Austin Homeless Free for All Ordinance

[dcar00 14986]

2 hours ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Well personally I’d like to see zoning that would allow us to recreate community first village in the city limits. 
 

There’s plenty of money for it. but nobody wants that except people who care.

where would you put it?  would you start no camping ban if you did it?

[Armybrat 41426]

8 hours ago, dcar00 said:

where would you put it?  would you start no camping ban if you did it?

I have 25 acres available near the CotA.... for a much cheaper price than all the fleabag hotels Adler wants the taxpayers to buy from his friends.

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

9 hours ago, dcar00 said:

where would you put it?  would you start no camping ban if you did it?

Plenty of parcels around, but it’s probably easiest to get stuff like this done on state property already dedicated to a related purpose.  Places would need to be fairly central and close to services. I would probably start with the Austin State Hospital and HHS properties on Guadalupe, which would be ideal. The State School property on 35th would be great too.

i don’t know that I would support a full camping ban because I don’t think it should be a crime to not have a home. I would and do support a large number of restrictions on where camping is tolerated, whether or not holistic, high quality  programs like Community First Village can be expanded or recreated. Those are two separate issues in my opinion.

Edited August 4, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[landman 564]

14 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Plenty of parcels around, but it’s probably easiest to get stuff like this done on state property already dedicated to a related purpose.  Places would need to be fairly central and close to services. I would probably start with the Austin State Hospital and HHS properties on Guadalupe, which would be ideal. The State School property on 35th would be great too.

i don’t know that I would support a full camping ban because I don’t think it should be a crime to not have a home. I would and do support a large number of restrictions on where camping is tolerated, whether or not holistic, high quality  programs like Community First Village can be expanded or recreated. Those are two separate issues in my opinion.

Most of them should be at the state hospital already.

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

Homelessness, much like occasional acts of mayhem, are out mental health system working as designed. We use law enforcement as the primary intake mechanism for mental health crisis intervention. The Travis County Jail is the biggest mental health provider in Central Texas and nothing else is close. 
“Defund the police” has pros and cons as a slogan, but money we currently spend on mental health in law enforcement diverted to more appropriate resources would be more cost effective, make cops jobs more straightforward, and improve the lives of suffering people.

[Guest Lobo]

Yep, I agree completely.  

We're never gonna get there on any of this though.  Our great grandchildren will still be wading through this bullshit.  We can't even get the fucking terminology right.  

"Law Enforcement"?  So they're out there to enforce laws and grab wrong-doers, right?  Sounds simple enough.  But half their day is responding to calls that have nothing to do with law enforcement (or petty traffic violations).  They're dealing with the mentally ill and so is a massive chunk of their budget.  

"Defund the Police"? Whoever came up with that one needs to be arrested.  A serious re-re-evalution of muni police budgets, which with it will bring a reduction in the unnecessary time and resources that local police spend on calls that, again, have nothing to do with law enforcement.  Would you send out a Texas State Trooper on a mentally ill disturbance call?  No, shitty use of resources, right?  Then what the fuck is the point of sending any other type of cop?  Would you use a Texas Ranger to answer a call about possession of a small amount of personal use drugs?  No, shitty use of resources, right?  Send a social worker or a "community cop liaison" who documents the incident in case things escalate down the road.  Things get physical, call a real cop.  98% of the time they don't though.  

"Homeless"?  To me, and I'm close to the situation in Austin, that screams "These people's biggest problem is they don't have a home/dwelling/residence."  When, for 80% of them, the number one issue is not being homeless.  That's just a symptom of a much larger disease.  That should not be their identity, "Homeless."  They're living out there because of an underlying mental issue and/or addiction issue.  Even our own "progressive" City Council and Mayor don't fucking get this.  All they ever ask money for is real estate, real estate, and real estate.  I understand much of this should have fallen to the State or even the Feds.  But news flash...they ain't fucking coming to help.  So instead of allocating sufficient resources to the homeless population in the form of mental health help and addiction help and case workers and job training, it's always about fucking real estate and it's always about let APD deal with them. 

So the "Defund the Police" crowd think the "Homeless" need hotels to live in, but want "Law Enforcement" to not be given the resources to cover the deeper root causes of the"Homeless", and the people that misunderstand "Defund the Police" want to talk about mental health assistance for the "Homeless" population to get them off the streets but want "Law Enforcement" to do most of it?  And those in/around "Law Enforcement" don't like dealing with the "Homeless" but understand that dealing with them is a big part of their budget allocation and they kinda don't want "Defund the Police" to know that...so maybe they're okay with the hotel solution to it all?  Do I have that about right?  

I confess a large portion of my support for "Black Lives Matter" is it's the only movement of the last few years whose name actually makes fucking sense.  

Edited August 4, 2020 by Lobo

[Wally Pryor 5410]

16 hours ago, bschoolprof said:

Seems relevant.

 

Impressive overall effort by the Windsor bums. But my neighbors in the '04 still get scoreboard with the height of the garbage piles and the sheer extent of them on Ben White, all the way from 35 to South Lamar.  Plus the bonus points for amenities. Saw a big screen across from Strait Music last week - no idea if functioning, but the optic is nice.  Several nice grills in place including what looks to be an 8-burner under Manchaca.  Also scoring with the clotheslines that are springing up and, with fitness in mind, what looks to be a badminton net strung up (also near Strait.)

 

The crows on Nextdoor are no doubt screaming "Send this video to your council member, blah, blah."    Lulz.   Go ahead and send it.   The short documentary will probably be front and center at the council's next working lunch with pom poms raised and virtual high fives exchanged in between bites of kale on rye and fig newtons. 

 

[ChickenSandwich 9964]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Plenty of parcels around, but it’s probably easiest to get stuff like this done on state property already dedicated to a related purpose.  Places would need to be fairly central and close to services. I would probably start with the Austin State Hospital and HHS properties on Guadalupe, which would be ideal. The State School property on 35th would be great too.

i don’t know that I would support a full camping ban because I don’t think it should be a crime to not have a home. I would and do support a large number of restrictions on where camping is tolerated, whether or not holistic, high quality  programs like Community First Village can be expanded or recreated. Those are two separate issues in my opinion.

You have it backwards. Move them to the edge of the city limits or near the airport. Let the services come to them. Less access to drugs, alcohol and panhandling. 
 

The land is much cheaper and it isn’t near as many neighborhood communities. Easier for the services to travel to them and for much cheaper. Then full ban on camping. Give them a real alternative, but don’t actively enforce their downfall.  
 

San Antonio did it right. Prime real estate is just an incentive to attract more homelessness 

Edited August 4, 2020 by ChickenSandwich

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

11 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

You have it backwards. Move them to the edge of the city limits or near the airport. Let the services come to them. Less access to drugs, alcohol and panhandling. 
 

The land is much cheaper and it isn’t near as many neighborhood communities. Easier for the services to travel to them and for much cheaper. Then full ban on camping. Give them a real alternative, but don’t actively enforce their downfall.  

What do you mean "neighborhood communities"? Do you mean "affluent whites"? When they had the zoning hearing about Community First the people in the subdivision next to it said "there's no way you would be able to get away with this in Central Austin." And they were right- the self-styled progressives in Austin didn't want a community for the permanent homeless in their back yards. However, they've had no real issues, the development has contributed amenities and resources to their area,  and the opposition has therefore melted away. 

Also, the idea of putting stuff like this the middle of nowhere is, in a word, silly. It's not a prison ad the goal isn't to confine people. The goal is to give a home to the permanently homeless and help them build lives with dignity and work and meaning and contribution. Part of what make CF work is that it's close to a bus route and relatively centrally located despite being just outside city limits. These issues - substance abuse and panhandling and litter, etc- are the result of a lack of appropriate care and community. Good programs reduce those issues, they don't produce them. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[dcar00 14986]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Homelessness, much like occasional acts of mayhem, are out mental health system working as designed. We use law enforcement as the primary intake mechanism for mental health crisis intervention. The Travis County Jail is the biggest mental health provider in Central Texas and nothing else is close. 
“Defund the police” has pros and cons as a slogan, but money we currently spend on mental health in law enforcement diverted to more appropriate resources would be more cost effective, make cops jobs more straightforward, and improve the lives of suffering people.

not all homeless people are mentally ill.  I do have a problem with just saying they are mentally ill to put them in a "they all deserve help" bucket.

[crash_davis 23470]

Fuck this shit. I'm fully support people who want to help themselves but the only thing these assholes want to help themselves to is a another hit of whatever fucking drug they are strung out on. And it's highly likely that these assholes aren't from Austin. Why should I keep pumping endless tax dollars treating vagrants? It's not an Austin issue, it's a national issue. Until Congress and the President get behind a coherent plan to address homeless across the nation, the tax payers of Austin will continue to deal with all the bullshit that comes with these asshat vagrants and continue to spend tens and hundreds of millions trying to fix an unfixable situation, unfixable for Austin's scope. Again if we were able to succeed, guess what's going to happen. Even more homeless will come to Austin because hey, we're giving free hand outs. It's fucking endless.

Until then, kick their asses out. Make their lives miserable. Drive them out of these makeshift villages and confiscate all of their stolen shit. Word will spread that Austin is unwelcomed for vagrants, they'll move away and stop coming.

[Orange&White 5573]

How far do the residents of Austin have to bend over for the homeless population? When is enough enough?

The residents of this town have been seeing astronomical increases in money for homeless people for the last 10 years and it continues to worsen every year. That is what happens when every homeless person in the state moves to the place that is dumping money on them and refusing to impose a modicum of laws against them, and we, the regular citizens of Austin are the ones that have to face the fucking brunt of it. No other City in Texas has to deal with this much of a problem and it is because they don't put up with it. Our leaders fucking celebrate it and refuse to recognize that in doing that, it is a ever increasing issue because they all move here.

Our city looks like a fucking shithole third world country. There is someone begging on every fucking corner and median of every intersection in this town. They leave their fucking trash on those same spots every day. Their camps are nothing but giant fucking trash heaps and real danger to walk through. They don't give a fuck or lift a finger to do anything about any of that yet we are all supposed to put up with it and pay for everything they need like hotels and apartments, etc.

There needs to be some way to limit the money spent and have it apply to the homeless people that really want to get out of the situation and the rest of them can fuck right off. This idea that we can continue to take in every fucking homeless person in the entire country and financially support them while they make ZERO fucking effort at keeping the area clean and safe is a 100% non starter. There needs to be some way to tie the actions and choices of the homeless person to the funding that we continue to throw at them. 

How far are Austinites willing to go? What if we get to $1B a year for homeless? Is that OK? Are we still good with that?

When do the 99.99% of the population that work to pay for all of this get to enjoy the city they live in without harassment and driving through trash heaps and pollution every day? 

The current path is unsustainable as is any path that increases by hundreds of millions of dollars every year.

 

 

[dcar00 14986]

3 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

How far do the residents of Austin have to bend over for the homeless population? When is enough enough?

The residents of this town have been seeing astronomical increases in money for homeless people for the last 10 years and it continues to worsen every year. That is what happens when every homeless person in the state moves to the place that is dumping money on them and refusing to impose a modicum of laws against them, and we, the regular citizens of Austin are the ones that have to face the fucking brunt of it. No other City in Texas has to deal with this much of a problem and it is because they don't put up with it. Our leaders fucking celebrate it and refuse to recognize that in doing that, it is a ever increasing issue because they all move here.

Our city looks like a fucking shithole third world country. There is someone begging on every fucking corner and median of every intersection in this town. They leave their fucking trash on those same spots every day. Their camps are nothing but giant fucking trash heaps and real danger to walk through. They don't give a fuck or lift a finger to do anything about any of that yet we are all supposed to put up with it and pay for everything they need like hotels and apartments, etc.

There needs to be some way to limit the money spent and have it apply to the homeless people that really want to get out of the situation and the rest of them can fuck right off. This idea that we can continue to take in every fucking homeless person in the entire country and financially support them while they make ZERO fucking effort at keeping the area clean and safe is a 100% non starter. There needs to be some way to tie the actions and choices of the homeless person to the funding that we continue to throw at them. 

How far are Austinites willing to go? What if we get to $1B a year for homeless? Is that OK? Are we still good with that?

When do the 99.99% of the population that work to pay for all of this get to enjoy the city they live in without harassment and driving through trash heaps and pollution every day? 

The current path is unsustainable as is any path that increases by hundreds of millions of dollars every year.

 

 

I'm not sure if you know this but it won't ever be enough...

[Orange&White 5573]

Just now, dcar00 said:

I'm not sure if you know this but it won't ever be enough...

If the line item got to $1B a year, you can be sure the voters would eventually put an end to it.

[BradInATX 9208]

The thing that really bothers me about the way the city has handled it is that they've done a great job of destroying sympathy for the homeless. I have talked to many, many people who might not be bleeding hearts but understand that the homeless problem is largely that of mental health and addiction, and understand the need for resources and effort to help them. But having these guys out in public trashing everything and creating general nuisance and safety issues for the community at large has turned the sentiment into "get these people the hell out of here". 

Every time I drive down Ben White, it makes me a little less sentimental and bittersweet about moving out of the city I was born and raised and consider "my city". I'd actually appreciate if they'd set up in my street for these last couple of days so I don't have any second guessing of the decision.

I think @Bozo_Casanova is one of the better posters on this site when it comes to politics and governmental logistics, but no amount of parsing and explaining government nuance is going to change the fact that you just can't have roving meth camps within a well-struck six iron of schools and foot traffic areas that families use. You just can't. Period. That is not acceptable.

Edited August 4, 2020 by BradInATX

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

13 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

not all homeless people are mentally ill.  I do have a problem with just saying they are mentally ill to put them in a "they all deserve help" bucket.

There is a subset of homeless people who are marginal characters and some who are down on your luck. But we're talking about the permanent homeless population here, and they are almost universally mentally ill, and has been pointed out before, 90%+ of that population is also suffering from PTSD from their experiences on the street in addition to their baseline illness. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[crash_davis 23470]

1 minute ago, Orange&White said:

If the line item got to $1B a year, you can be sure the voters would eventually put an end to it.

Asshats in this city seem to approve every feel good bond that comes across their screens on election day. It will never end.

They should pass a law that says you can only vote on bonds/issues that is funded from property taxes if you actually own property. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

22 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

How far do the residents of Austin have to bend over for the homeless population? When is enough enough?

The residents of this town have been seeing astronomical increases in money for homeless people for the last 10 years and it continues to worsen every year. That is what happens when every homeless person in the state moves to the place that is dumping money on them and refusing to impose a modicum of laws against them, and we, the regular citizens of Austin are the ones that have to face the fucking brunt of it. No other City in Texas has to deal with this much of a problem and it is because they don't put up with it. Our leaders fucking celebrate it and refuse to recognize that in doing that, it is a ever increasing issue because they all move here.

Our city looks like a fucking shithole third world country. There is someone begging on every fucking corner and median of every intersection in this town. They leave their fucking trash on those same spots every day. Their camps are nothing but giant fucking trash heaps and real danger to walk through. They don't give a fuck or lift a finger to do anything about any of that yet we are all supposed to put up with it and pay for everything they need like hotels and apartments, etc.

There needs to be some way to limit the money spent and have it apply to the homeless people that really want to get out of the situation and the rest of them can fuck right off. This idea that we can continue to take in every fucking homeless person in the entire country and financially support them while they make ZERO fucking effort at keeping the area clean and safe is a 100% non starter. There needs to be some way to tie the actions and choices of the homeless person to the funding that we continue to throw at them. 

How far are Austinites willing to go? What if we get to $1B a year for homeless? Is that OK? Are we still good with that?

When do the 99.99% of the population that work to pay for all of this get to enjoy the city they live in without harassment and driving through trash heaps and pollution every day? 

The current path is unsustainable as is any path that increases by hundreds of millions of dollars every year.

 

 

It's not a money problem. We don't spend the money well.  It's a zoning and program design problem combined with a culture problem. Your post is a good example. I'm literally talking about cost effective, self-sustaining programs that work and get people off the street, and you guys are like RAGERAGERAGERAGE. Why not bitch about all the money we spend jailing people for being ill?

13 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

The thing that really bothers me about the way the city has handled it is that they've done a great job of destroying sympathy for the homeless. I have talked to many, many people who might not be bleeding hearts but understand that the homeless problem is largely that of mental health and addiction, and understand the need for resources and effort to help them. But having these guys out in public trashing everything and creating general nuisance and safety issues for the community at large has turned the sentiment into "get these people the hell out of here". 

Every time I drive down Ben White, it makes me a little less sentimental and bittersweet about moving out of the city I was born and raised and consider "my city". I'd actually appreciate if they'd set up in my street for these last couple of days so I don't have any second guessing of the decision.

I think @Bozo_Casanova is one of the better posters on this site when it comes to politics and governmental logistics, but no amount of parsing and explaining government nuance is going to change the fact that you just can't have roving meth camps within a well-struck six iron of schools and foot traffic areas that families use. You just can't. Period. 

Do you not understand that a high quality residential community programming for thew permanent homeless population is the literal opposite of a roving meth camp? 

 

No offense, but it's always the people who complain the most about the homeless problem who oppose solutions that work most strongly. 

Edited August 4, 2020 by Bozo_Casanova

[crash_davis 23470]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

No offense, but it's always the people who complain the most about the homeless problem who oppose solutions that work most strongly. 

Honest requests and questions. Convince why I should give a shit spending tens of thousands for that couple in the tent shooting up in the video? How are we going to to fix thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of shitheads like them? How long will it take? What demands are you going to make of the recipients receiving said aid? How much is it going to cost per shithead? And most importantly, when can Austin tax payers stop spending to treat every asshat vagrant who shows up in our city limits?

[Orange&White 5573]

15 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's not a money problem. We don't spend the money well.  It's a zoning and program design problem combined with a culture problem. 

None of Dallas, San Antonio and HOUSTON seem to have the same issues (or even close for that matter) we have here. Are you trying to tell me that it is just simply because those places just have better zoning and design better programs? And if that is the case, why the fuck are we not mimicking those programs because they appear to be doing it on a fraction of the costs that we are failing miserably with.

Edited August 4, 2020 by Orange&White

[BradInATX 9208]

14 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's not a money problem. We don't spend the money well.  It's a zoning and program design problem combined with a culture problem. Your post is a good example. I'm literally talking about cost effective, self-sustaining programs that work and get people off the street, and you guys are like RAGERAGERAGERAGE. Why not bitch about all the money we spend jailing people for being ill?

Do you not understand that a high quality residential community programming for thew permanent homeless population is the literal opposite of a roving meth camp? 

 

No offense, but it's always the people who complain the most about the homeless problem who oppose solutions that work most strongly. 

 

I wasn't really commenting on any particular policy, just that you spend a lot of time defending the city's approach. My comment was simply that if you have drugged out people with mental issues in high density around elementary schools, local leadership has failed. There is no wiggle room there. What they do going forward, I'll let you and people more knowledgeable than me debate. But letting it get to that point is an abject failure.

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

5 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

Honest requests and questions. Convince why I should give a shit spending tens of thousands for that couple in the tent shooting up in the video? How are we going to to fix thousands, perhaps tens of thousands of shitheads like them? How long will it take? What demands are you going to make of the recipients receiving said aid? How much is it going to cost per shithead? And most importantly, when can Austin tax payers stop spending to treat every asshat vagrant who shows up in our city limits?

 You can't criminalize your way out of spending money. Running a county jail isn't free. Wipe the spittle off your computer and go visit Community First, then compare it to what's under Ben White. The Ben White system is what you are advocating. 

Just now, Orange&White said:

None of Dallas, San Antonio and HOUSTON seem to have the same issues (or even close for that matter) we have here. Are you trying to tell me that it is just simply because those places just have better zoning and design?

Yes. They have better land use regimes and better program design.  Also San Antonio. And they don't have the same penny-wise, pound foolish small-city myopia about solving big-picture issues that we do. I'm not saying they do a great job, but whether it's homeless, transit, or infrastructure, they do better than we do. 

[Orange&White 5573]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

 

Yes. They have better land use regimes and better program design.  Also San Antonio. And they don't have the same penny-wise, pound foolish small-city myopia about solving big-picture issues that we do. I'm not saying they do a great job, but whether it's homeless, transit, or infrastructure, they do better than we do. 

Then, according to you, the blueprint is fucking there. Why did Adler go and visit it and not adopt it right away? The first thing I can tell you about the difference between San Antonio and Austin is that they 100% don't let the homeless panhandle and harass the citizens. That's the first thing that needs to be adopted here.

[dcar00 14986]

35 minutes ago, Orange&White said:

If the line item got to $1B a year, you can be sure the voters would eventually put an end to it.

not in city of austin.  you can be assured of that.

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

3 minutes ago, BradInATX said:

 

I wasn't really commenting on any particular policy, just that you spend a lot of time defending the city's approach. My comment was simply that if you have drugged out people with mental issues in high density around elementary schools, local leadership has failed. There is no wiggle room there. What they do going forward, I'll let you and people more knowledgeable than me debate. But letting it get to that point is an abject failure.

I've never defended the city's approach. I think it's a disaster. That being said, I don't think camping should be a crime. I do think it should be highly restricted and that alternatives should be available. 

[landman 564]

1 minute ago, Orange&White said:

Then, according to you, the blueprint is fucking there. Why did Adler go and visit it and not adopt it right away? The first thing I can tell you about the difference between San Antonio and Austin is that they 100% don't let the homeless panhandle and harass the citizens. That's the first thing that needs to be adopted here.

San Antonio bought bus tickets for homeless and sent them to Austin when the camping back got thrown out last year.

[Orange&White 5573]

Just now, landman said:

San Antonio bought bus tickets for homeless and sent them to Austin when the camping back got thrown out last year.

That's just good program design.

[dcar00 14986]

32 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

Asshats in this city seem to approve every feel good bond that comes across their screens on election day. It will never end.

They should pass a law that says you can only vote on bonds/issues that is funded from property taxes if you actually own property. 

well sure but that would never happen.   people will just decide to move, which, you know, is like your right, man...

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

1 minute ago, Orange&White said:

Then, according to you, the blueprint is fucking there. Why did Adler go and visit it and not adopt it right away? The first thing I can tell you about the difference between San Antonio and Austin is that they 100% don't let the homeless panhandle and harass the citizens. That's the first thing that needs to be adopted here.

The mayor can't even pass a modest reform of our 1984 zoning code with a clear mandate. This is a big complex issue and he's too much of a consensus manager to work with those. 

[dcar00 14986]

2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I've never defended the city's approach. I think it's a disaster. That being said, I don't think camping should be a crime. I do think it should be highly restricted and that alternatives should be available. 

how do you highly restrict "camping"?

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

Just now, dcar00 said:

how do you highly restrict "camping"?

What do you mean, how to restrict. You prohibit it in certain categories of places. For me that would be a pretty long list. I touched on it earlier in the thread - parks, sidewalks, near bus stops and schools, anywhere downtown, utility easements, along waterways, in public ROW like highways, etc.  

[dcar00 14986]

also, is it me or do the homeless folks we see seem inordinately white and some black.  rarely see hispanic/asian/indian.  at least while driving around.

[dcar00 14986]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

What do you mean, how to restrict. You prohibit it in certain categories of places. For me that would be a pretty long list. I touched on it earlier in the thread - parks, sidewalks, near bus stops and schools, anywhere downtown, utility easements, along waterways, in public ROW like highways, etc.  

ok maybe better question is where would you allow it?

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

Just now, dcar00 said:

also, is it me or do the homeless folks we see seem inordinately white and some black.  rarely see hispanic/asian/indian.  at least while driving around.

It's a community values thing - ethnic communities with strong familial ties with cultures of multi-generational housing tend to have fewer folks fall through the cracks. 

[Mappable 37]

Homeowner should take possession of the greenbelt behind his house and line the perimeter with Concertina Wire.

$91.58 for a 492' roll on Amazon.

 

 

[crash_davis 23470]

17 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

 You can't criminalize your way out of spending money. Running a county jail isn't free. Wipe the spittle off your computer and go visit Community First, then compare it to what's under Ben White. The Ben White system is what you are advocating. 

You didn't answer a single question. Ben White is a fucking mess. If that's the model program then we are fucked. And again, how long are we going to have to keep feeding and housing every asshat who shows up in the city limits?

You think every tax payer as a blank check book with limitless good will and who is willing to overlook the shitholes in parts of the city that the homeless caused. Enough is enough. I don't want to criminalize them, I want to kick their asses out. Make them feel unwelcomed. Constantly tear down their tent cities and confiscate the stolen shit. Take away their clothes, their tents, their sleeping stuff, they'll move away.

Edited August 4, 2020 by crash_davis

[dcar00 14986]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's a community values thing - ethnic communities with strong familial ties with cultures of multi-generational housing tend to have fewer folks fall through the cracks. 

so its the damn white guys that are lazy...who knew.

[dcar00 14986]

3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

What do you mean, how to restrict. You prohibit it in certain categories of places. For me that would be a pretty long list. I touched on it earlier in the thread - parks, sidewalks, near bus stops and schools, anywhere downtown, utility easements, along waterways, in public ROW like highways, etc.  

why anywhere downtown but not anywhere city of austin?

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

Just now, crash_davis said:

You didn't answer a single question. Ben White is a fucking mess. If that's the model program then we are fucked. And again, how long are we going to have to keep feeding and housing every asshat who shows up in the city limits?

You think every tax payer as a blank check book with expendable good will and who is willing to overlook the shitholes in parts of the city that the homeless caused. Enough is enough. I don't want to criminalize them, I want to kick their asses out. Make them feel unwelcomed. Constantly tear down their tent cities and confiscate the stolen shit. Take away their clothes, their tents, their sleeping stuff, they'll move away.

I can't answer your question when the premise is wrong. 

[dcar00 14986]

2 minutes ago, crash_davis said:

You didn't answer a single question. Ben White is a fucking mess. If that's the model program then we are fucked. And again, how long are we going to have to keep feeding and housing every asshat who shows up in the city limits?

You think every tax payer as a blank check book with expendable good will and who is willing to overlook the shitholes in parts of the city that the homeless caused. Enough is enough. I don't want to criminalize them, I want to kick their asses out. Make them feel unwelcomed. Constantly tear down their tent cities and confiscate the stolen shit. Take away their clothes, their tents, their sleeping stuff, they'll move away.

well you apparently aren't on the "save just one life" train...

[crash_davis 23470]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

I can't answer your question when the premise is wrong. 

you mean you can't answer the question because anything the city does is just a fucking band-aid and will continue into perpetuity.

[dcar00 14986]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

It's a community values thing - ethnic communities with strong familial ties with cultures of multi-generational housing tend to have fewer folks fall through the cracks. 

or maybe those folks want to work?

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

3 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

why anywhere downtown but not anywhere city of austin?

Several reasons, but the biggest one is that there's virtually no place downtown where they wouldn't be blocking foot traffic, on a sidewalk, or in a park. It also puts them in close contact with the criminal element, entertainment venues, etc. It's also too close to the jail. 

[dcar00 14986]

Just now, Bozo_Casanova said:

Several reasons, but the biggest one is that there's virtually no place downtown where they wouldn't be blocking foot traffic, on a sidewalk, or in a park. It also puts them in close contact with the criminal element, entertainment venues, etc. It's also too close to the jail. 

so people in downtown get no homeless around them but people in the outer areas gonna have to deal with it, right?

[Bozo_Casanova 26897]

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

so people in downtown get no homeless around them but people in the outer areas gonna have to deal with it, right?

In what sense would they be "dealing with it" as restricted above?

[BradInATX 9208]

13 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

What do you mean, how to restrict. You prohibit it in certain categories of places. For me that would be a pretty long list. I touched on it earlier in the thread - parks, sidewalks, near bus stops and schools, anywhere downtown, utility easements, along waterways, in public ROW like highways, etc.  

I guess it's hard to reconcile this with the fact that you don't want to push them a bit out of the urban core. With that list, you pretty much have to. 

[MC Fresh Breath 4075]

Left Windsor Park when  I moved to Oregon, so this used to hit close to home.

 

[dcar00 14986]

Just now, BradInATX said:

I guess it's hard to reconcile this with the fact that you don't want to push them a bit out of the urban core. With that list, you pretty much have to. 

exactly.  

[dcar00 14986]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

In what sense would they be "dealing with it" as restricted above?

you say you don't want to eliminate camping but you want to eliminate it anywhere downtown.  why not just eliminate camping in COA?

Edited August 4, 2020 by dcar00

[Orange&White 5573]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

In what sense would they be "dealing with it" as restricted above?

Because no where in your restrictions does it keep away the massive piles of trash and illegal drug use and harassment of the people that live near it.