Editor’s note: This column discusses power-based violence and death.
There’s a separation at Street Roots that is complicated but worth it. That’s the firewall between our journalism and our advocacy to protect editorial independence.
What this means in practice is that K. Rambo, as editor in chief, directs the journalism, and I, as executive director, direct advocacy. In those roles, we do not influence how we direct our respective efforts.
In both cases, our decisions are informed by organizational values — creativity, dignity, equity, grace, integrity and relation — and Street Roots vendors through conversations, surveys and listening sessions. For example, because Street Roots vendors and others on the streets made clear the need for a non-police crisis response, our newspaper dug into the issue. Our advocacy approached the issue both through a campaign and through civic engagement, helping survey more people on the streets to inform the program design.
Rambo has written about what guides their editorial decisions . I approach advocacy guided by 10 priorities , layered with decisions about how much we can take on.
Our history of advocacy also informs these decisions. Street Roots has fought the criminalization of homelessness for more than 25 years (as Street Roots and its predecessor, the Burnside Cadillac). This ongoing fight adheres to the notion that “There is nothing new under the sun,” as Shakespeare jotted down — this current camping ban is preceded by many others that have wrought damage.
Occasionally, our journalism and our advocacy touch on the same issue, and that’s what you’ll witness in this issue.
Jeremiah Hayden covers the Oregon Law Center lawsuit , filed Sept. 29, disclosing the Street Roots advocacy role in an editor's note. The following is a declaration I wrote to support the Oregon Law Center lawsuit. The points below refer to ORS 195.530 and are abbreviated for space.
1. The introduction of the term “involuntarily homeless” creates dangerous conditions that could lead to profiling.
I would never be able to ascertain whether someone is “voluntarily” or “involuntarily” homeless by sight. I am hard-pressed to come up with clear-cut examples of people who are entirely “voluntary” in their homelessness. There is no way that an enforcement officer could assign such a conditional identity to anyone. This faulty definition has prejudicial implications, setting up conditions for profiling bound to further existing inequities.
2. The extremely broad definition of “campsite” sets up conditions in which compliance is impossible.
Since a person cannot leave belongings behind because daytime camps are banned, they must carry all their belongings. An adequate storage infrastructure does not exist. It is very difficult to lug all of one’s possessions from place to place, so people will need to stop. Stopping will easily resemble setting up camp because the campsite definition includes “any bedding, sleeping bag, or other sleeping matter.”
3. This ordinance adds barriers to stability, health, jobs and housing.
Lugging one's belongings everywhere creates additional barriers. It is difficult to enter many spaces. Even testifying before city hall on policies that impact their lives becomes nearly impossible for unhoused people who won’t be able to pass the entirety of their possessions through the metal detector. The mere logistics of managing belongings adds challenges to accessing meals, accessing showers, checking in on shelter and housing lists and accessing computers for emails and housing. This also makes having a job nearly impossible. Many homeless Portlanders hold down jobs and return to campsites because the chasm between income and rent is so wide. Forced to haul possessions, people will be subjected to the stigma of homelessness, and few employers can double as a storage facility.
4. The time restriction ratchets up danger for people.
Allowing people to camp only between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m. disregards many fundamental aspects of homelessness. In most instances, it isn’t safe to wait until 8 p.m. to set up a place to sleep. People commit earlier to a place that provides relative safety in terms of location and companionship. They are in particular danger if they can’t even do this until it is dark, which begins before 8 p.m. for a portion of the year in Portland. Street Roots rarely holds evening events for this reason.
Many people sleep during the day so they can be watchful during the dark hours for safety. People who have worked at Street Roots have described staying awake to watch for rodents, with accounts of rats gnawing at their bodies and their possessions. They’ve also described staying awake to fend off violent attacks. The most recent Domicile Unknown Report, which Street Roots co-publishes with Multnomah County, uncovered that 20% of Multnomah County homicides in 2021 were of unhoused people. People are also subjected to rape. It is safer to sleep during the day, when there are witnesses to lower the odds of those brutal attacks.
5. The time restriction is impossible to fulfill
There are not enough day shelters in this city for people to visit, let alone spend 12 hours a day. People are aware they won’t have the option to rest in parks because of restrictions in the ordinance. Libraries, mass transportation systems, nonprofits and governmental entities that work with unhoused people will all face pressure to become de facto safety nets as people search out some place to be. Street Roots is not set up as a day shelter. People who visit our office do so to sell the newspaper, so our office is a workspace set up to be supportive to people experiencing homelessness. When the city outlaws existence in most spaces, Street Roots is one of the places where people crowd with bundled tents and duffle bags stuffed with worldly possessions. We have to stretch beyond our mission and funding to absorb the external costs of city policy. Those external costs and that mission creep is felt by many public and nonprofit entities.
6. The introduction of this ordinance impairs mental health
Our staff have already noticed mental health challenges among vendors. Some people have expressed depressed thoughts because this communicates to people that they, and not homelessness, are the problem. People spiral into despair, overwhelmed by the impossibility of compliance and survival.
This is compounded by the fact that the place restrictions are convoluted, expressed by a city-produced map that does not effectively communicate. While off-limit areas are in red and plentiful, other areas that are white would also be considered trespassing. There is no way to read this map and know where to go. The indiscriminate nature, then, of where and when enforcement introduces terror for people already experiencing trauma.
7. The penalties associated with this ordinance are cruel
Fines, fees and legal entanglements exacerbate problems. The Oregonian and Reveal News have reported that over 50% of arrests in Portland targeted unhoused people from 2017 to 2020, the most recent year studied. People end up with warrants. Legal entanglements create barriers for employment and housing, and unresolved warrants gum up courts. Jail time is more expensive than sheltering or housing people. It also disrupts people's jobs, relationships, case management for housing lists, and medical care for mental health and substance use.
Street Roots is an award-winning weekly investigative publication covering economic, environmental and social inequity. 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 .
© 2023 Street Roots. All rights reserved. | To request permission to reuse content, email editor@streetroots.org or call 503-228-5657 , ext. 404
