"It always seems impossible until its done,” reads a handmade sign at Hazelnut Grove. A small band of houseless folks built the hillside community in North Portland from the ground up.
For decades, cities like Portland have grappled with what it takes to get the job of ending homelessness done. Despite many moving parts in play — “housing first” initiatives, shelter expansions, camping allowances, affordable-housing bonds and investments — the challenge only increases as the visible need on our streets expands. All the while, an ever-increasing number of Portlanders are at risk of a similar fate.
While we figure out what might work, we know a tactic Portland has habitually leaned on through the years does not work: applying an endless cycle of camp sweeps, downward social pressures and police intervention as our frontline approach.
Today, we know what perpetuates homelessness, yet we continue to put valuable resources toward measures that aggravate and further destabilize people’s lives. Meanwhile, many Portlanders care and want to help, and as a city, we’re ahead of the curve with resources and a variety of approaches.
But there’s an aggressive disconnect between these two tactics, one supportive and one punitive. Destructive policy undermines the constructive work.
The proliferation of camps throughout the city challenges us to think differently, to push beyond barriers that protect the idea that solving this problem is impossible and pursue instead a course of what is possible. That’s going to take rethinking what it means to support people in transition and looking inward into why we prevent that support from reaching its full potential.
The coming months hold a lot of that potential. The Portland City Council will be looking at zoning changes to better support camps and tiny home villages. The Metro regional government will begin collecting revenue from the homeless service measure, and additional housing affordable for low- and no-income residents is expected to come online.
But with all that, it’s not enough. The visible homeless, the people under tarps and tents that draw outcry and complaints, are only a fraction of the people who need these services. Across the tri-county area, it was estimated 38,000 people experienced homelessness in 2017 when homelessness in all its forms was considered.
Before housing, there is survival, and that’s where the example set by communities such as Hazelnut Grove and Right 2 Dream Too — and Dignity Village before them — can help guide the way.
DIRECTOR'S DESK: We should embrace ingenuity, not erase it
We’re hopeful about proposals the city’s Bureau of Planning and Sustainability is considering to modify city code to foster expanded housing and shelter options by changing permitting procedures and regulations to rethink campgrounds, sleeping pods, tiny-house villages and other group living arrangements as part of our shelter-housing continuum.
Complex, restrictive and, frankly, backward regulations undercut creative solutions that are already taking place. They are holding us back.
Instead, the houseless people who have a proven track record in creating these communities should be part of leading our new approach. Self-governed communities can succeed with proper support: restrooms, garbage collection, health care and outreach connections. And, all will require government and community backing. The city should help these independent efforts succeed.
But this is a statewide, even nationwide issue. In the Feb. 3-9 edition, Street Roots begins a series of stories on the impediments facing people experiencing homelessness in rural Southern Oregon, where housing and shelters are scarce. This means people are left outside, in RVs or less, and law enforcement becomes the only application, as if the problem — and the person — will go away with a citation or fine. The poorest people in our state then incur costs and legal entanglements that only push them further from housing.
We’ve reported on such conditions in Grants Pass that prompted a class-action lawsuit against the city. In July, a federal judge ruled that the town’s use of violations and fines to punish people for sleeping outside is unconstitutional. That ruling upheld the federal 2018 Martin v. Boise decision, which declared it unconstitutional to punish people for sleeping outdoors in public spaces when there aren’t enough shelter beds to meet demand.
In this state legislative session, efforts are underway to solidify, for all communities, the intentions behind Martin v. Boise: Stop criminalizing people for meeting their fundamental needs while homeless when other resources are not available. We have to rethink our obligations and obstacles to ending homelessness, and this statewide action will force communities to have deeper conversations on the issue, to identify better answers — constructive answers — to the plight of their neighbors in need.
In the course of our reporting this summer, we spoke to a young woman living in a tent by Interstate 205. When asked what would help her, she said she needed “a stepping stone.”
“For me, even if I had somewhere in a backyard, or the backside of a property, where the police aren’t harassing me, and where I wasn’t worried about (my abuser), I’d be fine,” she said. “Because I could go find work. I could set an alarm clock. I’ve started over more than once.”
We need to support the efforts of this young woman as much as we do the current momentum in state and local policy. We have to recognize stepping stones when people point them out to us. Who better than they to show us how the impossible gets done?