| Home |
 |
Writing in the World Projects |
|
Homelessness in Portland: A Reflective Essay |
|
PORTLAND. Each night, Randall McKey sleeps on the streets in and around downtown Portland. He and several hundred others are the most visible of the city’s homeless population, as they spend most of their time in the center city, gathering in Pioneer Square, sleeping on public benches, and sometimes asking pedestrians for change.
"I don’t bother anyone,” says McKey. “I just go about my business like the next guy. If I ask for your money, then I do it polite.”
McKey, however, is precisely the kind of person that many local residents think is being targeted by Ordinance 151, the “Unlawful Loitering Ordinance” recently proposed by Councilwoman Carole Griffith. Although proponents of the measure describe it as primarily an attempt to protect the rights of all citizens, critics see it as proof of something far more ominous: an increasing insensitivity on the part of civic leaders to the plight of the city’s least fortunate citizens.
The Ordinance states that it shall be unlawful for anyone “to loiter, to sit, or to lie in the right of way of other citizens in a manner that would hinder their unobstructed passage.” The law would apply to sidewalks, streets, and most of the city’s other public spaces, including the city’s extensive park system.
According to the Ordinance, citizens found in violation of the Ordinance would first receive a warning. Violators who refuse to act after having been warned would receive a citation, along with a fine as high as $500. Authorities may also relocate violators to shelters, “according to the authorities’ best judgement,” states the Ordinance.
Why, according to its supporters, has the Ordinance become necessary? Councilwoman Griffith explains, “In the past several years, we’ve seen an enormous increase in the number of homeless in our city. While we’re working to address the needs of these people, we need also to protect the rights of others. The rights of businesses to conduct their business. And the rights of Portlanders to walk through the city unmolested and unafraid.”
When asked whether this Ordinance is meant to target the homeless in particular, Griffith states an emphatic no. “This Ordinance is not meant to target any particular population. It is meant, rather, to target behavior. There are certain behaviors—behaviors that impinge upon others’ rights—that we simply should not tolerate. This applies to downtown. It applies in the areas near our schools and universities. It applies in our neighborhoods.”
Critics of the Ordinance claim that Griffith and her supporters are in fact targeting the homeless. “It is becoming increasingly common in cities across the country to pass laws that essentially criminalize homelessness,” says Maria Zapata, director of the Hope in Portland Shelter, which provides beds and medical services to the city’s homeless population. “The Anti-Loitering Ordinance is just Portland’s version of this kind of law.”
Zapata believes that the Ordinance is primarily intended to deal with the homeless who gather downtown and in the neighborhoods near Portland University. “In the past several years, those two parts of town have become the centers of homeless activity.”
Reverend Morris Baker, of the First Portland Episcopal Church, agrees with Zapata, and expects that Ordinance 151 will spark heated debate in the next few months. “We’re pretty unhappy with Councilwoman’s Griffith’s proposal. Let’s address the real problems here—rents are high and getting higher, jobs are hard to find. We’re getting rid of a lot of affordable housing. The truth be told, we’re not doing a very good job of helping out the people around us who need the most help.”
Both sides of this debate agree that—in Portland, as in most American cities—homelessness has become a more serious problem in the past decade. City officials estimate that between 2500 and 3000 people seek shelter each night in Portland. Nearly a quarter of these people are turned away from shelters due to lack of space or resources.
What people often ignore, notes Zapata, is that many women and families are also homeless. “People think the homeless population is just single men. It’s not.” Indeed, city officials estimate that nearly a quarter of the homeless turned away from shelters each night are children.
Councilwoman Griffith has repeatedly asserted that she does not want the debate over the Ordinance to overlook this fact. “I’ve said it a thousand times. With this ordinance, we’re trying to address certain kinds of behaviors, not certain people. Like everyone in Portland, I want to help the homeless, especially those families with children that are struggling to make it day by day.”
Nevertheless, the debate over the Ordinance has tended to address not the root causes of homelessness, but some of its results. Perhaps the most-discussed issue concerning the proposed law is the effect of loitering on local businesses.
Rhonda Davis, manager of a coffee shop near Portland University, agrees that loitering is becoming more of a problem for businesses in her neighborhood. Davis explains that she isn’t yet sure what to think of the Ordinance. “But,” she says, “I can guarantee that we get less business than we would if there weren’t so many panhandlers outside our door. That’s a real problem.”
Many downtown merchants concur. The Portland Chamber of Commerce has been one of the strongest advocates of the Ordinance. Ben Hatch, the Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, says “we’ve seen an increase in homelessness, and therefore an increase in the number of folks just hanging around downtown. And, yes, there’s now a larger group of individuals who support themselves through illegal activity—aggressive panhandling, purse-snatching, petty theft. Our concern is that these people are going to ruin the city for all of us.”
When asked to comment on Hatch’s statement, Zapata nods in agreement. “It is true that petty crime is up. And it’s probably true that there is a small group of trouble-makers who give the homeless a bad name. But is the Ordinance the way to address this problem? What these people are dong is already illegal. Why do we need a new law?"
Tommy Paciorek, editor of Street, a newsletter written by and for the Portland homeless, thinks that the local climate is especially mean-spirited, but he’s also not terribly surprised by the Ordinance. “People don’t want to face the fact that everything isn’t wonderful,” he says with a shrug.
Paciorek also doubts that the Ordinance will have a substantial effect on the life of the homeless. “The police aren’t going to put all these people in jail. They know that. The homeless know that.” Paciorek adds, sitting forward in his chair, “But I’ll tell you what. This law isn’t going to get rid of the homeless. It’s not going to run them out of town.”
The City Council is now considering the Ordinance. A vote is expected in early November.
|