Critics say the ordinance, which makes unauthorized camping a misdemeanor, criminalizes homelessness while proponents say it’s necessary for community safety
The Bear Creek Greenway, a 20-mile paved trail connecting several towns in Southern Oregon, has become a center for controversy in Medford as authorities there attempt to crack down on the unauthorized campers tucked between its trees.
After much anticipation, on April 2, the Medford City Council revised an ordinance to specifically ban camping along the Bear Creek Greenway during fire season. The ordinance had previously banned sleeping with any bedding material on public property, and while people can now sleep outside in select places, the city upheld the ban on sleeping in tents on all public property.
“The Proposed Ordinance misses the most significant feature of a homeless encampments policy — namely, where else will those residing in the encampments go?”
The council also elevated the penalty for tent camping or sleeping in prohibited places, including the greenway, from a violation to a crime. Starting May 1, campers found in violation of these policies could be charged with a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a $500 fine.
The change sparked outrage in the community and nationwide. Both the National Homelessness Law Center and the Civil Liberties Defense Center contacted Medford city officials advising them not to pass the ordinance.
“The Proposed Ordinance misses the most significant feature of a homeless encampments policy — namely, where else will those residing in the encampments go?” Eric Tars, legal director at the National Homelessness Law Center, wrote in a letter to the city.
The City Council plans to put additional policies in place to allow tent camping during the winter months, but those would not be published before May 1, Eric Mitton, Medford’s deputy city attorney, told Street Roots.
Mitton highlighted Medford’s other shelter program options including Rogue Retreat’s urban campground and Kelly Shelter, Gospel Mission, Maslow Project and Hearts with a Mission.
The ordinance comes in the wake of the Almeda Fire, which swept through sections of the Bear Creek Greenway last fall in nearby Talent and Phoenix and destroyed about 2,500 homes. Though the cause of the Almeda Fire is still under investigation, this event prompted community conversations about fire risk on the greenway and raised eyebrows about the hundreds of people that live in unorganized camps there.
STREET ROOTS NEWS: Medford residents to sue over camp sweep during wildfire (from October 2020)
The Medford Police Department told Street Roots that calls for service along the Bear Creek Greenway have nearly tripled since 2015, with 893 calls in 2020, not including the last two months of the year. And according to the Medford Fire Department, the greenway had 220 fire-related incidents in 2020 caused by “cooking, camping, ‘warming fires,’ incendiary acts, accidents and undetermined fire causes.”
Medford city councilors cited fire risk as their primary motivation for banning camping on the greenway.
“Prohibiting sleeping on the greenways during fire season is for the protection of unhoused individuals as well as other community members,” Mitton said via email. “Fires sweeping down the greenways pose an imminent threat to the lives of anyone sleeping on the greenway.”
From May 1 until Sept. 30, it will be considered a misdemeanor to “camp, lie, sleep, or use bedding materials” at the Bear Creek Greenway, Prescott Park and other greenways — all of which the city considers to have high fire risk due to “dry brush and abundant fuel sources.” The ordinance also cites difficulties evacuating campers in the event of a fire and states these fires pose a “severe threat” to nearby residents and property owners.
The city also deemed it a misdemeanor to lie or sleep on playgrounds or sports fields, near railroad tracks and on streets, among other places.
Sleeping in a vehicle in a lawful parking space is still considered a violation, which it has been classified as for several years, according to Mitton.
Though it was loosely enforced, until now the ordinance had broadly banned all camping on public property, including sleeping with any bedding materials. Now campers can sleep with bedding on some public property, such as select parks, if they leave within 24 hours and don’t use a tent. People can also sleep on a sidewalk if they leave a 3-foot path for pedestrian traffic. All camping with a tent or campfire is prohibited on public property, unless there is a severe weather or emergency declaration, or the city publishes a policy on its website authorizing camping in certain places.
•••
The city has relied heavily on local nonprofit Rogue Retreat to provide shelter and transitional housing. According to Matthew Vorderstrasse, development director at Rogue Retreat, the organization tried to remain neutral about the ordinance regulating Medford camping.
“We understand the fire danger that the greenway has and we understand that the community needs to be able to limit where people can be,” Vorderstrasse told Street Roots. “But, at the same time, we are only in support of an ordinance like this if the community is continuing to find other spaces that people can go toward.”
At least one additional space may soon become available. On April 15, the city approved an expansion of its urban campground, which could provide space for at least 50 more campsites and potentially open before the May 1 ban on greenway camping. Rogue Retreat also plans to open a similar urban campground in Ashland by June.
According to Vorderstrasse, “The goal of the ordinance is really not to punish people for being homeless.”
A Class C misdemeanor is punishable by up to 30 days in jail and, according to Medford’s ordinance, a maximum fine of $500.
But city officials say these measures will be used sparingly and police will take a more educational approach.
People living outside in the area, however, described an adversarial relationship with police when they spoke with Street Roots.
Geoff Kirkpatrick, sergeant of the Medford Police Department’s Livability Team and Code Enforcement, disagreed. “We have good relationships with the majority of the folks that are down there. That’s what the Livability Team’s job is to maintain those relationships so that we can break down those barriers,” he said.
Kirkpatrick told Street Roots that police plan to begin enforcing the policy in May by posting specific greenway camps on a weekly basis. They will take factors such as fire hazards and campers’ environmental impacts and behavior into account. While Oregon requires camps to be posted 24 hours ahead of sweeps, the Livability Team will allow people 72 hours to find somewhere to go. If people refuse to leave, he indicated police will cite them, but it will be a municipal court judge who ultimately decides if they should get jail time and/or a fine.
“We’re going to do a lot of things to give you so many opportunities to not have any kind of legal repercussions because I think we’re probably all in agreement that enforcement in and of itself doesn’t solve the problem of homelessness,” Kirkpatrick said. He also noted that as of April 22, there were 48 beds open in Medford’s transitional housing and shelter facilities, and that number is pretty consistent with what they see on a daily basis.
His team initiates all referrals to Rogue Retreat’s urban campground, and it focuses specifically on the greenway.
“(The ordinance) is a way that we can prompt people with a little bit more urgency to take that referral and go to that campground space,” Vorderstrasse said.
While there are typically open spaces at Medford’s urban campground and other shelter options, there are not enough spaces to house the many campers who could be displaced come May. Many of these campers said they’ve tried the services in Medford, and they don’t work for them.
Serena Slinker, who’s lived on the greenway on and off for four years, tried Rogue Retreat’s urban campground and Kelly Shelter and struggled with what she describes as a one-size-fits-all program.
Rogue Retreat offers a case management program, which can include everything from mental health services to assistance finding housing or employment. The organization says that 60% of people who enter their facilities move on to more permanent housing, though some do end up back on the streets.
Slinker said law enforcement told her and other campers to shelter-in-place on the greenway when the pandemic hit. But, since homeless individuals have been eligible for the vaccine since March 29, deputy city attorney Mitton said fire risk now outweighs risks posed by the pandemic because of the unique conditions on the greenway.
Despite the city’s efforts to push unhoused people out of the greenway, camper Christine Marie Caligiuri said she isn’t going anywhere. She also went through various Rogue Retreat programs and ended up back on the greenway.
Caligiuri called the city’s new ordinance “inhumane” and plans to stand up to authorities by remaining at her camp. She said most other campers appear to be doing the same.
Estimates put the number of greenway campers in the hundreds. The 2020 Point-in-Time count found Jackson County had 727 people experiencing homelessness, 50% of whom were unsheltered and 71% of whom lived in Medford.
With an estimated population of just over 80,000, Medford had about 6 people living homeless per every 1,000 residents. For contrast, in Multnomah County, fewer than 5 out of every 1,000 residents is experiencing homelessness, according to the 2019 Point-in-Time count and recent population estimates.
These numbers don’t reflect the effects of the pandemic and wildfires, which left many Oregonians without stable housing. In Jackson County alone, emergency management estimates that between 7,500 and 8,500 people were displaced. This placed additional strain on an already tight housing market, pushing rents even higher. Many of the people camping on the greenway lost shelter options during the fires.
•••
Despite the housing crisis and ongoing pandemic, community members rallied behind the anti-camping ordinance. Citizens started a Facebook group called “Greenway Recovery Project” and deemed the greenway a “blight” for Southern Oregon communities. The path runs from Central Point to Ashland, connecting Medford, Phoenix and Talent along the way.
“This is about our community being a clean, safe place for everybody who’s in it, including the homeless,” said Matt Roberts, who originally started the Facebook page in early March.
Roberts was inspired to combat what he sees as environmental and economic damage on the greenway, as well as fire risk. He argues the ordinance is not “anti-homeless,” and that people living on the greenway are “choosing to be there.”
“This is as much to benefit the people who are using (the greenway) as their home base right now, as it is for the public who is fearful to be there,” he said.
In running the Facebook page, Roberts partnered up with Ryan Mallory, who owns a marketing company and brought his experience operating Facebook “Scanner Groups” in Jackson, Josephine and Siskiyou counties on the Oregon-California border. These provide “citizen-operated crime and public safety news,” according to the Scanner Group website. The Jackson County Scanner Group has nearly 66,500 members — a sizable following for a county with a population of just over 220,000, and in an area of Southern Oregon known to be a hotbed for militia groups and vigilantism in recent years.
Mallory, who has led campaigns for issues including Second Amendment rights, said a lot of his work relates to crime, public safety and “despair” in the community. He said the Southern Oregon community feels a loss because they no longer feel safe using the greenway trail.
He also added, “From a psychology standpoint, we’re not just allowing bad behavior, but we’re not helping (people experiencing homelessness) get out of that situation by leaving something like the Bear Creek Greenway open to camping and other drug camps.”
Mallory suggested that people who don’t want to utilize Medford’s shelter options should sleep on the Interstate-5 corridor, which is state property and he said poses less of a fire risk. He said that with limited space, it’s unlikely people who are breaking the ordinances will be put in Jackson County Jail, though noted that if he lived on the greenway, jail is where he’d rather be.
“We definitely have to help folks, but I do not think we have to sacrifice the quality and standard of living that we’ve created in Southern Oregon when there are folks that just don’t want that help, even when it’s available,” Mallory said. “Maybe a detox in jail for a couple of days would be a good thing, and then be shown some better solutions and some services.”
Jackson County residents voted down a measure last May that would have expanded the county jail through property taxes. Mallory said the new ordinance could serve as one motivation to expand the jail, which he argues is outdated and, with about 300 beds, has limited capacity.
In just two weeks, Mallory said the Greenway Recovery Project was able to secure 4,301 letters in support of the ordinance from both Democrats and Republicans, with the help of campaign pushes through Mallory’s Facebook pages. The ordinance was ultimately passed by a majority of City Council, which slants conservative and is led by Mayor Randy Sparacino, who was recently elected and was formerly Medford’s police chief.
City Councilor Kevin Stine — who ran on a housing platform — supported the ordinance and faced backlash from the more progressive Medford residents who voted for him. Stine declined Street Roots’ request to comment about the ordinance.
•••
On the night of the vote, protesters and unhoused people gathered and camped outside City Hall to honor community members who died without shelter and to show opposition to the ordinance. To fight the new policies, organizers formed a Housing Justice Alliance, which includes Siskiyou Rising Tide, Rogue Action Center and Southern Oregon Coalition for Racial Equity, among other organizations.
The alliance collected 3,142 signatures on a petition opposing the ordinance and collected 65 written testimonies from unhoused residents.
Jenny C., who referred to herself as a “tent person,” wrote, “Without this tent, friends by the river, I would have died in a doorway. Who would care? But don’t take our only shelter, the tents.”
Medford, the most populous town in the area, has more shelter options than most Southern Oregon communities. Nearby Josephine County, for example, still has zero low-barrier shelter options.
Maig Tinnin, a member of the Housing Justice Alliance who organizes support for unhoused people on the greenway, recognized that Medford has more service options than most nearby communities, but still said it isn’t enough.
“Where I take issue is when the city is justifying criminalization because of the existence of some of these services,” Tinnin said. “That’s the real problem because the truth is we just need a more diverse set of options for folks.”
The city held a resource fair on April 9 to connect unhoused people with available services in Jackson County, ahead of enforcing the camping bans in May. City officials said this was a part of its educational approach, but those opposing the ordinance saw it as a publicity stunt.
Derek DeForest, another member of the Housing Justice Alliance, said, “‘Resources’ are often code for ‘eviction.’” While some unhoused people did attend the city’s resource fair, Tinnin said others were scared their camps would be swept if they left to attend the fair and feared the law enforcement presence.
“Come May 1, (the city) can say everyone is ‘choosing to remain here,’” Deforest said. “Because in their mind, if a service doesn’t work for you, they want to blame the individual rather than look at the problem of the service.”
DeForest said that services are often more full than the city lets on, and they lack diversity in leadership, despite people of color being disproportionately represented in unhoused populations. He argued that the city should give unhoused people a seat at the table and support campgrounds on the greenway that already exist.
DeForest and Tinnin, along with unhoused residents, agreed that fires are a real hazard in the area, but don’t think the risk is cause enough to displace residents. They say the city may be using that justification to push a larger agenda, like building a larger jail and supporting the criminalization industry.
“To me, it feels like it’s convenient for them to bring up the fires when they want to push an agenda,” Tinnin said.
•••
The city of Medford could face litigation depending on how it enforces the ordinance — and on whether or not it designates other places where people can sleep with tents.
Additionally, though individuals experiencing homelessness are technically eligible for the vaccine, observers warn that moving people from their camps could further spread the virus.
In his letter to the city, Tars from the National Homelessness Law Center wrote, “Displacing encampment residents from their private tents and vehicles — where they can self-isolate — to crowded congregate shelters will create a breeding ground for COVID-19 and rapidly increase the number of people requiring hospitalization and intensive care.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has advised communities to allow people who are unsheltered to remain where they are if individual housing is not available.
Tars also said, “We are concerned that this activity runs afoul of the 9th Circuit’s ruling in Martin v. Boise by criminalizing involuntary homelessness.”
The 2018 Martin v. Boise case declared it unconstitutional to punish people for sleeping outdoors in public spaces when there aren’t adequate and accessible shelter beds. And last summer, a federal judge ruled against Grants Pass — which neighbors Medford in Southern Oregon — in Blake v. Grants Pass, saying the city’s use of violations and fines to punish people for sleeping outside was unconstitutional when there was nowhere else to rest. The class action suit was brought against the city of Grants Pass by the Oregon Law Center on behalf of homeless plaintiffs.
STREET ROOTS NEWS: A judge struck down Grants Pass’ anti-camping policy, but campers are still told to ‘move along’
Oregon House Bill 3115, which recently passed in the House and is headed to the Senate, could require local governments to amend ordinances to align with the guiding principles of these cases. If passed, they would have to adopt policies that are “objectively reasonable” in regulating when, where and how people can live outside.
According to Medford’s deputy city attorney Mitton, city staff sat on the workgroup that initiated this bill. The city argues it is already in accordance with the potential law, because the ordinance is not a citywide ban on sleeping on public property. It instead allows the city to regulate the time, place and manner in which people can sleep on public property — a principle that both the Boise and Grants Pass cases upheld.
But according to Walter Fonseca, a staff attorney with the Oregon Law Center, the city could still face litigation from different entities.
“The open question is really this ban on tent camping everywhere,” Fonseca said.
One local attorney, Justin Rosas, has already said he’s filing a class-action lawsuit against the city in federal court for the new ordinance, as well as for past camping laws, which he deemed unconstitutional and a violation of basic human rights.
“It is clear that the City has failed to meet the standards enunciated in Boise v. Martin and that often the reports of space at Rogue Retreat, who does wonderful work, are overstated and exaggerated,” Rosas said in a statement. “A few minutes along the greenway and anyone would be able to tell that we do not have sufficient low barrier housing or services in our city.”
Although the city maintains it is in accordance with case law on homelessness, observers are waiting to see how the city enforces the new ordinance come May 1.
Street Roots is an award-winning weekly publication focusing on economic, environmental and social justice issues. The newspaper is sold in Portland, Oregon, by people experiencing homelessness and/or extreme poverty as means of earning an income with dignity. Street Roots newspaper operates independently of Street Roots advocacy and is a part of the Street Roots organization. Learn more about Street Roots. Support your community newspaper by making a one-time or recurring gift today.
© 2021 Street Roots. All rights reserved. | To request permission to reuse content, email editor@streetroots.org or call 503-228-5657, ext. 404.
