie Johnson – the gift that keeps on giving.
Hey, with this Quonset Hut thing, we could clean up a few loose ends.
It is a story as old as history that once any group, such as the houseless, is successfully scapegoated as a threat to “normal” values, by an indifferent government, emboldened citizens will take over. I have no problem using taxpayer dollars to have the city cleanup houseless camps similar to how they pick up our garbage at our homes. I have no problem with a port-a-potty either, just like in a city park. The long, long, debate on this topic will continue but it should not focus on NIMBY syndrome. Camps are unsightly yes, but a small price to pay for being human.
It’s a nationwide problem.
Gee, I guess the overwhelming view of the folks here is that no one should do anything and it’s just fine like it is.
So be it, in Albany.
Seems like vagrancy is a law on the books that could be applied. In the depression when so many were unemployed the WPA was established and it did a lot of good for our country while giving people a way to go with pride. Maybe we need a national program along those lines. I don’t believe anyone is a deadbeat because they like it or want to be.
The courts have ruled that the right to sleep is fundamental for human beings ( and all beings IMHO). If you can’t provide someone a place to sleep, they get to sleep anyway and arresting for sleeping is not constitutional.
That makes sense.
Time for bed….
I’m Pete and I’m homeless and use drugs and this is my right. Therefore, I am entitled to a whole host of public benefits. If you don’t give me what I want, you must have voted for Donald Trump.
Considered HH’s post and the comments for quite awhile.
Here’s a thought provoker.
Homelessness/houselessness is a condition that results from multiple problems. A single strategy may treat a symptom or two, but may also not be effective.
One thing I learned as a troubleshooter was that the path to solution begins with data. A cousin in an East Coast Megalopolis is a VA RN who performs street-level outreach. You can’t beat direct observation.
Until you get these “homeless” to deal with their addictions – alcohol/drugs, we the caring public aren’t gonna get anything done. Those people won’t deal with rules & such of a shelter. They want their way & I’d show them out to the RR yard! Or a long walk off a short pier at the beach!
Pure insanity. Government has no business playing charity ambassador with our tax dollars. How is it the Gov wins when asking for our tax dollars for a problem which cannot be solved by giving hand-outs which perpetuate the problem. I’ll tell you why, you give in. You’re giving into a system which doesn’t perform with any fiscal responsibility, the services and tasks on a day-to-day basis when they have your money in their hands. So, you want them to give help without stipulation…welfare. Why? Helps some, produces more dependents of most.
You want to make change????? Stop voting for these people and make sure your councilors don’t vote one more tax in until things change…..NOT ONE.
Charity………….Do it with private donations because expecting the gov to do any better with charity than they do with any other dedicated tax dollars, is ludicrous.
The more financial resources you throw at a social problem, the larger the participation of recipients of those financial resources.
Hmmm
So, many folks want the gummint to make a problem go away, but oppose funding a solution.
Now comes a proposal that somebody (else) fund a solution.
As I see it the problem with the homeless and homelessness are several issues.
• You are homeless because you have lost your job or because housing is too expensive to afford.
• You made life choices that lead you in to drug use and a life of crime is another.
• You have a medical condition that in not under control.
• Sometimes all of these are co-contributing factors on the individual level.
The public’s contribution to the problem of homelessness:
• The voters of Oregon who believe that more money thrown at a problem with make the problem go away.
• The voters of Oregon who legalized marijuana. I believe marijuana is a gateway drug – not for all but for those people who have addictive personalities.
• The voters of Oregon’s choice to decriminalize the possession of drugs. I believe this makes experimentation with drugs more likely.
• The voters of Oregon who vote politicians into office who believe that throwing money at problems with make the problems go away.
• The voters of Oregon who elect district attorneys who choose not to enforce the law that are on the books.
• The closing of institutions that cared for those who are not capable of taking care of themselves.
• Well meaning citizens who give money without knowing how the money is going to be used. I offer to buy food, however more often than not they person asking for help does not want food. I never just had out money to someone who is asking I offer to buy food that would be on my table.
• Laws that allow for begging. If you watch you will notice that there is almost a work schedule that the beggars use when they stand outside of stores and restaurants.
• The shifting of the idea of helping your neighbor through personal interaction to asking the government to take my money and “fix” the problem.
In my opinion if one wants to camp under a bridge I say go for it as long as they:
1. Leave no trace. The camps should not be left setup during the day.
2. Are not a nuisance to others around them (ie not begging for money, threatening people, stealing, not killing)