Opinion: Housing—Not Tickets and Jail Time

Print More

The mood was tense at the Orange County Civic Center Plaza, a vast expanse of concrete many of the county’s unsheltered homeless population call home. The county had just issued a memo homeless people could see as meaning just one thing: a police crackdown was on the way. They would face more frequent arrests and citations under existing ordinances for resting, sleeping or camping in public.

County officials are fully aware that many homeless people have no way to comply with such laws because those same officials have failed abysmally to provide adequate shelter and appropriate housing. The hypocrisy of the looming crackdown is evident since it comes only a few months after the county acquiesced to the city of Santa Ana’s temporary moratorium opposing a proposed emergency shelter.

The memo to county employees talked about potential threats to public safety stemming from the “increased transient population” around the civic center. Even though the county admitted that “documented cases of threats to personal safety are limited,” the memo proposed “stronger working relations with law enforcement” to combat the problem.

Unfortunately, unsheltered homeless people in Santa Ana and elsewhere in Orange County face an all too common predicament as so-called “quality of life” laws spread from city to city in what can only be called an absurd and cruel race to the bottom. A UC Berkeley Law School study on anti-homeless laws in California found that all 58 cities they surveyed had at least one local law allowing authorities to ticket or arrest people for standing, sitting, or resting in public. All but one city also had banned sleeping, camping, or lodging in public places.

Since people with no access to shelter or housing have no alternative to being on public property, these ordinances serve only to push homeless individuals into neighboring communities. These laws perpetuate homelessness by making it even more difficult to secure and maintain housing, employment, and benefits.

Those cited while sleeping or resting in public may be sentenced to jail time, hit with fines they cannot afford to pay and wind up with criminal records. Not only does such enforcement raise serious civil and human rights concerns, it can be significantly more costly than providing adequate shelter and housing. A study of 13 cities and states found they spend an average of $87 a day to jail someone, while they spend only about $28 a day to provide someone with shelter.

Recognizing the punitive and counterproductive nature of such enforcement, California State Senator Carol Liu (D-Glendale) has introduced the Right to Rest Act of 2015 (SB 608). Her bill would protect every Californian’s right to rest and would limit the criminalization of homeless people. The League of California Cities opposes the bill, saying it would “create a special set of exemptions, privileges and rights for the homeless to occupy public and private property without complying with laws that apply to all others in society.”

Homeless people are not given any special rights or privileges in this bill. In many communities across the state, they have no place where they can legally engage in necessary human behaviors such as sleeping or resting. SB 608 prohibits punishment for sleeping and resting. Changes introduced in this bill apply only to public spaces—not private property as the League alleges. Existing state law can still be used to prevent lodging on private property without the owner’s consent.

Senator Liu’s bill would also enable local governments to redirect funds currently used to enforce anti-homeless ordinances towards desperately needed housing and shelter. Such funds would be especially beneficial in Orange County, which has no year-round emergency shelter and insufficient affordable housing. The county’s waitlist has been closed for Housing Choice Vouchers, known as Section 8, the federal government’s main rental subsidy program for low income people. Demand for permanent housing with supportive services, which studies suggest best meets the needs of chronically homeless people with disabilities, also far exceeds supply.

Counties do not have to wait to change their approach to homelessness. They have the capacity to act now. All that is lacking is the will. They can actually get people off the streets and give them a place to rest by creating more affordable, permanent housing. No amount of loitering or vagrancy tickets or orders to “move along” even comes close as a solution.

Garrow is a homelessness policy analyst and advocate with the ACLU of Southern California. Johnson is a staff attorney with the ACLU of Southern California.

  • dc matthews

    League of California Cities supporting property ownership as a requirement to be able to live -as sleep is REQUIRED for life and sanity- is despicable . Maybe they should be asked to stay outdoors for this event – April 29, 2015
    Legislative Action Day & Reception
    Location: Sacramento Registration Closed
    Room Rate: $209

    PS: Supportive housing is ok for some w long term substance abuse , psychosis, severe dev delay and some other conditions, BUT not for disabled who want to go to college and be productive and Able and live in society. ADA and FHEO talk about inclusion in society while OC talks about management of the problems most helps are for families leaving the disabled out, creating exclusion from being able and exclusion from most needed resources and closing doors on education and opportunity for the disAbled to be productive and part of society.

  • Tim Shaw

    The more things change, the more they stay the same. When I ran the Orange County Homeless Issues Task Force in the 90’s, we were constantly (and unfortunately unsuccessfully) beating back efforts to criminalize homelessness through these “anti-camping” ordinances. It appears we haven’t advanced much over the last two decades. I recall the police “sweeps” of the Civic Center, citing and arresting homeless people for littering (dropping a cigarette butt), loitering and unlawful camping, where people were rounded up and chained to bleachers at Santa Ana Stadium. I recall being the expert witness in the trial of a homeless man who was arrested for unlawful camping. We demonstrated that there were no emergency housing options for him on the night he was cited and his conviction was eventually overturned…but the ordinance wasn’t. We can and must do better. Housing is the answer. Homelessness is not a crime, nor is it a moral failing. Stop criminalizing it and start diverting resources into housing.

    • dc matthews

      Thanks for caring . Irvine is studying options expected a 9month long study- for vets housing. But as long as developers (and sadly even some progressives) push to prtetect sprawl and excessive housing costs .Vs. affrodable and accessible housing. The problem won’t go away. OC HA created my homelessness via paperwork delays and free legal won’t address ADA FHEO issues. We, even veterans in OC, have no access to housing or justice.

  • Pingback: Housing—not tickets and jail time | ACLU of Southern California()