Austin Homeless Free for All Ordinance

[washparkhorn 9939]

3 minutes ago, MAUFRAIS said:

https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2013/10/23/community-mental-health-kennedy

Out of the fat (inordinate amount of institutionalizations) and into the frying pan (put the institutionalized out of the streets).

[Ghost of LL 15531]

4 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

If the perp is violently mentally ill, he should be institutionalized.

What happened to the process of involuntary commitments?

Irrespective of what is going on with the offender--homelessness, mental illness, just really pissed off at the world--the police need to enforce the law.  And that means arresting lawbreakers rather than saying, "eh, what's the point?".

Involuntary commitments became very difficult as a result of reforms during the 60s and 70s.  And, in fairness, the system did need to be reformed because it was being abused.  I'm not saying that One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was a documentary, but it was rooted in reality.  There were a lot of people out there who would have their problematic relatives involuntarily committed on very flimsy bases.

But I think it's very clear that the pendulum has swung too far the other way.  There should be a mechanism for committing people who pose a danger to themselves or others.

But the real problem here is that there's nowhere to put them.  The State of Texas has invested absolutely no money in the MHMR system.  We need several new state hospitals with thousands of beds in each.  And there's absolutely no fucking way the Legislature is going to fund that.  They'll just pass a statewide camping ban and wash their hands of it.

[dcar00 14181]

21 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

I don't even regard this as a homeless problem.  That's a policing problem.

It really doesn't matter whether the perpetrator has a home or not. For all we know, he does have a permanent or semi-permanent place to live.  But that's not really germane to the issue.

The issue is that he committed a violent assault.  And the cops did absolutely nothing because . . . I don't know, paperwork?

And it's not like this is a rare occurrence.  We've seen at least a dozen of these stories on this thread, and I've heard a dozen more offline.  This is APD's modus operandi.  It's an absolutely broken fucking agency.  It can't be categorized as a "law-enforcement" agency because, fundamentally, it's not in the business of enforcing the law.

agreed it is a policing/manpower problem but I don't believe APD handles it really any differently than most large cities.  its also why many cities will by bus tickets for homeless folks, especially if they are causing trouble.  they are just playing percentages/odds pretty much in all cases.

[Armybrat 40832]

18 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Irrespective of what is going on with the offender--homelessness, mental illness, just really pissed off at the world--the police need to enforce the law.  And that means arresting lawbreakers rather than saying, "eh, what's the point?".

Involuntary commitments became very difficult as a result of reforms during the 60s and 70s.  And, in fairness, the system did need to be reformed because it was being abused.  I'm not saying that One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was a documentary, but it was rooted in reality.  There were a lot of people out there who would have their problematic relatives involuntarily committed on very flimsy bases.

But I think it's very clear that the pendulum has swung too far the other way.  There should be a mechanism for committing people who pose a danger to themselves or others.

But the real problem here is that there's nowhere to put them.  The State of Texas has invested absolutely no money in the MHMR system.  We need several new state hospitals with thousands of beds in each.  And there's absolutely no fucking way the Legislature is going to fund that.  They'll just pass a statewide camping ban and wash their hands of it.

I’m well aware of what reform was needed 60 years ago, as my brother worked as an attendant on the criminal ward at the Austin State Hospital for two years. The horror stories he related were were very eye-opening. But as you said, the swinging pendulum has created serious unintended consequences.

There should be some common ground reached between the advocates for both sides of the issue. It is my understanding that the State already funded the expansion of some of its facilities including the one in Austin.

[Armybrat 40832]

21 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

agreed it is a policing/manpower problem but I don't believe APD handles it really any differently than most large cities.  its also why many cities will by bus tickets for homeless folks, especially if they are causing trouble.  they are just playing percentages/odds pretty much in all cases.

We can hardly blame the small cities & towns, as many of them don’t have the resources or facilities to deal with the problem of their own nutters.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Armybrat

[faps 806]

12 hours ago, B00M said:

What about an air horn mounted to a drone... Or balloons full of piss from above? Once they retreat into the greenbelts en mass, how do we make that suck too? 

Air drop piss on the greenbelts with that DC10 tanker jet?

[dcar00 14181]

11 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

We can hardly blame the small cities & towns, as many of them don’t have the resources or facilities to deal with the problem of their own nutters.

Oh I'm not blaming small cities.  It happens with cities both large, medium and small.  If I am a city and I get the guy to get on a bus to Austin, what are the chances/odds he's coming back?

[dcar00 14181]

12 hours ago, B00M said:

What about an air horn mounted to a drone... Or balloons full of piss from above? Once they retreat into the greenbelts en mass, how do we make that suck too? 

[Armybrat 40832]

I recall a story related by my cop nephew about a homeless guy he picked up one morning in Kerrville. Seems that the dude had been in Fredericksburg where those cops put him on the bus to Kerrville. 
So the Kerrville cops pooled their money and bought him a bus ticket back to Fredericksburg that afternoon.
I wonder how many milage points the fellow eventually accumulated?

[TKthunder2 4988]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

I don't even regard this as a homeless problem.  That's a policing problem.

It really doesn't matter whether the perpetrator has a home or not. For all we know, he does have a permanent or semi-permanent place to live.  But that's not really germane to the issue.

The issue is that he committed a violent assault.  And the cops did absolutely nothing because . . . I don't know, paperwork?

And it's not like this is a rare occurrence.  We've seen at least a dozen of these stories on this thread, and I've heard a dozen more offline.  This is APD's modus operandi.  It's an absolutely broken fucking agency.  It can't be categorized as a "law-enforcement" agency because, fundamentally, it's not in the business of enforcing the law.

You’re right, it’s about paperwork, they arrest him take him to booking, put him through a psych eval, comes back that he is mentally ill, the DA/judge will drop all charges and release him with a pamphlet on mental illness and a referral (which will likely never be used).  The process of arresting and charging him takes 2-3 hours so that time they are away from their post and other officers (who are already stretched thin) have to cover which make for long response times and more pissed off citizens.

I’m not advocating for giving homeless a free pass, but with already limited resources now stretched thin due to budget cuts and canceling two cadet classes, APD has to make choices that will ultimately piss of someone.  It’s just not a simple issue to solve without throwing more more at it.

Still not arresting someone for violence is beyond stupid.

[MAUFRAIS 6623]

5 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I recall a story related by my cop nephew about a homeless guy he picked up one morning in Kerrville. Seems that the dude had been in Fredericksburg where those cops put him on the bus to Kerrville. 
So the Kerrville cops pooled their money and bought him a bus ticket back to Fredericksburg that afternoon.
I wonder how many milage points the fellow eventually accumulated?

hobo volleyball

[Guest Lobo]

14 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I recall a story related by my cop nephew about a homeless guy he picked up one morning in Kerrville. Seems that the dude had been in Fredericksburg where those cops put him on the bus to Kerrville. 
So the Kerrville cops pooled their money and bought him a bus ticket back to Fredericksburg that afternoon.
I wonder how many milage points the fellow eventually accumulated?

And did he ever return?

no he never returned.

and his fate is still unlearned 

poor Charlie 

he may ride forever on the bus of Texas 

he’s the man who never returned. 

[gyroprotagonist 2592]

19 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

I recall a story related by my cop nephew about a homeless guy he picked up one morning in Kerrville. Seems that the dude had been in Fredericksburg where those cops put him on the bus to Kerrville. 
So the Kerrville cops pooled their money and bought him a bus ticket back to Fredericksburg that afternoon.
I wonder how many milage points the fellow eventually accumulated?

put bob wheeler in charge of bus transportation.  maybe their arson would be forged of a hotter fire

[Armybrat 40832]

9 minutes ago, gyroprotagonist said:

put bob wheeler in charge of bus transportation.  maybe their arson would be forged of a hotter fire

I recall that phantom bus episode of his.

He disappeared quicker than David Copperfield could.

[dcar00 14181]

23 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

You’re right, it’s about paperwork, they arrest him take him to booking, put him through a psych eval, comes back that he is mentally ill, the DA/judge will drop all charges and release him with a pamphlet on mental illness and a referral (which will likely never be used).  The process of arresting and charging him takes 2-3 hours so that time they are away from their post and other officers (who are already stretched thin) have to cover which make for long response times and more pissed off citizens.

I’m not advocating for giving homeless a free pass, but with already limited resources now stretched thin due to budget cuts and canceling two cadet classes, APD has to make choices that will ultimately piss of someone.  It’s just not a simple issue to solve without throwing more more at it.

Still not arresting someone for violence is beyond stupid.

which is why we will still have people living in tents along the highways and under the overpasses still 2 years from now, even if prop B passes.  the defund the police is perfect timing for Adler and cronies to say we don't have the resources.  Social Worker Force(or whatever they will want to call them) won't be able to force homeless to move from where they are.

I fully believe the downtown area will be cleaned up by Adler, because they will prioritize it for their real estate buddy/grift but none of the other areas will be.

It is all so predictable and IMO somewhat planned.

[Ghost of LL 15531]

4 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

which is why we will still have people living in tents along the highways and under the overpasses still 2 years from now, even if prop B passes.  the defund the police is perfect timing for Adler and cronies to say we don't have the resources.  Social Worker Force(or whatever they will want to call them) won't be able to force homeless to move from where they are.

I fully believe the downtown area will be cleaned up by Adler, because they will prioritize it for their real estate buddy/grift but none of the other areas will be.

It is all so predictable and IMO somewhat planned.

Don't give me this "it's-all-because-Defund-the-Police-cut-our-budget" nonsense.  This refusal to actually enforce the law has been going on for a very long time with APD.  It's actually part of the impetus behind cutting their budget.  If they're not going to enforce the law on the basis that "they're mentally ill, so they're going to get cut loose anyway," then it makes sense to transfer some of their budget to agencies that will deal with the mental-illness problem.

I understand the calculation that goes into the exercise of discretion as to whether to arrest.  In particular, I think it makes some sense when talking about petty property crime.  But that's not we're talking about in a lot of these instances.  We're talking about actual or threatened violent crime.

The refusal to arrest a guy who just threatened or committed a violent crime isn't a matter of expedience or efficiency.  It's just laziness and give-up.  Don't tell me that cops can't make time to arrest a violent criminal because he may get cut loose by a judge later on when I see plenty of cops making all the time in the world to chat amongst themselves, pull over drivers for minor traffic infractions, and harass black people who happen to find themselves in the wrong neighborhood.  It's not that they can't find the time to arrest the mentally-ill violent criminal.  It's that it's the shitty part of the job that they'd rather not do.

We can pass Prop B all day long.  We almost certainly will.  But you're point is completely correct--it won't make a shit.  And that's entirely because we have a completely broken and incapable police force.

Give the broken and incapable police force more money?  Yeah, I don't think so.

[Deej 76759]

2 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

cow milking training centers?

 

[Sandman 3403]

53 minutes ago, TKthunder2 said:

The process of arresting and charging him takes 2-3 hours so that time they are away from their post and other officers (who are already stretched thin) have to cover which make for long response times and more pissed off citizens.

Do you really think those cops were going to do some hard-nosed police work in those 2-3 hours and not just play grab-ass or hide in an alley? Because I sure don't. If anything, they'd probably just give out some bullshit tickets and ruin the day for some taxpayer.

[yoladu 4093]

not saying we don't currently have a problem, but i have lived in Austin since the mid 80s.

I feel like there were more panhandling homeless on the Drag in 1986 than there is today.

I know: ancedotal, feelings, etc.

[Hate 20108]

I’m well aware of what reform was needed 60 years ago, as my brother worked as an attendant on the criminal ward at the Austin State Hospital for two years. The horror stories he related were were very eye-opening. But as you said, the swinging pendulum has created serious unintended consequences.
There should be some common ground reached between the advocates for both sides of the issue. It is my understanding that the State already funded the expansion of some of its facilities including the one in Austin.

Let all of the “criminals” in jail on drug charges out and replace them with the homeless/mentally ill. Win win for everyone.

[Snake Diggity 4621]

3 minutes ago, yoladu said:

not saying we don't currently have a problem, but i have lived in Austin since the mid 80s.

I feel like there were more panhandling homeless on the Drag in 1986 than there is today.

I know: ancedotal, feelings, etc.

Maybe, but go a little further downtown or on Ben White.  It’s an undeniable crisis.

[yoladu 4093]

1 minute ago, Snake Diggity said:

Maybe, but go a little further downtown or on Ben White.  It’s an undeniable crisis.

Ben White?! I don't go South of the river. sheesh.

i hear you though.

[Teamdirtyleg 1060]

2 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

i've never understood why UT doesn't beef up UTPD and make life very annoying for any homeless dudes between 29th, mlk, lamar and i35 stay outta malibu style.

while i'm at it, i don't understand why our landscaping isn't country club level.  like we've got more money than the fucking vatican or whatever, yet that fountain at the end of the east mall has been broken for a decade.

A note on landscaping.  My daughter just did a college tour at TCU.  They said there is an endowment specifically for landscaping and they pull up the flowers every 6 days and replant fresh ones.  That’s what they said,  i have questions.  But regardless of the actual working of the endowment the campus is apparently beautiful (wife and daughter went; no pics), UT needs to get with it on landscaping.  Albino squirrels aren’t enough

Edited April 29, 2021 by Teamdirtyleg

[DonkeyCigars 144]

21 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Don't give me this "it's-all-because-Defund-the-Police-cut-our-budget" nonsense.  This refusal to actually enforce the law has been going on for a very long time with APD.  It's actually part of the impetus behind cutting their budget.  If they're not going to enforce the law on the basis that "they're mentally ill, so they're going to get cut loose anyway," then it makes sense to transfer some of their budget to agencies that will deal with the mental-illness problem.

I understand the calculation that goes into the exercise of discretion as to whether to arrest.  In particular, I think it makes some sense when talking about petty property crime.  But that's not we're talking about in a lot of these instances.  We're talking about actual or threatened violent crime.

The refusal to arrest a guy who just threatened or committed a violent crime isn't a matter of expedience or efficiency.  It's just laziness and give-up.  Don't tell me that cops can't make time to arrest a violent criminal because he may get cut loose by a judge later on when I see plenty of cops making all the time in the world to chat amongst themselves, pull over drivers for minor traffic infractions, and harass black people who happen to find themselves in the wrong neighborhood.  It's not that they can't find the time to arrest the mentally-ill violent criminal.  It's that it's the shitty part of the job that they'd rather not do.

We can pass Prop B all day long.  We almost certainly will.  But you're point is completely correct--it won't make a shit.  And that's entirely because we have a completely broken and incapable police force.

Give the broken and incapable police force more money?  Yeah, I don't think so.

Seems like a simple management fix, which makes me think the problem is in the management of these people.

"You manage what you measure" is not just a saying-- and if "quotas" can work for speeding tickets or whatever, why wouldn't it work here?

[yoladu 4093]

2 hours ago, MAUFRAIS said:

while i'm at it, i don't understand why our landscaping isn't country club level.  like we've got more money than the fucking vatican or whatever, yet that fountain at the end of the east mall has been broken for a decade.

this could be a whole other thread.

I kind of feel like they gave up on the West Mall entrance off Guadalupe as well.

[gsoda3 3254]

9 minutes ago, Teamdirtyleg said:

A note on landscaping.  My daughter just did a college tour at TCU.  They said there is an endowment specifically for landscaping and they pull up the flowers every 6 days and replant fresh ones.  That’s what they said,  i have questions.  But regardless of the actual working of the endowment, UT need to get with it on landscaping.  Albino squirrels aren’t enough

 

6 minutes ago, yoladu said:

this could be a whole other thread.

I kind of feel like they gave up on the West Mall entrance off Guadalupe as well.

dfw-ites care much more about landscaping than austinites.  look at the middle - upper class homes in dfw vs the middle - upper class homes in austin.  there's a drastic difference.  maybe it bleeds over to the university campuses.

[Armybrat 40832]

8 minutes ago, yoladu said:

this could be a whole other thread.

I kind of feel like they gave up on the West Mall entrance off Guadalupe as well.

You mean they never cleaned it up after I left in 1964?

[Deej 76759]

13 minutes ago, Teamdirtyleg said:

UT needs to get with it on landscaping.  Albino squirrels aren’t enough

The grackles will just shit all over everything.

[dcar00 14181]

36 minutes ago, Ghost of LL said:

Don't give me this "it's-all-because-Defund-the-Police-cut-our-budget" nonsense.  This refusal to actually enforce the law has been going on for a very long time with APD.  It's actually part of the impetus behind cutting their budget.  If they're not going to enforce the law on the basis that "they're mentally ill, so they're going to get cut loose anyway," then it makes sense to transfer some of their budget to agencies that will deal with the mental-illness problem.

I understand the calculation that goes into the exercise of discretion as to whether to arrest.  In particular, I think it makes some sense when talking about petty property crime.  But that's not we're talking about in a lot of these instances.  We're talking about actual or threatened violent crime.

The refusal to arrest a guy who just threatened or committed a violent crime isn't a matter of expedience or efficiency.  It's just laziness and give-up.  Don't tell me that cops can't make time to arrest a violent criminal because he may get cut loose by a judge later on when I see plenty of cops making all the time in the world to chat amongst themselves, pull over drivers for minor traffic infractions, and harass black people who happen to find themselves in the wrong neighborhood.  It's not that they can't find the time to arrest the mentally-ill violent criminal.  It's that it's the shitty part of the job that they'd rather not do.

We can pass Prop B all day long.  We almost certainly will.  But you're point is completely correct--it won't make a shit.  And that's entirely because we have a completely broken and incapable police force.

Give the broken and incapable police force more money?  Yeah, I don't think so.

sure but the city leaders attitudes and priorities have something to do with that as well...so don't give me that its "all the police force's" issue.

[washparkhorn 9939]

San Diego created a Homeless Court in an effort to not make the problems associated with homelessness worse. It is still coercive (get treatment/help or go to jail), but the resources are available and offered.  

Spoiler

Homelessness isn’t a crime.

It’s a common refrain among advocates and even the Department of Justice, which said so in an Idaho case last year.

“Our society, our Constitution doesn’t allow for people to be arbitrarily told what to do and where to go,” said Eric Tars, senior attorney for the D.C.-based National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty.

Yet we hear about homeless San Diegans receiving tickets, getting caught up in encampment sweeps and being ordered to move along though they seemingly have nowhere else to go.

I talked to attorneys, police officers, experts and activists about what the law allows – and doesn’t allow – and how those laws work in practice on San Diego streets.

Their message was clear: Homeless people have the same constitutional rights as anyone else, and that means working with them to get off the street is the best way to get them off the streets.

. . . 

Two Criminal Justice System Approaches
San Diego’s got two programs that encourage homeless folks dealing with chronic criminal offenses to get off the streets but they only apply to people caught in repeated drug or alcohol offenses.

One is the Serial Inebriate Program, a county, city and nonprofit cooperative available after a person is taken to a sobering center six times for public drunkenness. Police say these folks are often homeless.

After a person is booked in jail and arraigned on those charges, they’re asked whether they’d like to enroll in a program run by the nonprofit Mental Health Systems and avoid jail time.

If they agree, they’re transported from jail directly to a treatment program that often lasts several months and given temporary housing while they’re enrolled.

Officer John Liening, who helped create the program, has said the program’s changed many lives.

More recently, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith has introduced a new intervention that aims to pair chronic misdemeanor drug offenders with case managers and housing for up to two years. Once they’re offered the option, offenders can avoid jail time if they agree to sign up.

“Rather than put them through the revolving door one more time, we will offer them a spot in an intensive drug treatment program and a tailored housing placement – all overseen by a case manager who will keep on top of their situation and keep them on a track to success,” Goldsmith said in May.

Goldsmith wants to secure at least 28 beds to support the program.

Court-Ordered Moves
Courts hold more power to force homeless people to change their behavior than police.

As part of a plea agreement or sentencing, folks who’ve been charged with illegal lodging, encroachment or another offense are sometimes asked if they’d be willing to stay away from an area. Sometimes they’re asked to do that in exchange for avoiding fines or jail time.

Binder said these stay-away orders are common in San Diego and can cover large areas.

Dreher said he’s encountered cases where the stay-away orders included areas where the homeless might want to access services.

And showing up in those areas can come with consequences.

“Once you agree to them and you violate it, it becomes a crime,” Dreher said.

Binder and Dreher both said stay-away orders don’t help end a person’s homelessness or even effectively move a homeless person out of a neighborhood.

“It’s a like a leaf-blower justice,” Binder said. “You are essentially moving the problem homelessness represents from one block to the next.”

San Diego County courts did get another tool this April that can remove a person from the streets, at least for a time.

The county recently implemented Laura’s Law, a measure that gives judges the power to order mandated treatment for a mentally ill person – homeless or not – for at least 180 days.

But Laura’s Law comes with strict criteria and requires county officials to conduct in-person evaluations and suggest the person voluntarily enter a facility before they make the case to the Superior Court.

Most homeless folks who resist going into shelter wouldn’t be eligible for this intervention, said Piedad Garcia, a deputy director in the county’s Health and Human services Agency.

If they aren’t eligible or a judge doesn’t grant the order, the county can get permission to hold a person for up to three days using what’s known as a 5150 hold.

Still, that requires proof the person is a serious danger to himself or others. That’s a high bar, too.

The Easiest (and Hardest) Way to Get Someone Off the Street
Garcia and a slew of experts I talked to emphasized that the government has little power to force a homeless person to do what they don’t want to do, whether that’s walk into a shelter or move into an apartment.

The best solution, they say, is to figure out what works for that person.

That means spending weeks or months getting to know a person and learning about her needs rather than pressuring her through law enforcement action, said Steve Berg of the D.C.-based National Alliance to End Homelessness.

“It doesn’t really get the results that you want,” Berg said. “If shelter provides things that a homeless person thinks are valuable then you don’t have to force them. They’ll go.”

The county’s new Project One for All initiative is the largest San Diego program thus far to acknowledge the need to invest upfront time with homeless folks who are the hardest to reach.

The county plan aims to persuade 1,250 homeless San Diegans with serious mental illnesses to get off the street over the next two years.

Garcia said the county’s initial contracts call for an average of three to five months of outreach per client.

“We know now that in order to engage people who are resistant to services, resistant to treatment, you need to take the time to engage them,” Garcia said.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/nonprofits/authorities-cant-force-the-homeless-off-the-street-heres-what-they-can-do/

[dcar00 14181]

1 minute ago, washparkhorn said:

San Diego created a Homeless Court in an effort to not make the problems associated with homelessness worse. It is still coercive (get treatment/help or go to jail), but the resources are available and offered.  

  Reveal hidden contents

Homelessness isn’t a crime.

It’s a common refrain among advocates and even the Department of Justice, which said so in an Idaho case last year.

“Our society, our Constitution doesn’t allow for people to be arbitrarily told what to do and where to go,” said Eric Tars, senior attorney for the D.C.-based National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty.

Yet we hear about homeless San Diegans receiving tickets, getting caught up in encampment sweeps and being ordered to move along though they seemingly have nowhere else to go.

I talked to attorneys, police officers, experts and activists about what the law allows – and doesn’t allow – and how those laws work in practice on San Diego streets.

Their message was clear: Homeless people have the same constitutional rights as anyone else, and that means working with them to get off the street is the best way to get them off the streets.

. . . 

Two Criminal Justice System Approaches
San Diego’s got two programs that encourage homeless folks dealing with chronic criminal offenses to get off the streets but they only apply to people caught in repeated drug or alcohol offenses.

One is the Serial Inebriate Program, a county, city and nonprofit cooperative available after a person is taken to a sobering center six times for public drunkenness. Police say these folks are often homeless.

After a person is booked in jail and arraigned on those charges, they’re asked whether they’d like to enroll in a program run by the nonprofit Mental Health Systems and avoid jail time.

If they agree, they’re transported from jail directly to a treatment program that often lasts several months and given temporary housing while they’re enrolled.

Officer John Liening, who helped create the program, has said the program’s changed many lives.

More recently, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith has introduced a new intervention that aims to pair chronic misdemeanor drug offenders with case managers and housing for up to two years. Once they’re offered the option, offenders can avoid jail time if they agree to sign up.

“Rather than put them through the revolving door one more time, we will offer them a spot in an intensive drug treatment program and a tailored housing placement – all overseen by a case manager who will keep on top of their situation and keep them on a track to success,” Goldsmith said in May.

Goldsmith wants to secure at least 28 beds to support the program.

Court-Ordered Moves
Courts hold more power to force homeless people to change their behavior than police.

As part of a plea agreement or sentencing, folks who’ve been charged with illegal lodging, encroachment or another offense are sometimes asked if they’d be willing to stay away from an area. Sometimes they’re asked to do that in exchange for avoiding fines or jail time.

Binder said these stay-away orders are common in San Diego and can cover large areas.

Dreher said he’s encountered cases where the stay-away orders included areas where the homeless might want to access services.

And showing up in those areas can come with consequences.

“Once you agree to them and you violate it, it becomes a crime,” Dreher said.

Binder and Dreher both said stay-away orders don’t help end a person’s homelessness or even effectively move a homeless person out of a neighborhood.

“It’s a like a leaf-blower justice,” Binder said. “You are essentially moving the problem homelessness represents from one block to the next.”

San Diego County courts did get another tool this April that can remove a person from the streets, at least for a time.

The county recently implemented Laura’s Law, a measure that gives judges the power to order mandated treatment for a mentally ill person – homeless or not – for at least 180 days.

But Laura’s Law comes with strict criteria and requires county officials to conduct in-person evaluations and suggest the person voluntarily enter a facility before they make the case to the Superior Court.

Most homeless folks who resist going into shelter wouldn’t be eligible for this intervention, said Piedad Garcia, a deputy director in the county’s Health and Human services Agency.

If they aren’t eligible or a judge doesn’t grant the order, the county can get permission to hold a person for up to three days using what’s known as a 5150 hold.

Still, that requires proof the person is a serious danger to himself or others. That’s a high bar, too.

The Easiest (and Hardest) Way to Get Someone Off the Street
Garcia and a slew of experts I talked to emphasized that the government has little power to force a homeless person to do what they don’t want to do, whether that’s walk into a shelter or move into an apartment.

The best solution, they say, is to figure out what works for that person.

That means spending weeks or months getting to know a person and learning about her needs rather than pressuring her through law enforcement action, said Steve Berg of the D.C.-based National Alliance to End Homelessness.

“It doesn’t really get the results that you want,” Berg said. “If shelter provides things that a homeless person thinks are valuable then you don’t have to force them. They’ll go.”

The county’s new Project One for All initiative is the largest San Diego program thus far to acknowledge the need to invest upfront time with homeless folks who are the hardest to reach.

The county plan aims to persuade 1,250 homeless San Diegans with serious mental illnesses to get off the street over the next two years.

Garcia said the county’s initial contracts call for an average of three to five months of outreach per client.

“We know now that in order to engage people who are resistant to services, resistant to treatment, you need to take the time to engage them,” Garcia said.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/nonprofits/authorities-cant-force-the-homeless-off-the-street-heres-what-they-can-do/

I would be for streamlining the process of dealing with vagrancy and loitering

[Teamdirtyleg 1060]

12 minutes ago, Deej said:

The grackles will just shit all over everything.

Points for calling them grackles and not crows or blackbirds.  It always annoys.  Since I was a kid, I was always a bird nerd. 

Edited April 29, 2021 by Teamdirtyleg

[Teamdirtyleg 1060]

16 minutes ago, gsoda3 said:

 

dfw-ites care much more about landscaping than austinites.  look at the middle - upper class homes in dfw vs the middle - upper class homes in austin.  there's a drastic difference.  maybe it bleeds over to the university campuses.

Painting with a very broad brush, neatness and care in landscaping seem to correlate with latitude in this state.  

[Ghost of LL 15531]

12 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

sure but the city leaders attitudes and priorities have something to do with that as well...so don't give me that its "all the police force's" issue.

Well, APD is ultimately overseen by Council.  So I don't think I'm at all disagreeing with you.

12 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

San Diego created a Homeless Court in an effort to not make the problems associated with homelessness worse. It is still coercive (get treatment/help or go to jail), but the resources are available and offered.  

  Reveal hidden contents

Homelessness isn’t a crime.

It’s a common refrain among advocates and even the Department of Justice, which said so in an Idaho case last year.

“Our society, our Constitution doesn’t allow for people to be arbitrarily told what to do and where to go,” said Eric Tars, senior attorney for the D.C.-based National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty.

Yet we hear about homeless San Diegans receiving tickets, getting caught up in encampment sweeps and being ordered to move along though they seemingly have nowhere else to go.

I talked to attorneys, police officers, experts and activists about what the law allows – and doesn’t allow – and how those laws work in practice on San Diego streets.

Their message was clear: Homeless people have the same constitutional rights as anyone else, and that means working with them to get off the street is the best way to get them off the streets.

. . . 

Two Criminal Justice System Approaches
San Diego’s got two programs that encourage homeless folks dealing with chronic criminal offenses to get off the streets but they only apply to people caught in repeated drug or alcohol offenses.

One is the Serial Inebriate Program, a county, city and nonprofit cooperative available after a person is taken to a sobering center six times for public drunkenness. Police say these folks are often homeless.

After a person is booked in jail and arraigned on those charges, they’re asked whether they’d like to enroll in a program run by the nonprofit Mental Health Systems and avoid jail time.

If they agree, they’re transported from jail directly to a treatment program that often lasts several months and given temporary housing while they’re enrolled.

Officer John Liening, who helped create the program, has said the program’s changed many lives.

More recently, City Attorney Jan Goldsmith has introduced a new intervention that aims to pair chronic misdemeanor drug offenders with case managers and housing for up to two years. Once they’re offered the option, offenders can avoid jail time if they agree to sign up.

“Rather than put them through the revolving door one more time, we will offer them a spot in an intensive drug treatment program and a tailored housing placement – all overseen by a case manager who will keep on top of their situation and keep them on a track to success,” Goldsmith said in May.

Goldsmith wants to secure at least 28 beds to support the program.

Court-Ordered Moves
Courts hold more power to force homeless people to change their behavior than police.

As part of a plea agreement or sentencing, folks who’ve been charged with illegal lodging, encroachment or another offense are sometimes asked if they’d be willing to stay away from an area. Sometimes they’re asked to do that in exchange for avoiding fines or jail time.

Binder said these stay-away orders are common in San Diego and can cover large areas.

Dreher said he’s encountered cases where the stay-away orders included areas where the homeless might want to access services.

And showing up in those areas can come with consequences.

“Once you agree to them and you violate it, it becomes a crime,” Dreher said.

Binder and Dreher both said stay-away orders don’t help end a person’s homelessness or even effectively move a homeless person out of a neighborhood.

“It’s a like a leaf-blower justice,” Binder said. “You are essentially moving the problem homelessness represents from one block to the next.”

San Diego County courts did get another tool this April that can remove a person from the streets, at least for a time.

The county recently implemented Laura’s Law, a measure that gives judges the power to order mandated treatment for a mentally ill person – homeless or not – for at least 180 days.

But Laura’s Law comes with strict criteria and requires county officials to conduct in-person evaluations and suggest the person voluntarily enter a facility before they make the case to the Superior Court.

Most homeless folks who resist going into shelter wouldn’t be eligible for this intervention, said Piedad Garcia, a deputy director in the county’s Health and Human services Agency.

If they aren’t eligible or a judge doesn’t grant the order, the county can get permission to hold a person for up to three days using what’s known as a 5150 hold.

Still, that requires proof the person is a serious danger to himself or others. That’s a high bar, too.

The Easiest (and Hardest) Way to Get Someone Off the Street
Garcia and a slew of experts I talked to emphasized that the government has little power to force a homeless person to do what they don’t want to do, whether that’s walk into a shelter or move into an apartment.

The best solution, they say, is to figure out what works for that person.

That means spending weeks or months getting to know a person and learning about her needs rather than pressuring her through law enforcement action, said Steve Berg of the D.C.-based National Alliance to End Homelessness.

“It doesn’t really get the results that you want,” Berg said. “If shelter provides things that a homeless person thinks are valuable then you don’t have to force them. They’ll go.”

The county’s new Project One for All initiative is the largest San Diego program thus far to acknowledge the need to invest upfront time with homeless folks who are the hardest to reach.

The county plan aims to persuade 1,250 homeless San Diegans with serious mental illnesses to get off the street over the next two years.

Garcia said the county’s initial contracts call for an average of three to five months of outreach per client.

“We know now that in order to engage people who are resistant to services, resistant to treatment, you need to take the time to engage them,” Garcia said.

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/nonprofits/authorities-cant-force-the-homeless-off-the-street-heres-what-they-can-do/

Once Prop B passes, Council would do well to put something like that into place.

Instead, I fear they're going to say "fuck the voters; we know what's best" and refuse to do anything on the homeless issue.  And that's exactly how Austin will end up with Mayor Fitlump.

[dcar00 14181]

5 minutes ago, Teamdirtyleg said:

Points for calling them grackles and not crows or blackbirds.  It always annoys.  Since I was a kid, I was always a bird nerd. 

Jester Grackle-Cannon FTW!

[Bozo_Casanova 26444]

4 hours ago, Snake Diggity said:

Despite the myriad causes of homelessness, “you can just camp wherever” is not a solution to any of them.

Violent: you go to jail*

Mentally ill: you go to mental hospital**

Addiction: you go to treatment facility**

Poor: you get on welfare*

Just want to live a nomadic life: you go to designated camping area***

Im pretty liberal, so I’m all for additional resources for addressing those causes.  Allowing camping is not that.****

* Sometimes

** Almost Never
***  Not a fan of those

**** Agreed, restricting camping from locations is different than banning camping. One is about where something is permitted. The other criminalizes homelessness itself. 

3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I don't even regard this as a homeless problem.  That's a policing problem.

It's both.

2 hours ago, dcar00 said:

agreed it is a policing/manpower problem but I don't believe APD handles it really any differently than most large cities. 

Disagree. 

30 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

sure but the city leaders attitudes and priorities have something to do with that as well...so don't give me that its "all the police force's" issue.

Again - it's not all APD, but APD isn't doing what they can. The mutual relationship between Council, staff, and APD has never been worse, IMO.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Bozo_Casanova

[yoladu 4093]

21 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

Jester Grackle-Cannon FTW!

the worst morning hangover cure ever.

[SKA the boss 729]

3 hours ago, Ghost of LL said:

I don't even regard this as a homeless problem.  That's a policing problem.

Agreed. It is a policing problem. But it's also a homeless problem and dismissive of the fact that allowing, even inviting tons of mentally unstable people and drug addicts to come plant themselves in the heart of your society to prey upon your civilians, and then neutering your police force is the source of the problem.

 

I fear that dcar is right and the genie is out of the bottle. Austin has screwed this up so bad they will never be able to clean it up.

[Armybrat 40832]

4 minutes ago, SKA the boss said:

Agreed. It is a policing problem. But it's also a homeless problem and dismissive of the fact that allowing, even inviting tons of mentally unstable people and drug addicts to come plant themselves in the heart of your society to prey upon your civilians, and then neutering your police force is the source of the problem.

 

I fear that dcar is right and the genie is out of the bottle. Austin has screwed this up so bad they will never be able to clean it up.

This bears repeating.

[Wally Pryor 5261]

22 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Again - it's not all APD, but APD isn't doing what they can. The mutual relationship between Council, staff, and APD has never been worse, IMO.

I sorta doubt that APD could hate the council (sans Kelly I guess) anymore than it does right now. 

[dcar00 14181]

22 minutes ago, SKA the boss said:

Agreed. It is a policing problem. But it's also a homeless problem and dismissive of the fact that allowing, even inviting tons of mentally unstable people and drug addicts to come plant themselves in the heart of your society to prey upon your civilians, and then neutering your police force is the source of the problem.

 

I fear that dcar is right and the genie is out of the bottle. Austin has screwed this up so bad they will never be able to clean it up.

well that's a first for this board.  IMO, they won't have the will because the optics of what they would really need to do are going to be extremely ugly.  It can be done(meaning starting over) but it won't be pretty and will be all over the twitter-verse.

Adler will slow play this thing big time so it doesn't happen on his watch and he can get out of dodge and on to bigger dem party stuff.

all assuming it passes, of course

Edited April 29, 2021 by dcar00

[Homesickhorn 2202]

2 hours ago, Armybrat said:

I recall a story related by my cop nephew about a homeless guy he picked up one morning in Kerrville. Seems that the dude had been in Fredericksburg where those cops put him on the bus to Kerrville. 
So the Kerrville cops pooled their money and bought him a bus ticket back to Fredericksburg that afternoon.
I wonder how many milage points the fellow eventually accumulated?

 

I would have paid the dude an extra $20 if upon arrival in F'burg, he promised to take a shit on their football field.

Edited April 29, 2021 by Homesickhorn

[Ghost of LL 15531]

24 minutes ago, SKA the boss said:

Agreed. It is a policing problem. But it's also a homeless problem and dismissive of the fact that allowing, even inviting tons of mentally unstable people and drug addicts to come plant themselves in the heart of your society to prey upon your civilians, and then neutering your police force is the source of the problem.

 

I fear that dcar is right and the genie is out of the bottle. Austin has screwed this up so bad they will never be able to clean it up.

Sorry if I was unclear.  I was speaking of the specific assault.  In that specific instance, it doesn't really matter whether the guy was homeless or not.

That is not to say more broadly that we don't have a very serious homeless problem.  That much is apparent.  This has been a failure of the city government at multiple levels.

And, I'm sorry to say, it's not something that Prop B is going to fix.

[Wally Pryor 5261]

8 minutes ago, SKA the boss said:

I fear that dcar is right and the genie is out of the bottle. Austin has screwed this up so bad they will never be able to clean it up.

It's been out of the bottle for awhile now. 

It took every ounce of strength that the wet rag had to finally admit that the repeal of the ban wasn't working in January, 18 months after said action had been taken by the council.  It should have taken 3 to 4 months, tops, for that fraud to admit the same.    

Ineptness in how to handle + the giant red carpet extended to homeless and you have a recipe for a cluster fuck of epic proportions.  And, yes, one that isn't going away.   It's Austin and, thus, essential to temper expectations appropriately. 

[MAUFRAIS 6623]

just clean up the fucking hike and bike trail.  sorry, people who live close to ben white.

[El Diablo 4232]

Maybe look to San Diego? I didn't dig into the details but der Mayor thinks they have the problem on the run.

https://www.hoover.org/research/how-san-diego-cleaned-its-act-and-got-real-homelessness

[Armybrat 40832]

10 minutes ago, MAUFRAIS said:

just clean up the fucking hike and bike trail.  sorry, people who live close to ben white.

That would be my son & grandkids who have to drive through that filthy blight every day.

[Wally Pryor 5261]

Forget the filth on Ben White.  It's a win now to just navigate its access roads and not hit a pedestrian.    

Guessing some posters might not consider that to be a win. 

 

[mchookem 16327]

the Burnet/183 area seems to have had some neat freaks move in. it seems...smaller? definitely more tidy, garbage isn't blowing around as much. not nearly the eyesore it was a few weeks ago. 

[Guest Lobo]

Looks like the gift cards City Council gave them to that nearby Container Store really paid off.  (I'm only half kidding). 

Edited April 29, 2021 by Lobo