Kicking Out the Homeless in Downtown Columbia, South Carolina

[thelakelander]

I'm sure this won't end well...

Finding ways to help the homeless population is one of the hardest problems any big city faces. However, one South Carolina municipality has found a cheap and easy solution: Out of sight, out of mind.

Under the "Emergency Homeless Response" plan (which can be read in full here), passed last week by the Columbia City Council, homeless-looking citizens in Columbia's 36-block downtown area will be asked by police to move to a shelter on the outskirts of the city. Should the person refuse, the State reports, "they could be arrested under a range of public nuisance laws that include loitering, public intoxication, public urination, aggressive panhandling or trespassing."

Coercing suspected homeless into shelter on the edge of town is just one of the plan's controversial aspects. Once at the shelter, the potentially unwilling residents would be prevented from leaving except by specific appointment. The only approved way to exit the installation is by reserving a shuttle ride. In order to further ensure shelter-goers do not return to the business district, a police officer will be placed on the road leading downtown to redirect homeless people away from the area.

full article: http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/08/22/kicking-out-the-homeless-in-downtown-columbia-south-carolina/#ixzz2d75k7Orh

[JayBird]

Wow that is certainly a forceful reaction to the problem. I wonder how their street homeless population compares to Jax, of course most of those maneuvers would be illegal in Florida, and how much the city figured the financial burden of non-profit sheltering and filling jails would be outweighed by them being removed from the streets. I also wonder how much they put aside for litigation as I am sure there is an ACLU paralegal slaving away on research at this very moment

[strider]

Don't forget that not all that long ago our Sheriff did suggest and try for a homeless relocation camp outside of town. 

Historically, relocation camps of any kind have never worked out to well for anyone.

[Cheshire Cat]

Is Don Redman advising in Columbia now? 

[Barnaby808]

If we move the homeless out, downtown will be completely empty on the weekend.

[vicupstate]

Wow that is certainly a forceful reaction to the problem. I wonder how their street homeless population compares to Jax, of course most of those maneuvers would be illegal in Florida, and how much the city figured the financial burden of non-profit sheltering and filling jails would be outweighed by them being removed from the streets. I also wonder how much they put aside for litigation as I am sure there is an ACLU paralegal slaving away on research at this very moment

I lived in Columbia from 1988-96 and this issue has perplexed that city since before then, and ever since.  Of course, the same can be said for Jax of course.  Both cities seem to have more than their share of homeless, as compared to most cities I have been to.  Supposedly, the number of homeless has noticeable increased there recently too.

Also like JAX, Columbia has struggled to revitialze it's CBD for decades as well.  Some recent success in that area has occurred and the merchants and developers responsible are the proponents of this plan, as I understand it.

[Bill Hoff]

It's common sense.

Deconsolidate homeless resouces from Downtown, and you'll have less homeless in Downtown, whether in Columbia, Jacksonville,  or wherever.

People who are homeless tend to hangout near where they can be given meals, beds, and other services (showers, case management, etc).

In Jacksonville, that's Downtown, and to a far lesser degree the beaches.

Cities all over the US are implenenting new homeless policy/strategy.

Look at Tampa & Miami recently. Just today Raliegh was in the news for making a church group get a permit to feed homeless in a public space.

[strider]

It's common sense.

Deconsolidate homeless resouces from Downtown, and you'll have less homeless in Downtown, whether in Columbia, Jacksonville,  or wherever.

People who are homeless tend to hangout near where they can be given meals, beds, and other services (showers, case management, etc).

In Jacksonville, that's Downtown, and to a far lesser degree the beaches.

Cities all over the US are implenenting new homeless policy/strategy.

Look at Tampa & Miami recently. Just today Raliegh was in the news for making a church group get a permit to feed homeless in a public space.

It is common sense.  Homeless is defined as:

A homeless individual is defined in section 330(h)(4)(A) as "an individual who lacks housing (without regard to whether the individual is a member of a family), including an individual whose primary residence during the night is a supervised public or private facility (e.g., shelters) that provides temporary living accommodations, and an individual who is a resident in transitional housing." A homeless person is an individual without permanent housing who may live on the streets; stay in a shelter, mission, single room occupancy facilities, abandoned building or vehicle; or in any other unstable or non-permanent situation. [Section 330 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C., 254b)]
An individual may be considered to be homeless if that person is "doubled up," a term that refers to a situation where individuals are unable to maintain their housing situation and are forced to stay with a series of friends and/or extended family members. In addition, previously homeless individuals who are to be released from a prison or a hospital may be considered homeless if they do not have a stable housing situation to which they can return. A recognition of the instability of an individual's living arrangements is critical to the definition of homelessness. (HRSA/Bureau of Primary Health Care, Program Assistance Letter 99-12, Health Care for the Homeless Principles of Practice)

At which group of people will this stop at?  The poorest among us who can't afford permanent housing?  The men and women who are in a recovery program?  Someone who happens to stay at an extended stay like 3rd and Main too long?  The person or family that has to move three times in one year?

While many may think of the people living on the streets or staying in the various shelters as the homeless, the definition encompasses many more than that.  Laws get passed that can and will be used against any group of people some other group doesn't like.  Ask Bill Hoff, he will tell you how they would use something like Columbia's laws in Springfield.

And what happens next?  What law gets passed when they see a majority of the homeless they are trying to move on coming back to their Homes? Staying Home in downtown even though the services have been moved on?  How do the cities pay for the resulting federal lawsuits?

Common sense.  We have to hope it is used here and problems are worked on to be solved not simply moved somewhere else.

[Bill Hoff]

I don't know anything about something like that in Jacksonville, let alone SPR.

I was commenting on how deconsolidating services from one spot (ie, downtown) leads to less numbers of people who use those services in that one spot. Whether it's a beer drinker-bar, handyman-hardware store or homeless-homeless services, same concept applies.

We (Jax residents & leaders) tend to think it's a tough issue to figure out, but it's really not.

The best way to help people with serious issues is another (very interesting, I think) discussion.

[sheclown]

An old man came in to the thrift story crying one afternoon.  He told me that JSO just "removed" everything he owned from under a tree and now his beloved trash bag of belongings was gone.

He said "now I have nothing."

There but for the grace of God...and anyone who doesn't think so, hasn't been paying attention for the last decade.

Govern yourselves accordingly.

[sheclown]

Senator: Food Stamps Are Just Like Slavery

By Zack Beauchamp on August 26, 2013 at 1:39 pm

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) equated government programs that prevent people from dying of starvation with slavery in a new profile of his medical practice published today, revealing himself to hold a view of the role of government so limited as to nearly define the state out of existence.

Paul's philosophical excursus is buried in the midst of the too-friendly-for-parody article (it ends with a patient waxing poetic about how Paul "loves people"), but the words are unmistakably Randian. "As humans, yeah, we do have an obligation to give people water, to give people food, to give people health care," Paul allowed, "but it's not a right because once you conscript people and say, 'Oh, it's a right,' then really you're in charge, it's servitude, you're in charge of me and I'm supposed to do whatever you tell me to do."

The comments are an echo of his 2011 claim that accepting a human right to health care "means you believe in slavery," but the Senator's new variation on the theme is notable because it puts the reasoning behind the crazy in stark relief. Particularly, this line: "You don't have a right to anyone else's labor. Food's pretty important, do you have a right to the labor of the farmer?"

The basic idea is that if slavery means forcing people to do things, and saying people have a right to food means the government should require farmers to provide it to them, then a right to food means the enslavement of farmers. A moderately bright high school student could spot the leap of logic here: no one's forcing anyone to farm against their will. In a democratic-capitalist economy, people have a right to choose their career and, as it turns out, enough people end up being farmers that there's generally enough food to go around. A socially-accepted "right to food" merely means the government should pay for the provision of food to those who can't afford it. No stealing, and definitely no slavery.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/26/2525961/rand-paul-food-health-libertarianism-hayek/

[fsujax]

I used to do a lot of work in Columbia, their downtown even at that time was way better than ours. I suspect it had something to do with USC being right down the street. I never really noticed that many homeless downtown, unlike here. Our propblem seems to be getting larger and expanding. Now there is a nice camp set up under I-95 at Church St overpass, right down from the middle school. Nice.

[JayBird]

Well when Orlando wanted to construct/improve Church Street Station they moved all the homeless shelters to the outskirts of the county, and thus created an influx of homeless on Jacksonville's shelter system (1996/1997??) so there is an example that proves that decentralizing resources provides a solution. However, some of the things Columbia are illegal under Florida law, keeping someone locked in any type of shelter, with the exception of a jail cell for committing a crime or a mental evaluation center under the Baker Act, is considered kidnapping. Ask Sulzbacher directors about that when they attempted to lock their doors at 9pm. Now they have a policy stating that you may leave as you wish, but you may not enter during curfew hours.

Also, JSO is pro-homeless as an organization. They do not target them or harass them as in other cities. The only time they will take action is if it is a flagrant disregard for the law or if a citizen contacts them with a complaint, as I would assume you would find with SheClowns incident listed above.

Working with the Jacksonville homeless for over 8 years now, I believe what needs to happen is that all of the resources need to come together and cross-honor each others services (several move from food line to food line having three dinners and getting several outfits of clothing per day) and provide limitations across the board. This would entitle the homeless to a hand up, but the help is limited. If after 6, 12, 18 months you are still in the same position than you are no longer eligible for such services and must move on elsewhere. One thing I find unique to Jacksonville is the lack of transition in transition programs, which in my opinion is where the fault lies. The funding recieved by the state and city and that recieved through grants and philanthropical organizations is all based on "number served/housed" so if people were to move on, without the same amount or more entering the shelter/agency would see less funds as they are serving less people. So, even though that should be positive and their mission should be dictated by the level of care and those transitioning out of care services, it is instead operated with a "for profit" non-profit mentality.

All that being said, I have yet to see proof saying that removing the homeless from the streets is economically beneficial to the area in which they currently reside. After all, you must factor in the funds given to those social services to relocate and operate as well as to the law enforcement and courts for the influx of petty misdemeanors. Most of the homeless are "invisible" to the businesses and customers and tourists, as humans we see what we want to see until it is forced upon us by panhandling or public displays. I believe most of the people whom complain or comment on the homeless situation in downtown Jacksonville have never actually been downtown. On a recent count on Saturday,  July 20th that was done from 12 midnight to 2am by myself and six others for the Catholic Diocese resulted in finding 36 people sleeping unsheltered in downtown/LaVilla/sports complex; 23 in Springfield below 12th street; 9 in San Marco; 41 within the boundaries of the City of Jacksonville Beach (it should be noted this count was before the JBPD did their nightly beach sweep removing those sleeping on the beach); 7 sleeping within the property of St Johns Town Center; and 68 sleeping in the Argyle Woods (a wooded lot accessed on the southwest corner of Blanding Boulevard and Argyle Forest Drive and a small camp located immediately south of Starbucks before the creek). So those numbers show there are actually more street dwellers living in the "suburbs" than downtown.

That camp mentioned on Church Street is actually supported by the Shiloh Metropolitan on Beaver in order to remove them off of their property. They provide food, clothing and volunteers walk the camp at night providing a feeling of safety.  Keep in mind Jacksonville's shelter system is no where close to full, they operate at about 55-60% capacity throughout the year, those on the street choose to not enter the shelters for whatever reason.

Those you see on the street are also ineligible for food stamp benefits as you must have a qualified address in order to file and the Department of Children and Families verifies that address every six months or every time you reapply whichever is sooner. Though Rand did have some interesting and credible points in his article, his definition was so broad that anyone and everyone could be considered a slave.

[vicupstate]

Though Rand did have some interesting and credible points in his article, his definition was so broad that anyone and everyone could be considered a slave.

Actually, if you have a library card, and you didn't pay a fee for it, you are a slave.  Such is the logic of the far right.

[simms3]

That camp mentioned on Church Street is actually supported by the Shiloh Metropolitan on Beaver in order to remove them off of their property. They provide food, clothing and volunteers walk the camp at night providing a feeling of safety.  Keep in mind Jacksonville's shelter system is no where close to full, they operate at about 55-60% capacity throughout the year, those on the street choose to not enter the shelters for whatever reason.

I too have worked with the homeless.  What is sometimes but not always the case is that shelters can be very dangerous places for them.  You have (often) overcrowding, strong attitudes on both sides, and a concentration of mental illness.  I have heard of a full scale riot at a shelter over a simple ballpoint pen (some man thought the man next to him lifted it).  Fights and riots are not uncommon, so if the weather is mild or pleasant then lots of homeless prefer to set up outside in camps where they can form camp bonds and look out for each other, all while having a little more space and less authoritative oversight.  Most homeless you see on the street will always be homeless, so a 6-8 month "program" is not going to get anywhere.

I sympathize with Columbia because I have heard that other cities take advantage of Columbia's generally more lenient laws and its programs.  Most cities are net exporters of homeless, which in my opinion is far more cruel and inhumane (to give them a one way bus ticket).  Columbia has been a net importer.  The law is sad and sounds wrong, but I think this issue runs deeper than anyone here can really comment on.

I live in an import city with a far higher population than any other in the country (in terms of %, and I believe in terms of sheer numbers too).  Just last Friday this sad article came out about a similar system where hospitals in Nevada and other states ship their homeless patients directly to SF.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Deaf-blind-man-called-example-of-patient-4754815.php

The kind, caring liberal people of the city do tend for the indigent, but internally we would ALL prefer there to be less homeless here too.  It's just a harsh reality.