Hiding the Homeless
How the Vancouver Olympics Violate Civil Rights
Published November 14, 2009 @ 03:38PM PT
Over 1,000 low income homes destroyed. Tenants evicted. Plans to forcibly remove homeless individuals from the streets.
If this sounds like the workings of a repressive government regime, you're partially right, only this is the ugly reality of the workings of the Olympic industry. These heavy handed tactics are being used today to prepare Vancouver for the 2010 Winter Olympics, exposing the ugly side of an otherwise awe-inspiring event.
Olympic-driven housing destruction and tenant displacement is not a new phenomenon, according to an In These Times article by Gaus. Indeed, some 30,000 residents were displaced due to construction prior to the 1996 Atlanta Games and a whopping 300,000 housing units in Beijing were demolished - displacing over 1,500,000 people - for the 2008 games.
Today, this trend is continuing in Vancouver. "Since Vancouver was awarded the Games in 2003, over 1,100 units of low income housing have been lost in the Vancouver Downtown Eastside," Laura Track, a lawyer with Pivot Legal Society (a BC public interest advocacy group), told Bev Yaworski of Suite101. "The legacy of affordable housing promised in the Olympic bid is nowhere to be found: social housing at Athlete's Village was slashed and is looking ever less likely; evictions continue apace, and 14 City-owned sites on which the provincial government has promised to build social housing sit empty and idle."
These recent developments have prompted watchdog groups to file human rights complaints with the United Nations against the Olympic organizing committee and the governments of B.C. and Canada.
But even in situations when low-income housing is not intentionally demolished, the speculation associated with Olympic host-cities will often have the same effect, according to In These Times. "What mass-produced arrest citations and bulldozers don't accomplish the market's invisible hand usually does. Real-estate speculation and ballooning rents push out vulnerable populations with inescapable regularity."
This is an unfortunate twist on what is otherwise an inspiring world event. Perhaps the Games would lose their allure if the ugly truth about the preparations for the games were exposed.
Update: The Homeless Forums is keeping a close eye on developments in Vancouver as they unravel, tracking the news and comments from homeless people on the streets. Check out the thread here.
Image: cheukiecfu
Phoenix Church Ordered to Stop Feeding the Homeless
Published November 12, 2009 @ 11:15AM PT
A church in Phoenix has lost a court battle to run a charity dining hall for the city's homeless. The problem is, the court's ruling sets a precedent for all churches zoned in residential areas of Phoenix. While the ruling raises larger issues about the concentration of the homeless in cities, the immediate concern is the challenges the city's homeless may face finding a meal in the coming weeks.
The controversy surrounding the Crossroads United Methodist Church's weekly pancake breakfast began last spring when neighbors complained about an increase in the number of homeless people in the neighborhood. With the increase in homeless individuals in the area came an uptick in their undesirable behaviors, including "panhandling, burglary, public intoxication and vandalism, among other things," according to AZ Family.
The judge's ruling is harsh at first glance, but it's important to consider the perspective of the church's neighbors. Just as any homeless person should have a right to safe, decent, and affordable housing, the neighbors of Crossroads United Methodist Church have a right to feel safe in their home. Still, this ruling seems to be a strategic interpretation of residential zoning laws designed to control the homeless population. Restricting services from residential areas will keep "unsightly" homeless people out of certain parts of the city and concentrate them in others. And you know what they say: out of sight, out of mind.
Crossroads United Methodist Church has not decided if they will continue to fight the judge's ruling. At the very least, if they decide not to fight, I hope they and all of the other churches impacted by this decision choose to relocate their weekly meal rather than cancel it completely. While taking a stand against the concentration of the homeless and the poor is a fight worth waging, the immediate needs of those who are hurting cannot be ignored.
Image: La Jace
A View from (Under) the Bridge
Published November 07, 2009 @ 05:42AM PT
On paper, Leonard Grant might say that a combination of unemployment, addiction, and mental health caused his homelessness. But that's not the whole story. Even these reasons for homelessness can have their own causes.
You see, Grant tragically lost his son in a car accident, which sent his world spiraling out of control. His depression turned into drug use, his drug use made him unemployable, and without an income, he lost his home.
Grant calls the past three years of his life "dead time." This is how long he has lived under a bridge in Knox County, Tennessee - homeless. He's trying to piece his life back together, but it isn't easy. He's working to gather the legal documents he needs to apply for housing and social security. His biggest hurdle? Getting a copy of his birth certificate.
This is the story behind Grant's reasons for homelessness. It's one example of a story that could never be captured by research or statistics as they are currently reported. This is the human element of homelessness, the kind of story we might be more likely to identify with, the kind that might allow us to feel someone else's pain.
It's so simple, but so easy to forget: nobody ever plans on living under a bridge in Tennessee.
Are Storage Units Modern-Day Carboard Boxes?
Published October 29, 2009 @ 10:30AM PT
Somewhere along the line, the cardboard box became synonymous with homelessness. But today, these old stereotypes are changing as our modern-era homeless population grows and utilizes existing resources. Today, many homeless individuals and families are taking shelter in storage units.
An article in last week's Chicago Tribune told the story of a family living in a storage unit. It's not a new phenomenon; similar stories have been reported out of Hawaii and Maryland. At $179/month, the price is certainly right. And as I wrote back in March, storage units beat the dangers of the street, the rules of shelters, and the stigma of tent cities for people who are newly homeless.
Still - it's ironic, isn't it? Storage units exist because people have too much stuff. So much stuff, in fact, that we can't even squeeze it into our houses or apartments. Yet, at the same time, homelessness is at an all-time high in many cities. What does this say about us a society, about the enormous gap between the rich and the poor?
Have we come to value "stuff" more than we value people?
Vancouver Planning Olympic Homeless Evictions
Published October 16, 2009 @ 05:32AM PT
Yesterday, the city of Vancouver announced that they will begin ridding the streets of homeless individuals to prepare for the 2010 Winter Olympics starting in February 2010. Despite repeated assurances that these individuals will be connected with services, something about this announcement doesn't jive. Maybe if our cities tackled the issue of homelessness with the same fervor as perparations for the Winter Olympics, there would be no homeless people on the streets in the first place.
It's an sad but common activity during high-profile events: city officials use law enforcement to remove homeless people from the streets or arrest them. Usually, they say these cruel tactics are necessary for security reasons. But with the eyes of the nation and/or the world descending on a city like Vancouver, many advocates - this one included - are suspicious of a city's ulterior motives. Could this just be an attempt to put Vancouver's best face, and streetscape, forward?
Clearly, the backlash over these types of evictions have Vancouver city officials on PR high-alert. Vancouver city manager Penny Ballum said all of the right things during yesterday's press conference. According to the Hook, she "gave repeated assurances that any dislocated people would be connected with a wide range of support services and shelter." She even mentioned Vancouver's extensive outreach network that helps people on the streets find housing. Now there's a step in the right directions. But why are they stopping there?
Vancouver is four months out from eviction date. Four months! Why not focus on rehousing these individuals during this time, removing them from the streets permanently instead of simply relocating them. Forget being a good host for the world over the course of two weeks. Try focusing on being a good home for your residents the other 50 weeks of the year.
Nat'l Corporate Privatization BIDs for Local Anti-Homeless Cadres
Published October 10, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT
In major city after city across the United States a trained corps of quasi-security agents are being hired and trained by business to function outside the official law enforcement aegis to drive homeless people away from "business districts."
The parent corporation, SMS Holdings, has subsidiary units in several different service sectors, including maintenance and security. The company has been wooing and partnering with groups of local businesses banded together as "Business Improvement Districts" (BIDs) to install private-sector, uniformed teams to patrol these city areas and, in part, seek to target homeless populations with efforts designed to control and even remove homeless citizens. These "services" include preventing "panhandling" and "loitering."
The language is often veiled and euphemized, in public relations and sales use, so that calling the police and trying to rid the area of homeless is even sometimes expressed as "helping" them. For instance, in cities with little by way of any actual "services" for the homeless, the premise is still to "direct them to services" and "help" them get off the streets. Or at least the streets that the SMS Holdings subsidiary BLOCKbyBLOCK garners contracts to patrol and control in these ways.
From the company's website promotion, under "Keep It Safe":
"Address 'Quality of Life' Violations to Include:
• Panhandling (non-aggressive & aggressive)
• Loud or intimidating Behavior
• Solicitation
The company currently claims contracts with 33 cities and is intently seeking more, with specializations in assisting the local BIDs to arrange for "matching fund" tapping of public monies, whether civic, state and/or federal.
Some cities, such as Berkeley, CA, with their teams of patrolling "Hosts", have installed their own programs of similar nature. But the authority and funding of such programs can get a bit complex. These programs are blending private businesses, corporate entities and civic, public agencies, powers and... funds, of course.
In Berkeley, it's most ironic to find even federal funds earmarked to "help the homeless" spent in this way, which includes being directed by the business "bosses" to call the police on the homeless since citizens weren't doing so enough, in their opinion, in order to help rid the area of these people. And the bulk of their $200,000+ budget goes to services that have nothing to do with helping homeless people, as such. Critics locally also complain that the Hosts spend too much time sitting in cafe's, "just hanging out", and other idle past-times -- even "loitering"?
While BLOCKbyBLOCK is proud of their brightly colored uniforms, Berkeley opted for plainer brown jackets. That's jackets -- but not quite brown shirts.
Image by the author.
Action Alert: Tell Seattle to Stop the Sweeps!
Published September 29, 2009 @ 08:57AM PT
On any given night, shelters across the country are full and thousands of people do not have a place to sleep. It is baffling that a city government would want to shut down a peaceful, self-governing homeless encampment, particularly in the midst of a recession. But this is exactly what Seattle officials are rumored to be planning, a sweep of Nickelsville.
Shutting down a peaceful homeless encampment without providing viable housing alternatives is not only bad policy, it's both inhumane and dangerous for those without a home. Your action is needed today; express solidarity with the residents of Nickelsville and tell Seattle officials to stop the sweeps!
Earlier this week, residents of Nickelsville announced on their blog that Port officials were threatening to sweep the tent city on September 30th (Wednesday). Tent city residents were warned of the Port official's intentions in a cooperative meeting last week. Nickelsville residents requested a permanent location to relocate the tent city, making it clear that they would not move peacefully until this one request was fulfilled. Thus far, the city has not provided an alternative location.
The protests began last night, with homeless self-advocates camping outside the homes of Seattle's mayor and city counselors. Today, Change.org is expressing solidarity with the residents of Nickelsville by waging an email campaign in support of their request for a permanent, safe place to relocate Nickelsville.
The tent city residents have taken pride in their "homes" by transforming into a safe and orderly community. They have formed a supportive and clean environment that operates much like any other gated community. There is a food donation tent, a cooking station, a security tent, and "house numbers" for each tent. Take a photo tour of Nickelsville as it is today. While you're at it, meet a few residents of Nickelsville, like Gus and Coreen. Listen to their stories. If not for Nickelsville, these individuals may have ended up in situation leaving them much more vulnerable to the dangers of the streets.
Sweeping Nickelsville - dismantling the tents, confiscating the tents, and arresting the residents - will do nothing to address the root causes of homelessness. It will do nothing to make safe, permanent housing more accessible to any tent city residents. Dismantling tent city will put these individuals back at square one; having to rebuild their community from the ground up.
What's more, Seattle officials should learn from their recent experiences. Just last year, city officials ordered a sweep of Nickelsville. According to Seattle Weekly, "the two-day sweep was expensive: $27,866 for staff, a rented tractor, portable toilets, safety equipment, immunizations, and dump fees... It's about half of what the city spends to house 75 people during the entire six-month season at its emergency winter shelter in the basement of City Hall."
Your action is urgently needed today. Tell Seattle officials that tent city sweeps are outrageously counterproductive from both a public policy and a human rights perspective. Rather than uprooting the residents of Nickelsvile, Seattle officials should be targeting the root causes of homelessness.
Image from the Seattle Times.
