Shamefully Wrong

Over time, I have noticed what appears to be an unwillingness (of many) to participate in a realistic dialogue about homelessness in Albany.

I have asked many people the following questions:

• Why did the Albany City Council and/or City Manager instruct Albany Police to *cease* enforcement of the camping ordinance that was passed in 1999?

• When did the Albany City Council and/or City Manager instruct Albany Police to *cease* enforcement of the camping ordinance that was passed in 1999?

• Why doesn't Albany have enough *below* moderate income housing and/or a homeless shelter?

• Where is it legal for a homeless individual to sleep, *in* the City of Albany?

and, my newest question

• Why is it *illegal* to "loiter", in all of Albany's parks, open spaces, Waterfront etc.?

People whom I have asked these questions of, have done one of two things:

a) They wonder the same thing.

OR

b) They remain silent.

Well, after reading a report that I downloaded from the NLCHP website, I think I understand the answers to some of my questions...



Statement on Criminalization of Homelessness in the U.S.
Submitted To The International Council On Human Rights Policy

"In March 2011, Law Center Legal Director Karen Cunningham participated in a two-day Workshop on the Penalization of People Living in Poverty. The meeting in Geneva, Switzerland was hosted by the International Council on Human Rights Policy and brought together more than 20 researchers and advocates from around the world. This testimony was submitted in advance of the meeting to address the manifestations of criminalization in the United States.

United Nations Independent Expert on the Question of Human Rights and Extreme Poverty Magdalena Sepulveda, who attended the meeting, will draw on what she learned to prepare a report to the United Nations General Assembly aimed at raising awareness of the penalization of people living in poverty and providing recommendations to states to address the human rights abuses inherent in such practices."

From that report:

"The lack of available shelter space leaves many homeless persons with no choice but to struggle to survive on the streets of our cities. Even though most cities do not provide enough affordable housing, shelter space, and food to meet the need, many cities use the criminal justice system to punish people living on the street for doing things that they need to do to survive. Such measures often prohibit activities such as sleeping/camping, eating, sitting, and/or begging in public spaces and include criminal penalties for violation of these laws. Some cities have even enacted restrictions that punish groups and individuals for serving food to homeless people. In addition to measures that criminalize homelessness, some cities have been using other types of regulations, such as zoning restrictions, to keep homeless people out of certain neighborhoods. Many of these measures appear to have the purpose of moving homeless people out of sight, or even out of a given city.



Types of Criminalization Measures:

The criminalization of homelessness in the United States takes many forms, including:

• Enactment and enforcement of legislation that makes it illegal to sleep, sit, or store personal belongings in public spaces in cities where people are forced to live in public spaces.

• Selective enforcement of facially neutral laws, such as loitering, jaywalking, or open container laws, against homeless persons.

• Sweeps of city areas in which homeless persons are living to drive them out of those areas, frequently resulting in the destruction of individuals’ personal property including important personal documents and medication.

• Enactment and enforcement of laws that punish people for begging or panhandling in order to move poor or homeless persons out of a city or downtown area.

• Enactment and enforcement of laws that limit the ability of religious and charitable groups to share food with homeless persons in public spaces.

• Enforcement of a wide range of so-called “quality of life” ordinances related to public activities and hygiene (i.e. public urination) when no appropriate public facilities are available to people without housing.

• Enactment of zoning laws to prohibit churches or other service providers from serving homeless individuals



Prevalence of Laws that Criminalize Homelessness and Poverty:

City ordinances frequently serve as a prominent tool for criminalizing homelessness.

Of the 235 cities the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty surveyed in 2009:

• 33% prohibit “camping” in particular public places in the city and 17% have city-wide prohibitions on “camping.”

• 30% prohibit sitting/lying in certain public places.

• 47% prohibit loitering in particular public areas and 19% prohibit loitering citywide.



Policy and Legal Concerns,:

These common practices that criminalize homelessness do nothing to address the underlying causes of homelessness. Instead, they drastically exacerbate the problem. They frequently move people away from services. When homeless persons are arrested and charged under these ordinances, they may develop criminal records, making it more difficult to obtain the employment and/or housing that could help them become self-sufficient.

Criminalization measures also violate the U.S. Constitution and the civil rights of homeless persons. Courts have found certain criminalization measures to be unconstitutional.

For example:

• When a city passes a law that places too many restrictions on begging, such restrictions may raise free speech concerns as courts have found begging to be protected speech under the First Amendment.

• When a city destroys homeless persons’ belongings, such actions may violate the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

• When a city enforces a law that imposes criminal penalties on a homeless person for engaging in necessary life activities such as sleeping in public, such a law could violate that person’s Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment if the person has nowhere else to perform the activity.

• When a city passes a law that does not give people sufficient notice of what types of conduct it prohibits, or allows for arbitrary enforcement by law enforcement officials, such a law can be determined to be overly vague in violation of the Constitution. Courts have found certain loitering and vagrancy laws to be unconstitutionally vague.

In addition to violating domestic law, criminalization measures can also violate international human rights law. The UN Special Rapporteurs on Housing and on Racism and the Human Rights Committee have all noted that homelessness in the United States impacts disproportionately communities of color, African-Americans in particular. Both Special Rapporteurs urged the United States to take steps to ameliorate the racial disparity and de facto segregation that U.S. housing policies create, and reduce the criminalization of homelessness.



Constructive Alternatives to Criminalization:

While many cities engage in practices that exacerbate the problem of homelessness by criminalizing it, some cities around the country have pursued more constructive approaches.

The following examples illustrate more constructive approaches to homelessness:

• Broward County, FL.
The Taskforce for Ending Homelessness, Inc., a not-for-profit agency that provides outreach, education, and advocacy services for the homeless population in Broward County, has partnered with the Ft. Lauderdale police department to create an outreach team made up of police officers and a civilian outreach worker who is formerly homeless. In its five years of operation, the Homeless Outreach Team has had over 23,000 contacts with homeless individuals and has placed 11,384 people in shelters. Estimates suggest that there are at least 2,400 fewer arrests each year as a result of the Homeless Outreach Team.

• Portland, OR.
As part of its 10-year plan, Portland began “A Key Not a Card,” where outreach workers from five different service providers are able to immediately offer people living on the street permanent housing rather than just a business card. From the program’s inception in 2005 through spring 2009, 936 individuals in 451 households have been housed through the program, including 216 households placed directly from the street.


Recommendations:
Instead of criminalizing homelessness, local governments, business groups, and law enforcement officials should work with homeless people, service providers, and advocates for solutions to prevent and end homelessness.

Cities should dedicate more resources to creating more affordable housing, permanent supportive housing, emergency shelters, and homeless services in general. To address street homelessness, cities should adopt or dedicate more resources to outreach programs, emergency shelter, and permanent supportive housing.

Business groups can play a positive role in helping to address the issue of homelessness. Instead of advocating for criminalization measures, business groups can put resources into solutions to homelessness.

Courts should affirm that punishing individuals for performing basic life activities such as sitting, sleeping, eating, or going to the bathroom in public where no alternative exists is cruel and unusual punishment.

When cities work with homeless persons and advocate for solutions to homelessness, instead of punishing those who are homeless or poor, everyone benefits."


Shame on the policymakers of Albany.