There is a couple living on the street on 6th ave between 55 and 56. have beeb there for over 6 weeks.they have shopping carts, suitcases, multiple milk crates., etc. they smell and it is creepy. at least once I saw the woman nodding off. one day they were drinking bottled frappacinos and eatine Leuwen ice cream (can’t find a pricier brand) NYC says can’t do anything because being homeless is not against the law. But an encampment is, and this for sure this is an encampment. Not fair to the obviously mentally ill homeless, not fair to our neighborhood-a tourist area. the idea that nyc streets are for anyone who wants to come here to beg is insane. Tickets back to wherever or a homeless facility is fine.
2
Last August, the Design Trust for Public Space, the Neighborhood Plaza Program at the Horticultural Society of NY, and Uptown Grand Central (the NYC Department of Transportation (DOT) Plaza Partner of the 125th Street Plaza) with the support of Loeb Fellows, led a workshop convening a cross-sector group of 50 stakeholders—plaza partners, Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) and local businesses, public agencies, developers, and homeless support organizations. The goal of the workshop was to clarify and more precisely describe vague words or phrases that are often used in discussions about public plazas, and to envision better plazas from the perspectives of different user experiences. This workshop stemmed from the Design Trust’s 2017 open call for projects called Public For All.
Close to half of NYC’s 70 pedestrian plazas, established by the NYC DOT are in under-served communities, where struggling organizations invest the time, money and sweat equity to privately manage them. The Neighborhood Plaza Program provides horticulture, daily sanitation, and technical assistance services for public plazas in “high need” areas, under contract to DOT.
We acknowledge that public plazas are a distinct type of public space that operate 24/7 in often intense urban contexts. We also believe that public plazas could offer a variety of uses and benefits to different users. The complexity of what happens in plazas and the public-private partnership model merits further exploration.
Laws that prohibit sitting and lying down in public spaces are a slap in the face to the millions of us with disabilities and chronic illnesses like POTS and ME/CFS. If I can't sit or lie down on a sidewalk or bench, I can't leave my home. When municipalities behave this way it tells us that we aren't wanted in public spaces, and are considered to be an inconvenience and burden.
12
@Rebecca Weger your need to rest in public is different from the use of public spaces as a residence for the homeless. Your need is real and shouldn't be denied.
28
Will Goubert: how are the needs of the homeless less real?
6
@Rebecca Weger
So society should stymie itself and ignore the far greater (!) need and instead focus on the relative paltry handful of those suffering from ailments you describe?
That makes almost no sense at all and its doubtful that argument will find much sympathy.
8
If public spaces are truly to accommodate anyone and everyone, with needles, feces and harassing behavior, then very soon they will not be "for all".
I think it's pretty clear that everyone does not have unlimited "rights". The homeless, drug-addicted and mentally ill need treatment, and their right to refuse treatment and shelter--yes, even shelter and treatment with a large dose of "order"-- has to give, in severe cases. This will infuriate the civil libertarians, but it is the cost of a civilized society.
Otherwise, we will increase our headlong rush away from common space and into gated communities and well-defended apartment buildings. This has nothing to do with compassion or the lack of it.
38
Having grown up on Manhattan's westside when it was a mixed-income area, I returned to NYC for a visit in April and marveled at how clean it was as compared to underclass portion of San Francisco.
In segments, I walked the length of Manhattan (South Ferry - 225th Street), and from Harlem Heights across 135th Street to the Tri-Borough through Randall's island, through Astoria over the bridge to Roosevelt Island and then onto the cable car and back to midtown.
At no point on my walking tour did I see anything like the concentration of degradation and filth that exists in San Francisco's Tenderloin.
The Naked City may not be perfect but given the size and the density, it's doing better than out this way.
31
@David Trotman San Diego resident here was there this last August, experienced the same awesome surprise of finding NYC so nice and clean and loving all the public spaces compared to what we deal with in SD including the Hepatitis A outbreak two years ago that was just contained last month.
20
@David Trotman We are New Yorkers who are very disturbed about the homeless and mentally ill and addicted on the streets and in the subways.
Then we went to Vancouver and Seattle. We were stunned! The number of such folks on the streets of these beautiful cities was horrifying. New York seems pristine compared to what we saw in VC and SEA.
11
@David Trotman
There is one clear reason why cities like San Diego, San Francisco, and Vancouver have a higher concentration of homeless: climate. We are now approaching the time of year when temps are regularly below freezing, which makes living rough tough.
5
Arguments over homeless people and how or why they become homeless fail to address the most basic question of all: "Where should they go?"
Sure, it's annoying and sometimes dangerous to be engaged with others who exhibit anti-social behavior (I've personally had run ins with this type and it's unpleasant); and it is uncomfortable and shocking sometimes to deal with people who have so little -- they have to resort to scrounging, and begging in order to basically survive: but where, oh where do others propose these people go?
If these needy, desperate people were pushed away into the shadows, would that solve most of the issue for the business owners who want public spaces organized around their commercial establishments? Would they care where these street people were pushed off to? Just let it become somebody else's problem?
We know the story, we've seen this movie before.
9
When children make bad decisions we don’t allow the behavior to continue. When adults make poor decisions we allow them to do so because it is considered their right.
That right needs to stop when the decisions hurt others around them. If someone is refusing to accept help, refusing to sleep in a shelter, refusing to take medication, refusing to bathe, causing public health hazards with defecting in public spaces, frightening people around them, in some cases outright hurting or attacking others, it impacts them greatly and in turn everyone else around them. Why does the right of one outweigh the rights of all others?
Often times the refusal to accept assistance stems from mental issues but to most of us the continued allowing of people who truly don’t have the capacity to make appropriate decisions to continue to refuse help needs to stop. It cannot be considered cruel to insist that people unable to make appropriate decisions accept assistance from those who can help them.
8
@Allison
Do you truly believe that anyone in their right mind would choose to sleep rough risking violence and illness? Are there really decent living spaces or mental care facilities for the 3000 plus that end up living under a cardboard box? I suspect the answer is no. You take a very arrogant position, in my opinion, when you suggest that the people living on the streets of NY are doing so voluntarily. One thing I do know is that anyone, and I mean anyone, with a little misfortune and a cruel twist of fate can end up in that place.
3
Thank the ACLU
cities need to declare the homeless a public health hazard and take drastic steps to move them from public spaces. the homeless deserve a safe environment and so does the public. the solution is to move the homeless to large open spaces and provide them with housing and all the services they need and deserve until they are capable of living independently. the obvious and easiest solution would be renovated military barracks on unused military bases. it's way past time for some tough and effective love for all our citizens.
2
Again I find my dual experience of life in the U.S. and life in Sweden clashing in my head. Is it necessary for thousands of our fellow men and women to sleep rough living in squalor and ill health? It bothered me profoundly when I became aware of this sad situation as a teenager growing up in the San Francisco. As I grew older I would throw guilty dollars into cups and hurry on with a wince in my heart. It was a huge relief when I moved to Sweden and realised that no, all that suffering is not necessary. It is entirely possible to take care of people that can't take care of themselves in a rich society like ours. It is a matter of choice. Pay more taxes and give everyone in society a chance. But one of the most common thoughts I have heard from Americans in arguments about health care is: "Why should I pay for someone else. I'm not homeless. I pay my own medical bills. etc etc" Maybe it is too un-American to give a little so that we all can live with dignity. But to all of you that think you don't need help from anyone else, I hope you are right. Karma is a witch.
3
New Public Spaces Are Supposed to Be for All Criminals. Gee, I remember when the parks in The Bronx became urban war zones. Et tu, Times?
1
2nd Half:
Others are due to mental illness and simply cannot help themselves. Is it truly that wrong to provide them with some type of institutionalized help to keep them from living on the streets and provide them with the basic necessities of life? Due to their mental condition, perhaps they are incapable of making a decision regarding housing. These institutions need not be like prisons, simple but respectable should be possible.
Then there are those with drug/alcohol addictions. These are likely a combination of bad life choices and mental illness. Again is it that horrible to require that they live in housing specifically provided for their situation, but requiring them to also participate in rehab? Are we as a society required to tolerate the open bad behavior (littering needles, defecating/urinating in public, etc.) of people who refuse to accept help? Does their right to essentially commit prolonged suicide trump a productive member of society's right to enjoy a public space paid for by their tax dollars?
Before writing replies denouncing my heartlessness, please consider rationally that the "homeless" are not one homogeneous group, but rather a very diverse group of individuals who have arrived at these circumstances through a wide variety of ways. As such, no one solution will work for all. Do we really want to place a young family, elderly women, single working mothers, etc. in the same shelters as drug/alcohol addicted and/or mentally ill men or women?
1
One word conspicuously missing from this story: Bloomberg.
He said, "They have these spaces in Paris" to justify creating his "malls". And he did it the way he did the bike lanes: as a "test program" so he could skirt the need for public input. We all knew this was coming. But Bloomberg would crow about New York being the greatest city in the world, then he'd push for idiotic projects like these malls or a ferris wheel because they have them in London and/or Paris.
Thanks, Mikey. We're all paying for your snobbery.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
1
Huh?--"Piles of trash, used needles and worse (human feces) have drawn complaints."-----Did Amazon get a chance to read this article before their announcement yesterday?
2
Compliments to the author of this piece, Winnie Hu -- this is a textbook example of what journalism (as I have understood it) is supposed to be: many people, representing many differently points of view, were interviewed, enabling the reader to learn about something going on in their midsts and to help them decide what to think about it. Very impressive job of reporting. the Times should do more local reporting of this kind.
2
The US&A contracted (under Obama), to purchase 2,424 F35 warplanes for about $210 million apiece.
Can't we cancel an airplane or two and use the money for helping and rehabilitating the homeless?
2
I've read the article and the vast majority of comments. It appears that the term "homeless" is being used to apply a broad brush to a very diverse group of people. This causes us to completely miss the possibility of arriving at viable actions to address the problem. This is similar to grouping all people of color together as one homogeneous group of non-whites, when in fact there are many wealthy and privileged among them - just read down the list of physicians in your health plan - a large portion do not have euro-centric names. The same holds true for labeling all whites as privileged bigots. Without the involvement of some of these privileged bigots there would have been no civil rights movement, just as the whites in the lower economic levels find it difficult to feel privileged.
My point here is not to argue the existence of racism, but rather to emphasize that all of these broad groups are made up of very diverse subgroups of people and using a broad brush to paint them all alike blinds our ability to improve the lives of those who are marginalized. The same holds true for the homeless. There are those who have truly fallen upon hard times due to lack of job opportunities and/or affordable housing and who need a temporary hand up to improve their circumstances, others may need more long term assistance but are seeking to improve their circumstances. See Comment part 2.
2
Creating and maintaining public spaces is not a moral imperative in my estimation. Aggressively addressing homelessness is.
6
@Lisa
You are thinking with your heart not your head. You are also attacking @Dan for no discernable reason. This issue cannot be solved with unlimited tolerance, resources and compassion. What's needed is a pragmatic, humanitarian approach and, yes, enforced laws. The homeless have made city streets, libraries and public spaces in every city menacing health and safety hazard zones.
And the definition of homelessness is not as simple as you want to believe. It's far more complex and complicated than simply being without a home or providing housing. Most of the homeless population are not simply people down on their luck. Most are mentally ill, drug and alcohol addicted, anti-social, disordered and maladjusted. And many are vets.
I know someone who worked with this population for decades in her law practice. Many of them don't want help. Many choose to live in the streets. Most want handouts not help. So what does a civilized society do with sick people, with uncivilized people, with people unable or unwilling to help themselves or accept help?
Letting them live on the streets, shooting up drugs and defecating on sidewalks is not the answer. Letting them aggressively harass and menace the public is not the answer. Giving them housing without addressing their mental illness, addiction and other issues is not the answer.
12
It will get worse and $$$ needs to be spent to help them.
3
Homeless people exist because we, as a society, simply do not care. We've made, and continue to make, economic decisions that ensure that this population will continue to grow and become more desperate. Mentally ill individuals, deinstitutionalized out of a sense that confinement was wrong, were turned loose without sufficient supports. The cost savings were too attractive. We gentrify and price housing out of reach for the bottom 25%. We continue to fight against a true minimum wage that would allow the working poor to actually afford a living space. Thousands of addicts are on the street as the latest casualties in our "war" on drugs; jobless and homeless. Want this problem to go away? Then we're going to need a real commitment and investment to do that. We need to finally leave behind the Calvinist notions that let us watch people's suffering and assume there where they are as a consequence of their own choices. We need to look at and rethink all the failed programs that seem to only lead to adding to this population. Don't for a minute think this is limited to cities either. Rural NY is home to a fair number of profoundly poor people; some quite literally still subsistence hunting and living in shacks with dirt floors and getting water from dug wells. They're just not nearly as visible as the ones on Broadway. We're the richest country in the world and we have no excuse.
9
The Midwest is plenty big with affordable housing
1
If you make life easy and welcoming for street people, you get more of them. They come from other cities, from the countryside, from wherever, to wherever life is easiest - where the police won't roust them for sleeping on the streets, where they can get away with taking over public spaces, where they can harass civilians for money and get away with it. If you want fewer street people, you have to make life harder and more uncomfortable - then, they'll find other places to go.
14
What I find missing in such articles is -- what are the authorities doing to help the homeless? Is anybody trying to provide shelter and food, to provide mental health services, to give them an alternative? Treating them as a nuisance (which they certainly are, no doubt) misses the fact that this isn't exactly a lifestyle choice. Many of them are struggling with mental health and substance abuse, and a logical solution would be to actually address these issues, not just to make life more unbearable to them, as if that would make them change their ways. When a panhandler on the subway is telling a story about how hungry he is and asking for loose change, one would hope that there are places that provide food to the homeless. Are there? Are they sufficient? Is the man only trying to get money or is he really starving? What are the authorities doing to help him and why aren't they helping all of them?
3
@Doron
Not everyone capable 9-5 organizational conforming entity. Yet unique, valuable nonetheless. Deserving life's necessities: eating, drinking,sleeping, dignity, compassion.
3
@Doron
Having run a church-based social service center in Chicago, I agree with you that resources are scarce. That said, are you willing to pay higher taxes in order to fund such services? Some folks who are on the street really do just need a hand up, some guidance, maybe job training, and assistance as they get on their feet. All of that costs lots of money, if done right.
Others, though, will likely never become self-sufficient. Some, because of mental illness (particularly paranoia) cannot even manage to stay in a room, if one is provided (they are less frightened out on the street). Others simply seem unable to make use of programs offered and either drop out or simply fall back into old habits if they complete the program. Others have learning difficulties, which make it very, very hard (at best) to train them for anything. What we 'do' with these folks is a chronic and not easily solved problem.
In short, it is not simply a lack of willingness to help. It is lack of funds, lack of know-how (with some), and the inability of others to make use of what is offered. I too am appalled at the situation some of our people find themselves in, but how to proceed is a difficult question to answer - at best.
8
Drug abuse IS a lifestyle choice
1
Set some strict rules for public spaces, and police them. If drugs and dedication are not allowed, remove the perpetrators and punish them. Rules and discipline are necessary to any civilised society. There are cities in the world without these problems. Tough, but fair.
13
I recently took two European residents on a tour of Manhattan. The first time we used the subway, we had to step over a homeless person who was sleeping on the steps leading down to the platform. Another homeless person, who was hallucinating and shouting obscenities, was walking up and down the platform in a threatening manner. We were relieved when we boarded the train until we discovered that another homeless person, who was not wearing shoes or socks, was stretched across an entire row of seats. The stench was so unbearable, no one could bear to stand near him, making the train feel more crowded than it truly was.
The end result? The visitors decided not to ride the subway again and used Uber for the remainder of their trip.
I am sure that these tourists will repeat this story to their friends who will probably share it with others as I have. Homeless people are not a symptom of a housing crisis. They are a product of bad life decisions and a clear threat to public health and safety. Treating them with kid gloves only exacerbates the problem. Please spare me the violins, I worked with this population for more than 40 years. A firm hand, not sympathy, is in everyone's best interest.
28
Read up on Billie Boggs and Ed Koch.
1
It appears to me that the people who live in these public spaces are alcoholic, addicted to some other kind of dope, or mentally ill. In any event they should be removed and treated for their incapacities and disabilities.
Don't argue with me that people have a right to live on the streets. People who opt to live on the streets when there is a viable alternative is per-se insane and, thus, needs treatment.
23
Are there treatment facilities available for all of the homeless? This is a population that will continue to grow. Being homeless for awhile will cause mental problems.
2
@MIKEinNYC
Unfortunately Mike is accurate. My experience as a mental heath professional is that there are a substantial number of homeless people who do not want to live in shelters nor do they want treatment.
15
If NYC houses 60,000 homeless, that will only bring 60,000 more.
11
Plenty of space in the Catskills to build shelters and mental health facilities
5
Coming home from a Broadway show 2 weeks ago, my sister and I passed a young homeless couple sitting 2 store fronts from a 99 cent pizza place. It was a small pizza shop with a line out the door and no one offered them a bite. I am a jaded NYer, but I felt bad and walked over to them (she was crying and he was comforting her) and handed them a $20 bill.
She shouted OMG and got up and got on line for pizza.
I can't solve their problems, but at least they had something to eat that night.
12
There is a clear and direct correlation between how much a community spends on homeless services and the number of homeless; just watch, after San Francisco begins spending the hundreds of millions of new taxes earmarked for homeless services, the problem will worsen considerably.
17
@Rjm
This is quite true. In a variation on the term moral hazard, when you reward specific behavior, more people will engage in it. Or, they will migrate from places that don't reward it to places that do.
i don't mean that entirely disparagingly. We have to do something compassionate and effective for people whose lives are ruined, if only because we want to live here too. But I have grave doubts whether throwing money at the problem will do anything other than make us feel better.
20
Absolutely no camping should be allowed in public spaces. Camping requires services including bathrooms and safe food services.
25
They should go to the Bronx
Stigma regarding mental illness so extreme, even with scary euphemistic classification label changes (Bipolar Disorder replacing Manic Depressive), one fortunately not homeless, while benefiting from "respectable Upper Middle Class" background though suffering in comfortable surroundings still facing peer based ostracism.
1
Just because you are homeless doesn't give you the right to squat in midtown Manhattan or the subway.
There are shelter and housing assistance options. But even if there weren't, none of us have the right to treat the public square as a toilet or drug den.
We can be compassionate but also fair to the rights and interests of all members of society. If we are overly permissive, you get the problems you find in the Tenderloin of SF.
38
My community is awash in homeless. It seems obvious from observation that a large number have profound mental illness. Surely the most staunch Republican would agree that such people can't just get a job and pull themselves up. No one would hire them. We simply have to supply them the necessities of life, and that means taxes. Get over it.
At the same time, are there REALLY significant numbers of libertarians arguing that forcing such people into treatment facilities violates their rights? This is like saying a drowning victim shouldn't be resuscitated as it violates his right not to breathe.
25
Soft power, one time admirable US trait, meaning helping out, empathizing with existing poor souls drinking, drugging themselves to an early grave.
Twilight Zone Christmas episode depicting heartbroken alcoholic Santa (Art Carney beautiful performance) trying to bring hope, joy to the poor making all of us cry. Yet real life everyday interactions leaving us (me too) jaded.
3
Here in Denver, the culture mostly consists of well-intentioned people who want to help the homeless and provide sanctuary for foreigners who have no legal to be here. This city without a doubt is a magnet for both. The library has a social worker for the homeless day campers. People overdose in the library after they shoot up in the bathroom. Although many may suffer from mental conditions, many don’t and simply want to live it up and get high and drunk. They don’t want to follow the rules of homeless shelters. Walk down the 16th street pedestrian mall and you will find droves of panhandlers and you can smell urine everywhere.
Donations and tax money go towards the homeless. What I want is an end to the chaos and my city being used as a campground, toilet and garbage can. Is it asking too much to be able to use a park bench once and a while? Is it too much to ask to use a library where my daughter can safely use the toilet without worrying about a junkie shooting up in the bathroom? It is our city too.
38
Where are the homeless supposed to go? Most shelters require the homeless to leave early in the morning. Where are they supposed to go? The idea of solving the problem of the rising homeless population by building homes doesn’t seem to have traction.
1
@Zejee I'm curious . If we accept this is a problem for all impacted both the homeless and the homed, what is your solution?
1
@Rich
totally agree. libraries are for people who want to read books, use computers , read: not camping out space. if you can’t sit at mcdonalds all day, why should you be able to take over the library?
6
"Under state law, homeless people cannot be forcibly removed from the streets unless they pose a threat to themselves or others."
I do not understand how anyone defecating, urinating, or leaving needles in the street is not posing a public health risk to others. Under this logic, shouldn't society be able to force them into treatment? After all, San Diego's Hepatitis outbreak was in large part due to the homeless population. The remaining well-behaved homeless should be left alone to sleep in peace and offered whatever (reasonable) assistance they require.
34
When I was growing up in the 1950s and '60s, there was no homelessness beyond the "Skid Row" of every city, whose population of male alcoholics generally worked as day laborers if and when they were physically and mentally able to do so. We simply didn't have beggars on every urban street corner as we do now. My children don't believe me, but I remember.
Then came Reagan's defunding of services for the mentally ill. And then, in the 21st century, the disastrous rise in rental housing costs.
Human nature cannot have changed that much in half a century.
I believe there is now good evidence that a "housing first" policy, without additional stringent demands on those being housed, is cheaper and more effective than constant intervention by police and trips to hospital emergency rooms. But our society insists on being judgmental and punitive.
14
@Rita Rousseau, I live in a city where housing first is being tried. The results so far are not good. The overwhelming majority of the people are continuing to live as they did when they were homeless; using drugs, stealing, fighting etc. They are not availing themselves of the wrap around services that are in place for them. They frighten away those who are trying to make positive changes in their lives. Requiring people to be willing to accept drug/alcohol treatment or mental health treatment is not being judgmental; it’s being practical.
26
@Rita Rousseau Surely you remember the photographic art of Jacob A. Riis. Homelessness is not new.
1
I know of no public places that don't have regulations in place for their use in order to give everyone the experience of using them.
We spent several months of every year camping and hiking on our BLM lands. Anybody can use them, but you can't just live on them. They aren't your "home." You have to move 25 miles at least once every two weeks.
Public places are not bedrooms or toilets or places to sit forever.
The reason many of these folks are homeless are because of bad decisions they have made, often those decisions were violating rules (e.g., drug use). By definition they have difficulty with this part of life, but that doesn't mean they have more rights than other folks.
If homeless people (whatever that really means) insist upon using public places for, basically, their residences, then I see no need to provide social services for them and places to live. They can't have their cake and eat it too. It is not unkind to treat people with respect by expecting that they can follow rules. To expect less, for whatever reasons, diminishes them as people.
27
@Dan Dan, homelessness means a person who does not have a home. You seem to be doing a darn good job of diminishing the homeless population all on your own. A big sensitivity chip needs to be implanted in you but quick. While you are waiting you might what to do a little research on why we are having a homeless crisis.
3
@Lisa
Thank you for the lecture. I wish I had the same big heart that you tell us you have.
I worked all of my career helping people like those described here. And let me tell you, they are infantilized by people who see them as hopeless, helpless, and victims. Your position insults them, demeans them, and dehumanizes them.
17
Professors at the Yale School of Management used new data to estimate that there could be up to 29.5 million people living in the country illegally. Only 5% of them work in agriculture. Most live in big cities. Even though many of illegal migrants often crowd together in one residence, the overall number of illegal migrants is so large that they are taking a great many affordable apartments and houses off the market. A lot of our own citizens are out on the street, even though they work 40 hours a week. There are too many people competing for affordable apartments.
16
A lot of your own citizens who were born here and speak perfect English choose drugs over having a quality of life that is acceptable. If an illegal Immigrant can come to New York and find a place to live in a share crowded apartment with no public benefits or handout, and not speaking the language... then maybe we should take more immigrants and send these drug addled American Citizens to third world countries. Let see how they deal there.
12
@Walter
1. A percentage of every population is mentally ill. Our country tends to overlook the mentally ill instead of helping them. Many self medicate with drugs or alcohol, and end up on the street.
If we legalize those who came here illegally, they will be able to legally bring in their family members, and you will find the same percentage of mentally ill among this population as we already have here.
2. Illegal immigrants do receive public benefits. One example is the Child Tax Credit. It is explained by an eyewitness news team that is on a youtube video titled "Part one: 13 Investigates IRS tax loophole".
1
Here in Honolulu, we are trying more resourceful methods of helping the homeless. We do have Kahauiki Village which is a plantation style community for homeless families on top of trying to work on more affordable apartment units and shelters to house the homeless. Unfortunately we are failing to expand on mental health and drug treatment services, which is what our homeless population desperately needs. We shouldn't have to send them through the revolving door of the criminal justice system just to get them treatment.
But then what is the answer? The lack of sanitation is a public hazard even if these homeless people do have a right to public spaces. You also cannot force these people to go to shelters. You can build all the shelters you want, there are still going to be people who would rather be homeless due to the restrictions a lot of shelters have whether it's sobriety, first-come-first-serve policies, or even disallowing pets. Regardless, a happy medium must be sought where everyone can safely enjoy public spaces.
7
@Kay didn't Mayor Kirkland build a homeless village of shipping containers on Sand Island some time ago? Also I read that many communities from colder regions on the mainland are giving one way tickets to homeless people to survive in HI, always wondered if that was really
true.
3
Both groups have rights and need to share the space. Just because you have a job and a home doesn’t mean you can push people out of the public space. Plus, it’s probably beneficial for people to witness suffering in their daily lives. It gives a bit of context. However, just because you’re homeless doesn’t mean you have more of a right to use public spaces either. It’s for everyone, not just you’re own personal sleeping quarters or bathroom. If you act poorly and cause problems, or take up too much space then you should rightfully be removed from that space.
7
Even when taking their medication, many people cursed with Bipolar Disorder, something like once stigmatized Cancer not chosen, further suffering side affects including constant exhaustion making work an impossibility meaning penury, eviction, abandonment, social contempt, loneliness, slow death. Shameful!
5
A huge, homeless man sleeping on a bench outside Prospect Park literally jumped on top of my husband from behind last week. He was on his way to work at 6.30am. My husband got him off his back but then the man blocked his way forward. He had to run around the block to the subway. He was very shook up by the incident. Could easily have been a child going to school. I agree many of the homeless are mentally ill.
36
Aside from drug/alcohol and mental health issues, there are also thousands of homeless citizens that do work, but there is no affordable housing. But cities across the country would prefer to kneel at the altar of Amazon by showering the richest man in the world with taxpayer dollars instead.
17
It used to be pigeons that bothered all those
who sat in the park for a little repose.
But now homeless people with nowhere to go
flock to our plazas to sleep and drunk grow.
It's hard to know whether to weep or to blaze
at so much humanity trapped in this maze.
Since there but for grace from an almighty Lord
go I -- without means for my own room and board.
3
Homeless populations will consume exactly as much space as a city allows them to consume. If a city shows a high tolerance for homelessness, the homeless population will expand to meet the city's tolerance. That's how homelessness works. It's a function of economics.
There will always be a portion of the population unable or unwilling to provide shelter for themselves. You can mitigate homelessness. However, social workers are never going to get every homeless person off the street. You're facing diminishing returns to investment. You simply pick a dollar amount that fits a city's tolerance. How much are you willing to spend to keep the public spaces clear?
In this context, homelessness is really a question of enforcement. How much of what enforcement will the city provide? Social workers or police officers make little difference. More enforcement equals less homelessness. You're mainly preventing the abuse of public spaces. That's the real goal. That's the social contract.
I think we can openly acknowledge homelessness represents an abuse of public spaces. The library is a public resource. However, sponge bathing yourself in a toilet stall during story time is an abuse of privilege. That is not how the space was intended to be used. Which isn't that the central point when restricting public space?
You are not meant to sleep in a park designed for recreation. You are not meant to sleep on a sidewalk designed for walking. The act represents a perversion of goodwill.
49
So maybe we need public bathrooms and public showers. Where are the homeless supposed to go during the day? Most shelters stipulate that all have to leave in the morning and not come back until evening.
3
@Zejee
You keep posting basically the same comment without making any suggestions for solutions to the problem. Where do you think the homeless should be able to go during the day and during the evening?
1
A country's level of civilization is measured by how it treats its worst off members. According to HUD's 2017 report about 553,000 people experienced homelessness on a single night in 2017. The same report states that homelessness increased for the first time in seven years in 2017, a quarter of these are children, 41% of the homeless are African-Americans, and for women domestic violence is the leading cause of homelessness. This tells a lot about our level of civilization in this country. What is worse is that the majority of the political candidates -and none of the presidential candidates- don't like to talk about this. There is no political gain in talking about homelessness because we don't care, so no votes in it. It reminds us what kind of a society we live in and what kind fo people we really are. Like many other issues that deeply mark our society we just keep ignoring this one too. It is just too inconvenient. The fact that we quite successfully ignore the issue doesn't make it disappear. While enjoying your sandwich at a posh park, the problem just looks at you in the eye and says hey, I'm here.
8
As a sometimes visitor to Manhattan, my experience with the homeless makes me moderate to highly sympathetic. I cover a lot of ground walking so I have frequent contact and never have had anything other than slightly annoying experience. Constantly bombarded with requests for change, but I give them a respectful "no" hand gesture, and they leave you alone. That's my experience, but I'm not a business owner. I am aware that I would have a much different perspective if I was. It's all about the bottom line, and if you believe that homeless are affecting the your bottom line resulting in fear of not being able to thrive or stay afloat, I totally understand a much more hostile feeling toward the homeless, but regardless of perspective, providing services rather than punitive would be better for everybody.
6
@Steve Women also often have a very different experience.
6
Recall reading recently how Washington DC's liberal homeless policies were attracting homeless people from surrounding states. Their policies were actually expanding the problem for the city.
13
@AACNY
Many who are homeless in NY also come from out of state because benefits are easy to obtain. Some are bussed in panhandle for the day then go home. Others come and stay. Not sure what the answer is but as they are a menace not only to themselves but strangers/visitors too; something needs to be done. Where is the Mayor?
Speaking of public space, Ocean Blvd in South Beach, Fl , the sidewalk has been taken over by restaurants. Fully 1/2 of the sidewalk is occupied by tables. This is akin to my parking my car in the middle of the street in front of my house.
9
Here in Seattle, we've got homeless people pitching tents on sidewalks in and around Pioneer Square, blocking the public right-of-way.
14
Each city, if prominent and touristic ones more likely, holds a scope of pride and aimed presentable images outwards. There are also different interest groups and entities, which divide or share powers in a city. Regardless of one’s idealistic and preferable view of the world, crimes exist and gangs are parts of urban realities. Nothing would change those real phases over one or two nights. Opportunity seeking good-will people might not grasp what is going on. Spiritual assistance is a fancifully nice expression, but the term seems to work most and best in a self-serving way for those who pronounce it. Rather than exclusion, inclusion must be the way. Simply, hearful people may have no idea, except criticizing or feeling good superficially about ‘I’m helping needy people’.
1
If NYC or any city wants to outlaw homelessness, then they have an obligation to provide shelter and services to those who are affected. When every homeless people has a safe shelter in which to sleep, then the city can morally ban sleeping on the streets.
14
We have no obligation to house anyone. How about we sent the homeless to Kentucky so you can House them
5
Here’s the flip side. I live in a liberal town of 70,000 which is inundated with homeless during the summer (they leave for warmer areas when it gets cold). Yes, drugs and mental illness are factors, but just as many choose homelessness because they have consciously checked out of the responsibilities of our society or make more panhandling than they would at a job (before I get slammed, this is documented by local media interviews and park rangers’ anecdotes pretty regularly). Despite several agencies providing food and shelter, we get tent camps along the wilder parts of our rivers and in our forests; ecological disasters with large amounts of feces going into the rivers where we swim, float and fish; families not being able to go for a hike because of the smell, danger and paraphernalia; and panhandling at every corner (existing laws against are not enforced). I’ve lived all over the US, including NYC, and here’s the difference between having a homeless problem and not: liberal vs conservative local governments. If you don’t like the homeless, vote Red; if you’re sympathetic to their plight, vote Blue. The rest inevitably follows.
34
@Michelle Smith I bet it helps you feel better to believe that homelessness is a choice.
5
@Zejee
Did you thoroughly understand her comment?
That is exactly @michellesmith's point: "homelessness is everywhere" and each communities reaction to it depends wholly on it's citizens political makeup.
4
@Gene
Oh come on! Please do the most basic research and you too will see that being homeless is - for many, many people - a choice!
3
They aren't exactly just 'homeless', they are mentally ill, physically ill, alcoholics, drug addicts and lastly human beings.
Spend 24 hours in their boots.
14
@MS
"Spend 24 hours in their boots"
Guess what? Most of us don't need to do that. Anyone who has spent years inundated (clobbered!) by the daily sight of homelessness is fully able to empathize. But empathy has its limits - as it should!
I'm tired of sympathizing for the pathological behavior (yes, it is!) of a group of people that predominantly got where they are (and REMAIN there) because of their own bad decisions. Here on E. 14th Street in Manhattan, for decades (truly!) I've watched the same core set of 25 to 30 men degrade themselves, everyone around them, the physical street itself, and the local society as a whole because of their messed up choices.
OMG, man up!
12
What’s your solution?
I empathize with people who are homeless, whether through bad luck, bad decisions or mental illness. However, it's not their city, it's our city. They shouldn't be sleeping in public spaces, let alone defecating or using drugs there.
Subsidizing homes the mentally ill sound great but nobody wants to build that type of housing.
26
@Zejee
He said "our city"....as in we have to stop elevating and enshrining the problem of homelessness at the expense of the greater, productive, contributing members of society.
Perhaps you should stop seeing the vast majority of homeless people as victims of something other than their own bad choices and decisions.
Yes, homeless people have a problem...but it is first and foremost THEIR problem that is affecting the rest of us who are not.
Personal, individual responsibility is the cost of personal, individual freedom! It is part of the bedrock foundation America is built on.
7
I don't think we should confuse the term homeless with drug addicts.
2
Rents continue to rise and wages stagnate. Homelessness will continue to rise—whether you like it or not—because all people actually do not have as many choices as you think they do. As long as providing homes for the homeless is never considered—the problem will grow.
Perhaps if there were more public restrooms that were open 24/7 throughout the city and especially around these plazas we could address one of the more unsanitary concerns that people complain about?
11
@Jill here in Seattle, even the port-a-potties are used for selling drugs, shooting up, and prostitution. Just the other day I read a story about people continuing to go to the bathroom on the street because the port-a-potty nearby was always "occupied". And when they installed those ones that auto-unlock ever 5 minutes, people just kept shutting them closed or barricading them.
6
@Jill
Those quickly become fouled beyond all comprehension. San Francisco's experiment with self cleaning Decaux toilets in the 90s became a nightmare. They did provide some privacy to addicts who wanted to shoot up, or have sex. Otherwise, they became impassable for normal folks (cue the predictable outrage over my use of the term "normal").
Did they mitigate the problem? No. Look at San Francisco's streets these days.
8
@Jill
24/7 bathrooms? Great so they'll congregate in them and harass anyone who dares use them or they'd shoot up in them. They'd have to be policed 24/7. Will not work. That's precisely why there aren't public restrooms.
Under Mayor Koch's gentification plans, we lost 200,000 units of SRO housing throughout the city. Hmmm, in retrospect, if you are in danger of homelessness, better to have SRO housing than no housing at all.
9
@LE Yes, this is a problem nationally. Economical housing that could help to solve homelessness has basically been zoned out of existence. The new trend is tiny houses for the homeless but cost wise they make no sense and are a poor use of resources. Bring back SROs and rooming houses in dense areas.
5
@LE
Koch was a true hero when it came to affordable housing and the most basic research will show you that his housing initiative was both unprecedented and a roaring success: over 250,000 housing units built over a 10-15 year period, all City financed - as in NOT private real estate developer dependent! We took care of our own: City housing, built with City dollars, for City residents.
Its Koch's most resounding (astounding!) legacy and his initiative has been recognized and applauded for decades by cities and governments the world over.
Just sayin'...
3
People migrate to the poles and nothing gets resolved. Of course people should not be defecating and shooting up in the streets without protest from everyone else-and of course people need treatment and safe homes.
Deinstitutionalization caused this problem-releasing 100,000 people to the streets to save money. Today, with the opioid crisis, and with CEO-worker wage disparity that has exploded from 30-1 to 300-1 in 3 decades, we need more hospitals for rehabilitation and we need more mixed income (NOT all low income) housing with supportive services.
Get off the poles, and the self-indulgence of believing in drama instead of humanity, and work on solutions.
20
My feelings is that Jason from Pennsylvania has a “home” and it is not in NYC but he doesn’t/can’t live there, with his family because of his behavior. Trashing public spaces hurts those who would honestly make a living there.
16
Public spaces are meant for all - assuming all maintain a certain level of civility toward other human beings. This would mean not defecating in said public spaces or discarding used needles. If this level of civility is not upheld, then they become public spaces for the abusers, or more realistically, public spaces for none.
35
The deterioration really started when the much hyped series on Willowbrook in Staten Island was done by Geraldo Rivera. Among the developmentally disabled were many mentally ill people that were warehoused there, under not the best conditions. Still they were better cared for than having them living on the streets, and having seen both Willowbrook and Gouveneur State School on Water Strret in lower Manhattan, Willowbrook was like the Plaza. Gouveneur resembled Auschwitz with kids and teenagers laying in old wooden gurneys that looked like something out of WW1 ,all twisted up from their afflictions and despite the overworked staff's efforts, often ignored for hours on end. After Geraldo whipped up the media into a frenzy for his own self-aggrandizement, embarrassed politicians said the answer was close all of these warehouses and replace them with many small group homes that they never funded or built. Now what is left is is chaos,a complete breakdown of public order and parts of the city look like Calcutta when you have to step over sleeping people in the middle of a sidewalk walk when you come out of a hotel, and the current mayor isn't even embarrassed by having people sacking out in mid-day a block from the UN surrounded by their food and belongings. You can't even begin to address the issues that these unfortunate people have and get them some sympathy with public dollars behind it, until inhabiting public spaces is replaced by moving them into surplus city real estate.
16
I completely agree
1
There is plenty of cheap, unused space upstate. I can't see why we don't bus them up there to live in camps and get treatment/learn marketable skills.
23
We are going to have to change the laws. The mentally ill homeless are threat to everyone. The ones who are "urban campers" are killing everything. Enough is enough. Quite frankly, as you can tell, I've had enough.
40
@Steve
Ditto. I believe your words are representative of the vast silent majority.
8
Too many people view the homeless as a homogeneous group. Actually there are differences which require different approaches. Most are simply people who are down on there luck - no different than anyone else. But a highly visible minority are dysfunctional, antisocial, misfits who have little interest in anything other than their next fix or bottle. This group is especially attracted to big cities that allow them to openly engage in antisocial behavior. We need reign them in.
68
@David
My understanding of the homeless is that about 2/3 are mentally ill and/or addicted to drugs. These are certainly different problems but the notion that most homeless people are just people without work is erroneous.
2
Build enough homeless shelters to cover every homeless person in your city. People then caught sleeping or camping in public then can be arrested and committed for refusing public assistance and “occupying” property that isn’t zoned for that purpose. Assuming there is space in a shelter, the rest of us should not have to tolerate this. Moreover, many if not most of these people have mental issues and really arent safe on their own out there off of their meds.
12
These people are the tail end of the curve of the larger problem. The larger problem is that substantial portions of of our citizenry have been left out of the touted wonderful growth recovery of our economy and are falling farther and farther behind. In fact these same "left behind people" have been slowly stagnating for decades. This is where our simmering rage originates.
If the United States would finally address the economic plight of its invisible people and bring everyone up, many of our other seemingly intractable problems would start to solve themselves.
12
@Madeline Conant
What does economic inequality have to do with people who do not wish to participate in the normal, working economy due to drug abuse, mental health problems, or merely lifestyle choice? America has always had its population of "hobos," "tramps," and "bums." Except now homeless advocates are claiming that these individuals can camp and use drugs wherever they want. This makes life difficult and dangerous for the rest of society.
Homeless people that want to participate in the improving economy should get help finding jobs and housing. There are a lot of government and nonprofits entities performing that function. But there are also service resistant individuals that do not avail themselves of these programs. No matter how good the economy is, some people will not participate in the normal 9-to-5 lifestyle most people live. Should these people be allowed to trash living spaces and impose their lawless behavior on others?
25
The Boise court decision was pretty clear that no jurisdiction can prohibit people from sleeping in public if there is no available shelter.
It didn't say that those without shelter could sleep anywhere, at anytime, and take up any amount of public space that they wanted.
Jurisdictions can say "You can sleep in these limited number of public places between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am and your belongings may not take up more space than 5x7 feet". Jurisdictions can also enforce drug laws prohibiting being high in public or injecting drugs in a public place.
Our community is heavily impacted and is a place where vagrants flock. I would like to see tough enough enforcement of the quality of life laws I mentioned here that vagrants spread themselves around more thinly.
21
While all the underlying causes, issues, legalities, politics, etc. are debated this article did not mention one very costly and dangerous aspect of the homeless problem that is largely ignored. Here in Los Angeles, “home” to one of the nation’s largest homeless populations, we have seen a huge rise in destructive fires caused by those living on the streets, in abandoned buildings and in wild land parks. These fires now happen on a regular basis, cause millions of dollars in damages, destroy and disrupt businesses, throw people out of work and place the public and first responders in grave danger.
22
Nope, as an investigator of these incidents, it is a lack of funded, aggressive and sustained mental health and drug addiction intervention.
3
I think we are running up against a number of different issues: (i) many, but not all, of the homeless have mental/psychological/dependency issues (which typically are made worse by living on the street); (ii) it is difficult to impossible to force those with these issues into residential treatment centers under the law, even if those centers are actually open, or to compel people to go to clinics for treatment or even the shelters (although it's pretty clear that the current NY administration doesn't want to do that at all); (iii) there is obviously an economic issue with housing (the market for which is highly distorted both by good and bad intentions, such as rent control/subsidized housing/zoning); and (iv) money alone, while necessary, doesn't cure this (witness the SF/LA issues, which are even worse than here).
All of these factors, and probably more, contribute to this, and no one wants to propose a solution that is both compassionate and, to some degree, coercive. I totally understand why, but we have to get beyond this.
26
It's ironic that those who have homes, offices, places to go eat, want to commandeer the space of people who have none of that so they can drink coffee, text their friends and people watch.
9
@mediapizza
I think you are confused as to who is doing the commandeering. These spaces are for ordinary citizens who have offices and homes, but also pay taxes and obey the law. If you're in favor of designating a space for the homeless, let's debate that. But guilt trips won't get us anywhere.
84
Most of these guys on the street (and its almost always guys) are suffering from nothing more than bad decisions and bad luck.
They should, quite literally, be forced to work and housed in dedicated / restricted areas.
Or did you forget that we are the ultimate capitalist society where money dictates everything - who each of us is and how each of us gets to live our lives.
20
@lowereastside
That is incorrect. A recent scientific study found that the two main causes of homelessness in America are untreated mental health issues and substance abuse.
Majority of the untreated mental health issues were PTSD, hereditary or age-related, and substance abuse related.
This problem is then compounded by economic policies, and lack of education and economic opportunity.
Yet another contributing factor is that we’ve “outsourced” this problem to charitable organizations that provide piecemeal emergency assistance but never comprehensively address the root causes.
The combination of the above practically siphons the most vulnerable in our society into homelessness and substance abuse, while the lack of a comprehensive solution keeps them down.
Perhaps looking at the issue of homelesness with some compassion - and with the factual clarity of scientific research - is a better step to help solve this problem.
8
Oh, you mean prison?
Another smashing success here in the city.
Problem solved.
I’m all over the city all the time. It seems that almost always, the only ones being hurt made uncomfortable by people asleep or sitting on the street are the ones who are on the street.
This city is also one of the easiest places to quickly elude or escape these scenes. But as it’s written in the article, the laying down part tends to happen most at night.
This past Friday night I walked across 23rd street at 11pm and it was eerily quiet for NYC. There is scaffolding which provides some type of “shelter” on the drizzly night and I saw no one sleeping let alone people walking.
And I’ll say again...most people living or walking through Manhattan now wouldn’t believe what the city looked like in the 80s (they wouldn’t have walked past Bryant Park, let alone go into it, but we did) or even the 90s as the renewal started. This is the golden age!
The POV of the article is all wrong. It’s not how to shoo away the homeless, it should be how to solve homelessness. Humans generally do not choose it, there are countless horrific stories out there of lives gone awry which at some point, of there had been help/support, would have prevented the current situation.
That is the only difference between having a home and not - being without support, encouragement, resources, things most people assume everyone has in their life but that many people do not. This is an outcome of the lacking.
6
@Colleen
So you walked along one block and saw a dearth of homelessness and that makes it the golden age?
I've lived in NYC for close to 40 years. Nearly 30 in the same home on Avenue A. The corner of 1st Avenue and 14th Street has never in all that time been as abysmally overrun with homeless men and their detritus as it is now. The entire length of 14th Street from East to West is a gallery of lost, disconnected, homeless souls splayed out on every block.
I clearly remember Union Square and Bryant Park in the 80s. They were definitely heroin central, but really what are you saying (from Connecticut)? - that two ultra-touristy sections of the City are somehow free of homelessness and all the ugliness homelessness brings with it? Because there are just as many homeless folks in Union Square now as there were back in the 80s...only difference is we've become desensitized to their presence and tricked into believing that there is no solution.
6
DeBlasio is falling all constituencies. Homeless people are not helped and now are taking over most public spaces. Brace for a tough subway ride when the winter comes! He fails taxpayers that pay dearly in NYC and should be able to see their money used properly in social care. What is he doing??? taking care of his cronies - the unions.
29
Mental illness is very common but States relinquished their duty to treat and keep safe the mentally ill. Children who experience trauma and/or neglect often do not have the personal resources to overcome these problems and carry them into adult life.
Caring for children is the most effective way to prevent mental illness. Providing universally available and affordable family planning and birth control is the most effective way to prevent family breakdown that results in trauma/neglect of children.
prevent, prevent, prevent!!! much cheaper than trying to cure.
33
@memosyne
Those are fine and compelling points, but how many of these homeless people are suffering from mental illness?
2
@memosyne
The fundamental issue remains: what do we do with people who refuse birth control and family planning, who refuse shelter; and who, aided and abetted by activists, proclaim their right to live wherever and however they please?
You would greatly increase your appeal to Trump country by honestly responding--assuming you have not already written them off as stonehearted racists.
Current law says we can't do more than coax them. It's simply not working.
4
Public spaces are not meant to be abodes for the homeless. Deal with the homeless and let citizens enjoy their open spaces. Two very different situations. Don't conflate them.
96
"And of the more than 60,000 homeless people in New York, at least 3,000 live on the streets." Where do the other 57,000 homeless people live, in the parks?
There are two aspects to homelessness; dysfunction and poverty. The dysfunctional homeless, the ones you are most likely to see, need treatment. They also need homes.
What you don't see is those who are homeless just because they have been priced out of the housing market. They do not make a public spectacle of themselves. They need inexpensive housing options.
But inexpensive housing options lower the demand for housing, which places downward pressure on rents and mortgages. The landlords and banks don't want that to happen, so we make this artificial distinction between shelter for the homeless, and the real estate market for everyone else.
It's all the same market, in a seamless continuum from mansions and high-end condos to tents and park benches. There are lots of ways to create inexpensive housing, but they do not get implemented, so homelessness becomes the devil to take the hindmost, and the dysfunctional homeless who act out in public give that devil a fearsome aspect.
There are only three things you can do with increased population: increase density, spread them out, or price people out. Pricing people out creates the very problem this article talks about. They don't leave, they go to the public spaces.
There is no substitute for enough housing, and some of it has to be cheap.
31
@mlbex “inexpensive housing options lower the demand for housing, which places downward pressure on rents and mortgages”
I assume you mean that people don’t want to live next to a homeless shelter, so they depress prices? That is true, but you are only seeing part of the question here: if the housing wasn’t provided for a reduced price (or even for free) to homeless people, but was provided at market price, it would increase the supply on the market, and would also depress prices. Immediately next to the shelter prices might be slightly depressed (which is actually not certain), but walk a bit further, out of the “annoyance zone” of the shelter, and you only have the impact of less competition, and hence higher prices.
“Affordable housing” is the PR expression for subsidized housing. Subsidizing demand inflates prices overall, and that is very easy to demonstrate.
I think this mechanism is very-well understood by people asking for more “affordable housing” in their area because it inflates the value of their property. Make the “affordability” just a 20% discount on the market price, and not only you can keep the real poor out of your area, but since “affordable housing” tends to favor locals you can even get your children to benefit from it!
2
@Bob Robert: Your assumption about what I mean is incorrect. I mean just the opposite.
Rather than relying on shelters, I'd like to see enough inexpensive options so that market forces lower the price to where it is affordable. You'd still need a few shelters and you'd still need mental support services, but functional people at the low end of the economic spectrum would be able to afford to rent.
9
@mlbex
Calls for "affordable housing" are just another way to blame the so-called privileged for the world's problems. One of the examples in the article is a public space in the Bronx. Is there no affordable housing there? How about the other less expensive cities experiencing the same problem? Have you been to LA? It's the size of a small country. If you have a job, there's an apartment somewhere that is affordable. It's not a housing issue, it's about people that have mental/addiction problems.
10
Since they (no parties or politicians mentioned since now we all own this issue) started closing mental facilities across the country in the early 80's many people have no place to go and be treated. We've always had addicts, severe alcoholics - people with all sorts of substance abuse problems. Then there are those with terrible abusive situations that leave their homes. Add to that the increasing wage gap. The list goes on. The problem is that our public spaces aren't meant to be the solution. Panhandlers aren't helped by giving them money. It just keeps them out on the street. We need to rebuild our social safety nets so that we can address people's needs. Living on the street in public spaces and panhandling lowers the quality of life for everyone - especially those forgotten on the street. Basic Health care for all would help and so would a living wage. How about decriminalizing addiction and instead of jailing rehab. To do all this we need a government that works from the top down and right now we don't have it. Next time instead of giving out a dollar give money to local organizations trying to solve these problems and don't forget to vote!
47
@Will Goubert Mental health facilities were closed as a result of exposure of abuse of patients in them. Outpatient care is largely ineffectual as the population we would wish it to serve does not see itself as needing or desiring such services. They are aided in their self-denial by civil libertarians who campaign for their right to self-determination. And in that determination they are, by and large, like other groups of epidemiological interest, prepared to make changes in behavior only when absolutely necessary, and so, by nature of this population's general unemployability due to behavior, environmental awareness, dependency on self-selected symptom dampening (or increasing) substances there is no place to go but down, down to the parks, the waterfronts, the bus stations, the subway grates, the underpasses.
Included in the other epidemiological groups alluded to must be those who are addicted to seeing themselves as caring and who would be loathe to give up the prejudices that have created the circumstances described.
19
I’m always amazed how even my most liberals friends have zero empathy for people living outside, even here in Portland.
Few people “want” to live on the streets. They do it because they have to.
20
@Randall, myself and a friend visited Portland last year because we heard it was such a beautiful city. But I would have to say that while the surrounding area is breathtakingly beautiful that Portland itself is a scary place for women. I was afraid to walk around in the daytime much less at night. All these men camped out all over the place is very intimidating. I wouldn't even want to drive there , if your car broke down the chances are about 50/50 you would be stuck next to an encampment while waiting to be towed. I was only there a few days but the homeless I saw were overwhelming gatherings of men, and the fact they were likely mentally ill and/or addicts didn't make them less threatening. Women have a right to walk where we want.
54
@Randall
And in Seattle, many refuse the outreach provided and prefer the streets, for whatever their reasons. What we hear is they don't like the "rules" of a shelter.
24
That is actually not true. Look up the “gutter punk” movement. Lots of them in Portland and elsewhere. They are homeless by choice and embrace the very behavior that this article describes as being such a nuisance to hard working people.
21
In this changing economy, many shopping centres are tenantless. Perhaps they can be repurposed as affordable living spaces. Few people actually want to live on the street and having a stable residence is the first step to a better life.
25
Those empty shopping malls are vehicles for wealthy people to launder money. Thats' was Paul Manafort was doing. They buy real estate with cash, then they take out a mortgage on the property so they can import money to live on and not pay income taxes on it. That's why all this expensive commercial real estate sits empty all over the country. NYT did a story on it about 2 years ago.
37
@ThinkingCdn
In other words, public housing wholly subsidized by the greater society, replete with all the well-documented challenges, issues and problems of existing public housing schemes all over the country.
5
@ThinkingCdn: not unless cities take them over by eminent domain! they are private property, and in NYC -- as covered by numerous articles here -- they held deliberately EMPTY as the owner/investors speculate on future price and rent increases.
2
There is no reason that cities should not require people to behave in a civil manner in a public space. That includes banning odious behaviors such as drug use, violence, and begging. However, it is beyond cruel to harass those who have no place to live.
Unless cities provide sufficient shelters, mental health facilities, and on-demand residential drug treatment to accommodate those who are homeless, it is wrong to evict the homeless from a public space.
We must remember that this problem exists essentially because we dumped the mentally ill in the 1980's. Before that, homelessness was virtually non-existent and essentially consisted of a few Bowery bums.
Our treatment of the mentally ill is virtually medieval.
95
@Josh Hill: The dysfunctional homeless are the visible tip of a larger iceberg. True enough they need those things you say, but there are many more homeless who have simply been priced out of the market. You don't see them because they don't want to be seen. All they need is inexpensive housing options.
18
@Josh Hill The mentally ill were dumped in the 60s. It was a problem way before the 80s.
7
@Josh Hill: "WE" did no such thing. The lefty libs and ACLU SUED back in the 1980s to let mentally ill people out of institutions because "they had rights" -- including the right to live out of doors, beg, defecate in public, etc.
They must be elated today, as all their lefty dreams have come true.
I've read a number of serious books about homelessness, and many of the homeless CHOOSE THIS AS A LIFESTYLE -- due to mental illness -- they do not want shelters even when offered.
6
One only has to remember that an Asylum was a place of safety. Now the asylums for the mentally ill are closed because of ill conceived ideas of out patient therapy for patients who are not capable of that and politicians seizing on the idea of closing very expensive in patient facilities.
Then add ill conceived laws making it nigh impossible to hospitalize people with severe mental illness who refuse to be admitted despite the fact the same people would be acquitted of felony charges because of their mental illness.
And the third strike is opiate addiction which is not only an illness but a fatal illness and you have our streets and plazas filled with sick people who should be being treated in asylums.
68
Dr. M Brewster Smith, co-chaired the drive for de-instutionalization in the 50’s and 60’s. Tranquilizers, as they were known back then, were the new wonder drug. The prospect of reducing large sums of State funds directed to these institutions had the politicians salivating. So they ran as fast as they could to get the forefathers of today’s homeless, back into society. Actually back into what was described as ‘local mental health centers’. No structure, planning or taking of responsibility. With a little ‘funding’ the psychology experts of the day, supported the view of the policiticans. Viola! Your local mental health center is now the cities common areas.
61
@Calvin Finally, an accurate, concise albeit abbreviated version of the truth about how mental institutions (think: California) were closed, the properties sold to anxious, influential developers, as the "experts" assured us that half-way houses would be in place to integrate these folks back into society. As Calvin said, THAT never happened. What we need now are camps for these folks.
21
@Calvin The goal of closing the psychiatric hospitals was a good one. There were plenty of people who were locked up who could and are treated in a community setting. The problem is the funding for community care was cut every year such that its down to almost nothing. The other problem is that in the land of the free it is difficult to force someone to take their medication and go to their therapy. A well funded parole type situation for the mentally ill would work wonders, but no one wants to pay for it.
4
It was noble to camp in the city streets when it was Occupy Wall Street. It is a nuisance when it's just poor folks who have no where else to go. I have an idea: Convert abandoned shopping malls into housing for the homeless. There can be safe injection sites, social services, job training, etc all under one under-utilized roof. Yes, homeless people would have to relocate outside the city, but at least they'd have a safe and warm place to lay their heads.
24
@Molly Great idea, but where will that money come from, considering the republicans gave it all away to people who don't need it?
26
@Molly Yes, big cities will export drug addicts and mentally deranged derelicts to suburbs where they would be out-of-sight and out-of-mind while leaving them for others to deal with. No doubt suburban residents would enthusiastically embrace this idea.
9
@Molly
I credit your good intentions, but this is an absolute loser. Many homeless prefer to live on the streets, in downtown areas. They claim the same right to live where they choose that the rest of us exercise. Will you force them to take shelter outside the city?
And who, outside the city, will tolerate a large homeless encampment next to their house? Well, I would, skeptically and barely, but if and only if order is strictly imposed and enforced. Few seem to have the stomach for that role in sunny California. It's viewed as downright authoritarian.
7