Using Police as a Strategy

Memories…

-When six police officers came to my church, handcuffed and seated ten people in the parking lot and threatened them verbally. Ten more officers came, with their lieutenant, who asked me, “Are you the pastor? Does your congregation want people like this here?” I pointed at all the people they had handcuffed and said, “They ARE my congregation.” The lieutenant turned to his officers and said, “We aren’t wanted here, let’s go” and they all released the folks and left. But not before the officer who started it all screamed at my face for “enabling these criminals.”

-The time an officer came to my church, harassing someone on my property. I calmly informed him that people who threaten others aren’t allowed on the property and he would have to stop or leave. He turned on me and said, “Sanctuary, what kind of a name is that”? I said, “It means a place that is safe for people to honor God.” “You mean safe from the authorities?” “Safe from anyone who threatens their well-being.” He huffed off.

-The time a group of officers came to move someone off of our property and they handcuffed and threatened the person in question. I told them not to threaten or harm him. An officer replied to me, “If you really want to help him, you’d send him to jail.” I replied, “Jail isn’t what he needs. He needs the freedom and opportunity to choose mercy and kindness. Jail takes away all choices, not allowing for any real change to happen.”

-An officer comes to our property during a winter shelter and asks if there are any problems. “No problems,” I say, “We work things out ourselves here.” “Well, if you need any help,” he says, “Be sure to call us. We are here to help you workers, not these people,” he points to houseless folk smoking beside the church.

* * *
Some politicians think the solution to homelessness is more police, better police, even arrests.  However, poverty is never reduced by police work, no matter how good. The very nature of a police officer is the threat they carry to force one to do their will.  What homeless folks need, more than anything, is space to make their own positive decisions. They can’t make positive decisions unless they have the freedom to make decisions.  Jail, the justice system, police accusations, arrests take away decisions from those who have too few choices to begin with.

When you are looking for a group to be the frontline for solving a city’s homeless issues, the police is the last group to use.  There is no reason to take the group that accuse families and the struggling of being criminals and make them the face of the city to the homeless.  This approach only increases a person’s stay on the street.

Top reasons why homeless are shot by police

In September 2013, Jack Collins was in a public restroom, attempting to commit suicide with his knife.  A park worker saw this, and called 911.  A police officer came, commanded the man to get out of the bathroom.  He came out, dripping blood.  The officer commanded him to drop the knife.  He didn't do so, and so he was shot and killed.

Early March of this year, a homeless man from Cameroon, known on the street as "Africa", was on the street.  He was approached by two police officers, and he ran.  They tased him, had him on the ground, and then they shot him five times.  On June 23, 2014, Nicholas Davis from Portland, was shot and killed by the Portland police as he wielded a crowbar.  In March of 2014, two police officers shot and killed a homeless man wielding a knife in Albuquerque, New Mexico.  These officers have since been charged with murder.   

Police shootings of the homeless are frequent and happen in every major city of the U.S.  As homelessness increases, the frequency of these shootings increases.  Why do they happen?  Are they the fault of the homeless?  Or of the police?  Here is the general context of every shooting of the homeless.

1.       The homeless are generally considered lesser people

Dr. Susan Fiske, a sociologist who has done brain scans on Americans judging our social viewpoint of a variety of groups has determined that the homeless are generally seen as disgusting and offensive, showing a similar brain pattern as looking at a “garbage pile”.  This isn't a problem with a certain segment of our society but rather an assumption that underlies most interactions between the homeless and society at large. 

2.       Cities pass laws to eliminate the homeless

Since the homeless are seen as “garbage piles”, most cities respond to them as if they are a sanitation issue.  They hire people to get rid of their possessions, they prevent them from loitering in public spaces, they use their police force to push them out of the city.  They might even make it illegal to feed the homeless because cities don’t want to have their garbage piles grow.

3.       Neighbors call the police to get rid of the homeless

Housed citizens see the homeless as nuisances that should be moved out of their neighborhood, partly out of disgust and partly out of fear.  A homeless person might be walking down a neighborhood street, sleeping in a public park, or talking with a couple of his friends and a neighbor will call the police.  They might fear for their children, or they might assume that a homeless person is up to criminal activity and so the police are called.  The police may not want to deal with a homeless person, but if they are called, they will come. 

4.       The regular contacts between the homeless and police are negative
When the police are called to deal with a homeless person, they have to prepare themselves for the worst.  They don’t know if the person is in the middle of a criminal act, dangerous or crazy.  They are ready to handle whatever bad situation comes up.  The homeless person, for the most part, isn't doing anything apart from trying to live the best they can.  So when they are confronted by officers who assume the worst, they react to that assumption negatively.  This creates a continuing tension between officers and the homeless.  The homeless are seen as up to no good by police, and the police are seen as hostile forces that bark orders and give no respect.  Many homeless people have automatic animosity to the police because of so many negative, hostile contacts.

5.       The homeless live in public areas

When we all are asleep in our rooms, we feel secure and free from harm.  None of the homeless have that luxury, as they live in public areas, not protected by society at large.  Neighbors, fellow homeless, and the authorities all feel free to enter into tents or the private possessions of a homeless person.  When a homeless person is in their tent or car, they feel at “home” as much as they can.  But others don’t see it that way.  This means that they feel a greater need to protect themselves than those who have locks and four secure walls.

6.       The homeless carry knives as part of their survival gear

Knives are part of the basic gear of a homeless person, just as they would be for any person who is camping.  Knives are essential for establishing and maintaining a camp, as well as personal security.   If a homeless person has had many people steal their items or attack them for no reason, they are more likely to grab a knife on anyone who approaches them, especially when they are sleeping.

7.       The mentally ill require different treatment

There are perhaps 25 percent of the homeless who have been diagnosed with mental illness, and homelessness increases any eccentricities that a person may already have, due to the enormous stress of living on the street.  The police are almost never trained to deal with people who act in a manner which is abnormal, or exceedingly disrespectful.  A homeless person with anxiety might very well run from the police when they come, which is seen as a sign of guilt by some officers.  Or a person might talk crazy, even angrily, to the “voices” in her head, making her seem suspicious or even dangerous.

8.       The homeless have nothing to lose
After being accused, harassed, yelled at, having possessions stolen, their camps destroyed and no opportunities given for a better life, a homeless person might decide that they have nothing to lose.  If they get attacked or stolen from one more time, they will snap.  Since life has nothing for them, they feel no reason to toe the line.

All of this creates a context for the homeless to be shot and killed by police.  If a homeless person is sleeping in their tent, a neighbor calls the police to have the “vagrant” moved on.  The police come and roust the citizen out of his bed.  He has had enough of the harassment and theft from official channels, and so comes out with a knife, which is always kept with them.  An officer will command the person to throw down the knife, but they have nothing to lose.  So they will not release the thing that they need to survive, even if it is irrational.  If they are considering suicide or have some paranoia, they will see their knife as their last hope.  Eventually, unless the officer is trained in dealing with the mentally ill, the person will be shot, and likely killed.

This is not the fault of a single police officer, but a state of affairs our society is in because of how everyone treats the homeless.  The homeless are more and more getting backed into a corner, in which they have no options.  Back any mammal in a corner and if they feel attacked, they will fight back with whatever they have, even if the situation is hopeless.

Partnering With the Police: Dealing with Conflict in Christian Ministry Part 6

For most of us who are middle class, the police are a symbol of security and order in the community.  If there is disorder, we might have a tendency to call the police immediately to make peace.  We feel that their uniform itself is a symbol of authority and security and people are more apt to listen to an officer than a simple citizen.

However, a ministry in which conflict is likely is going to be a ministry among the outcast of society—gangs, the mentally ill, the homeless, immigrants and others.  Among these groups, the police are those who judge and attack, who are not the defenders of security, but the creators of disorder.

Both perspectives have their points.  The police, ideally, are supposed to protect all citizens, and they do well in bringing security to homogeneous communities.  However, some, even if only a few, police officers have made themselves the enemies of the outcast, seeing them not as citizens but as “bad guys” and they treat them accordingly.

Unfortunately, what has happened is that the outcast and some police officers are both guilty of the same kind of stereotyping—judging a whole group for the actions of some.  Ideally, in time, the police and the outcast groups would be advised to discuss each other’s differences.

In the meantime, if we are doing any ministry to an outcast group, we have to recognize that the police are usually the opposite of a safe presence.  To call the police or to act like police is to betray the security of any outcast group.  This is not to say that the police should never be called, but it should be done sparingly, if at all.

The police should also be called rarely because to call them for any difficult conflict is to encourage the police to see the ministry as a target for problems, and the stereotyping of the group you’re ministering to would perpetuate.

And finally, the police should rarely be called because they have a different philosophy than a church ministry.  The job of the police is to keep citizens safe, in whatever way possible, and this is usually done by catching people who disrupt that safety and locking them up.  This is an appropriate and fair task for civil servants.  On the other hand, a church ministry that connects with the outcast is about re-appropriating the outcast and creating a place for them to experience the mercy of Christ.  This is a noble task, but the police would be the first to admit, honestly, that it is not a safe task.  Thus, it could be said (and it has been said by some) that the two tasks are the antithesis of each other—the police exile bad guys and the church tries to integrate them.  Both tasks are essential, but it is difficult for them to work together.

            If we are running a fairly large ministry for an outcast population, it might be good to communicate to the police about the ministry.  The police need to know that there will be a group of those who they are concerned about on the church grounds.  They also need to know that the church workers will be doing their best to create a safe place, both for the church and for the neighborhood.  And that because the church itself will be providing their own security, most of the time police presence will be unnecessary.  However, if there is a serious concern, then the church workers will contact the police themselves.

            The police will think that our ministry and the steps for deescalating conflict puts us in unnecessary danger.  Their training focuses on self-protection and stabilizing any situation.  A church ministry instead focuses on offering mercy, calling toward repentance, and loving those who are our enemies.  From a police perspective, this is dangerous business.  And perhaps it is.

            To prevent it being necessary for police to come, we will have to be proactive to prevent conflict.  This might mean acting as mediators between those who are heading toward conflict.  It certainly means following the steps of deescalating conflict.  And it will also mean that we will, on occasion have to put ourselves in harms way to protect others.

            On occasion the police will come on their own.  Perhaps they will see activity that they think could be illegal.  Perhaps a neighbor will call the police if they see a conflict that we will deal with ourselves.  When the police come, we need to politely identify ourselves, and answer their questions truthfully.  We need to encourage them to limit their contact to only those whom they are concerned with.  If some folks get into a fight, it is best for them to be off the church grounds before the police arrive.  This is all to help those who come to the ministry feel that they are safe without police involvement.

            Finally, there are some situations in which the police might be called.  If someone is continually threatening church workers or the facilities, then it may be necessary to call the police to get the person off of the church grounds.  Because the ministry of the church is to be focused on mercy, not judgment, then it is best to just ask the police to have the person go off of the church grounds, but not to press charges.  In this way, those who cause problems see that violence will not be tolerated, but that the church is not concerned with getting any vengeance.

Permitted To Be Nowhere

The cities of Multnomah County are like a lot of other cities throughout the United States.  They like to look like they are helping the homeless when they are actually oppressing them.

According to The Oregonian,  the owner of some private property has decided that he would temporarily allow the homeless to camp on his unused property in downtown Portland until he sells it.  "I'm willing to let them out of doorways," says Michael Wright, pointing out the benefit to the community.


The city of Portland, however has a problem.  There is no permit for it, they say.  And no one is allowed to camp, not even on private property.  Of course, that is the city ordinance.  That camping outdoors without a permit is illegal in Portland.  Remember that when your kids decide to camp in your backyard.

Or, perhaps, the activists of Occupy Portland should be informed as well.  They have been camping in public areas, not just private.  I want to make it clear, I am not opposed to protest.  I am opposed to the city's hypocrisy.

Or let's take Gresham.  There is at least two police officers, on city time, that have been going to homeless camps and ripping up their tents, sleeping bags and tarps.  They are vandalizing private property.  This is nothing new to the homeless in Gresham.  Those that lived on the Springwater Corridor would have their personal possessions ripped up and thrown in a dumpster by a county paid official.  Or there is the camp under a bridge in Gresham that came back to find their possessions thrown into a pit and burned up.

Many of the homeless are given tickets by a variety of Gresham police.  These tickets are sentences to leave Gresham and not come back.  Yes, they aren't binding by a court, but some homeless just follow it so as not to cause more trouble for themselves.  Many homeless claim Gresham as "home" and have no where else to go.

Okay, okay.  The homeless get the idea.  They aren't wanted here.  Somehow they are considered criminals just for living outside and trying to survive.  Look, if you can arrest them for drug use or for violent activity, no one is really complaining.  But the fact is, the homeless are being targeted as criminals because of what they don't have, not what they do.  They don't have four walls and a roof and that makes them criminals.

Oh, sorry, the camp in downtown Portland on Mr. Wright's property DOES have walls.  Made out of doors.  The City of Portland says that it is not according to code and must be torn down.

Look, here's the point.  You don't want the homeless to be hanging around on the streets?  THEN GIVE THEM A PLACE TO GO!  It is not enough to deny someone a place.  A body takes up room and space.  The cities of Multnomah County have basically denied the homeless the right to exist.  Can this really be legal?

The city of Portland just built a facility that houses 130 homeless and shelters no more than a hundred more. Where are the thousands of other homeless supposed to go?

Let's be completely frank.  The majority of homeless in Multnomah County have lived in the county since before they were homeless.  They became homeless here.  This means that these homeless are our responsibility.  We cannot deny them the right to exist.  The right to sleep.  The right to live.

We must work on a plan to live with the homeless because they aren't going anywhere.

Applied Bible Passages

You have heard that it was said, "Do not oppress the poor." But I say to you, if you have as much as voted for one who 
would kill an innocent person, then you are complicit.


Iraq Body Count


Afghani Civilian Deaths in 2011


 If you take a poor man's tent or sleeping bag or coat, even in the name of a government, that poor one will cry out to Me and you shall be homeless and helpless. For what else are they to keep warm in? (Exodus 22:22-27)

God takes his stand among the judges, police and council members. "How long will you judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked? Vindicate the mentally ill and homeless, do justice to the afflicted. Rescue them out of the hands of the wicked, those who are willing to harm the ill and pitiful for the sake of themselves."(Psalm 82)

‎"The outcry against them is very great. I shall go down and see if they have done according to the outcry, and I will know if it is true"

A Really Good, Rough Week

Sorry for failing to post in my blogs this week. Not only did my computer crash a week ago, but Anawim has been receiving a record number of in kind donations. We've received dozens of sleeping bags, even more blankets and tarps, and a huge number of clothes.

Also, we've had to open up the Gresham Underground Emergency Shelter (GUESs) a for six nights in the last two weeks. While I'm not in the shelter every night, I do open it up and close it every evening and morning.

This has been really tough on all the Anawim staff, and we're pretty exhausted. And Christmas hasn't even come yet!

Praise God for His ample provision, though! This is the first year I can say that we've provided for our folks in East County according to their need after more than twelve years of ministry there. I pray that next year we will be able to provide more-- and have more staff to help us! And we also received a couple stove/ovens for the Yellow Church, just in time to cook four turkeys for Christmas!

Also a me and a couple other day shelter folks were able to meet with a representative of the Gresham police, and we were able to share our concern for the homeless community and how we are both trying to help them and the security provisions we have. We seemed to have reached a tentative agreement, or at least we had a pleasant conversation!

If anyone is flexible in time and has ample patience and some smarts and would like to help us, we could really use the help. We don't have any salary to offer, but the retirement package is unimaginably great!

The Fear of the Police

Jack Collins walked out of the bathroom in Hoyt Arboretum all bloody, holding an X-acto knife.  In seeing this come at him in surprise, Officer Jason Walters says, "I was just totally surprised 'cause I didn't expect a bloody guy holding a knife to open the door, and it took a second, a moment to really register what was going on."  Walters had no back up there, and he ruled out the use of pepper spray, his baton or Taser.  So he shot Jack four times, and Jack was left to bleed to death.

Dehumanization of a kind of person-- like the homeless Jack Collins-- leads to people deciding that they should not be treated as a real person, but as an immediate threat.  There was no real threat to Officer Walters.  I have been in a similar situation myself, facing down a person holding a knife.  I had no gun, no baton, no Taser.  I just went right up to the person and talked to him, in gentleness.  There are only two differences between Officer Walters and me: I was not afraid, and I did not have a gun to enact against any fear I might have.

I don't want you to think that I am trying to demean Officer Walters.  He reacted as he has been trained to react, and he did so rightly.  He yelled at Mr. Collins a number of times to drop the knife and Mr. Collins did not.  His training tells him to shoot anyone with a weapon who could have been a danger to himself or others. So Mr. Collins was shot.  No, my fault is with the system.

What kind of a system trains officers to shoot instead of using other options.  Officer Walters, if he felt that he was endangered, could have backed up-- as Mr. Collins was in no condition to move quickly-- and used his Taser from a safe distance.  The officer could have called for backup and waited until it arrived.  Instead, he used force that was dangerous.  Mr. Collins was near the door of the Arboretum-- if the officer had missed, he could have shot an innocent person by accident.  But his training told him to shoot and so he did.  This training is irresponsible.

The other indictment of the system I have is connected to another case involving a homeless person and a police officer.  In that case, the police officer was also startled and afraid, according to his testimony, and so he tased a woman half his size four times, after she was clearly subdued.  Fear is the emotion that most readily leads to violence-- not anger.  Fear makes one want to protect oneself or others, and would use whatever means necessary to quench the object of one's fear.

If police officers are so afraid of small women or people who are already injured, then what else are they afraid of?  Black people?  Perhaps homeless people in general?  God forbid that these fearful officers actually deal with a gang or any group of teenage males.  It is a matter of public safety to take police officers who are fearful of non-lethal situations and get them off the street.  If an officer is startled so easily as to shoot someone in a situation in which they are "startled" then that officer is too easily trigger happy to be in the public interest.

If an officer is fearful, perhaps they should stay in the office, doing paperwork.  Life is scary, and police work takes courage.  Let the brave ones, who won't hide behind a gun, but work toward peace, do the street work.

About the shooting of Jack Collins: http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/04/grand_jury_transcript_hoyt_arb.html
About the tasing of Mary McGuire: http://www.nowheretolayhishead.org/fearofthehomeless.html

Who Is The Alien?

I had a surreal experience yesterday. I watched District 9.

Well, watching a movie, no matter how insane, is almost never a surreal experience (Eraserhead is an exception, but I don’t necessarily recommend that to anyone, either). District 9 is a good film, using aliens who have faced a disaster who are then moved into refugee camps by people of Johannesburg, South Africa, as a way of speaking of humans inhumanity to other humans, although of different kinds. It is science fiction social commentary at its best—working at the level of a compelling story and a coherent commentary on the myopic nature of our culture.

Just before I plugged the movie in, I received the latest news in a terribly tragic story of one of the homeless community in Gresham. Mike Bighaus is a man who has been schizophrenic for years, with little or no help. Without any housing or nurses, he would go into a clinic to get his medication only as he was mentally stable enough to go through the extra effort. He knew he needed his medication. He would see things no one else could see, and sometimes had self-aggrandizing visions. He would occasionally be so irrational as to be threatening, but the homeless community knew how to deal with him, and there were few problems.

Over this last holiday season, he had failed to get his latest medication before the clinics closed for Christmas, but he already had plans to stay at his parents’ house over the holidays, so he figured all would be well. His mother was a caring nurse practitioner, and his father was retired. They would care for him.

Christmas night, he took the rifle he parents kept in their home and shot his mother to death. The police were called immediately but Mike had wandered about the Oregon community with the rifle. They blocked roads, sent out alerts, sent police cars all over the community. Many hours later Mike comes walking back home with the rifle as if nothing had happened. The police surrounded him and Mike surrendered the rifle with no resistance. He was immediately arrested.

He had his first hearing, where he was strapped down, both head and body, and his mouth gagged. He muttered throughout the arraignment, possibly not even knowing what was going on. In his second arraignment, where he was indicted for murder, he was not even present, being in the hospital for a leg infection.

Last night, I found out that the infection was one of the antibiotic resistant infections. So they amputated his leg, without consulting family. His other leg also has an infection and so they are looking to amputate this leg as well.

This was all running through my mind as I watched District 9, and I thought of the mentally ill. The mentally ill are often placed in homes or camps, apart from the rest of humanity. There are ways to solve some of their issues—granting housing where helpful medication can be offered, or providing employment that would work around their mental weaknesses—but few seem to be thinking of how the mentally ill can actually be helped as individuals. They are seen as a pathetic, stupid, dangerous group. They are rarely dangerous, and in fact, they rarely use the capacity for violence they have—they are statistically less likely to use violence than “normal” groups. But because they need some extra attention and thought, they are rather just ignored, cast aside. Eventually policies will be made against them “for their own good”, which is really for the comfort of society. If this means more end up in prison, or locked up in mental health facilities, even though preventative care could mean a semi-productive life, then so be it.

The mentally ill truly are the aliens in society. And yet the difference is, they didn’t come from a spaceship, hovering over our homes, but they are part of our own families, we grew up with them. But when they become homeless, although they’ve lived in our communities all of our lives, they become “transients.” When they are seen at soup kitchens, they become “bums” although they’ve done all they can do to survive. Even though legal medications didn’t help their ailments, or they couldn’t afford them, when they use illegal drugs to help them feel better they are “addicts.” And when they are unable to fill out the complicated paperwork for assistance from the government because of their social weaknesses or depression, it is considered that they didn’t “ask for help.”

Of course I have no sympathy for Mike being arrested. He is clearly dangerous and needs to be restrained. What I am saying is that this tragedy could have been averted, if Mike had been cared for by more than just his family. He needed a community with resources to get behind him, giving him the medications on a regular basis that he did not resist taking, and his mother could be alive today. He wouldn’t be in prison. He wouldn’t have his leg amputated because care would have been given ahead of time. Or, if he hadn’t been in jail at the time of this severe infection, they might have tried alternative treatments—of which there are many—instead of jumping to amputation.

Mike has been dehumanized. And it could be said that he deserves it because he shot his mother, and I could understand that perspective. But he was dehumanized long before this crime, when he had to live with his severe mental illness, with little or no help. When he needed assistance, he was blamed for that which he could not control.

And I think the best lesson I learned in watching District 9 at the same time of hearing of Mike’s amputation is that dehumanization of the poor and needy do not dehumanize the one being treated poorly. It ultimately makes the authorities less than human. In District 9, it is clear that it was not the aliens that were unhuman—they had very human responses to their situation. Rather it is the police, the system, the family that judges that becomes less than human.

In the case of Mike Bighaus, who is less than human? Mike, who has been struggling with his illness and left to his own devises? Or the system who ignored Mike until he had become so ill that he killed his mother? The system that takes away his legs without searching for other treatments? The system who treats Mike as little more than an animal?

I have great sympathy for Mike’s family. They didn’t know what to do with Mike and then they face this tragedy. It was Mike’s cousin, who sent me a message about his amputated leg, horrified at the treatment Mike has been given.

I also pray for this system that treats the poor like semi-human. May God teach the “justice” system how to be fully human.

Homelessness In Gresham

Anabeth asked how homelessness in Gresham differs from Portland and who is involved in helping them. "I am wondering about the situation in Gresham regarding people living outdoors as I am only more familiar with what is going on in Portland. Can you please tell me a little more about it? Do we know approximately how many people are living outdoors in Gresham- have the numbers increased the past couple of years b/c of Mayor Potter's ordinances? I know that Eastside Foursquare Church there has done some things- are they empowering people?? Is it My Father's House that was just built for housing people living outdoors in Gresham- though I know that obviously not everyone is helped in a situation like that, people are still left out and my question for them is still about how their services are being played out- are they empowering or patronizing?"


There are basically three services for street folks in Gresham: Zaraphath Kitchen which has a meal six days a week, Anawim (showers, clothes and a meal one day a week) and My Father's House for homeless families. EastHill has been out of the loop for a number of years, but they are trying to re-organize their assistance. Right now, they are filling out Zaraphath so that there are meals every Sunday, and they want to provide socks-- which is what Anawim has done for years. But maybe this means that we can provide socks for the SE group instead.

Gresham is a different street experience than Portland. There is a lot more room for camping in tents and there is less dependence on services. The police are more consistantly active in kicking the homeless out of the city and there are people hired by the city to throw away people's tents and gear if left behind. So the homeless are more hidden. The only place they are alowed to hang out is Gresham Main Park, but even there they are carefully monitored by the police. Sometimes the police are abusive and in fact at least four homeless I know have successfully sued the city of Gresham for police brutality. Many more have been abused without suing. For all of these reasons, not very many people have moved from Portland to Gresham.

Homelessness has grown in Gresham, but mostly it is young people who have increased the numbers. When we talk about the homeless, the numbers are all guess work, but I'd say there's about 200 chronic homeless and someone has quoted to me a statistic of 200 young people on the street (That number might be a bit high-- they might be including those who hang out with the "gutter punks" but still sleep at home). A large number of these people live on the Springwater Corridor bike trail.

Recently there have been three groups wanting to advocate for the poor in Gresham. But I noted that all three of these groups were full of middle class churches and leaders who wanted to help the homeless but who weren't interested in having the homeless own the services. That is the kind of system we don't need in Gresham. We have a lot of strong, ready-to-work folk who would do work to support a service as long as it was a service they asked for. This was one of the main purposes of this community meeting-- to get the homeless involved in the conversation of how to serve the homeless. To get them to own the service from the ground level so they would own it and participate.

I'd say that My Father's House does empower, but they aren't dealing with the chronic homeless at all. They help families in crisis, which is great. But I note that Gresham-- East Hill in particular-- is willing to spend literally millions of dollars for My Father's House, but the chronic homeless get nothing but tickets and abuse. I think it is long overdue to have some services for all the homeless in Gresham, but I also think that to do it rightly, we need to draw upon the willing help and resources of the homeless.

Okay, you asked a lot of questions and got a long answer. Hope that's okay!

Are The Homeless Full Citizens?

To be a full citizen is to have the right to sleep without the police harassing you.
To be a full citizen is to be allowed to live in one’s city without being told to leave.
To be a full citizen is to be given the opportunity to speak about community issues from one’s perspective.
To be a full citizen is to have the right to go to the bathroom.
To be a full citizen is to be allowed to gather with others about issues of mutual interest.
To be a full citizen is to be allowed to do legal work for one’s means.

If The Housed Were Treated Like The Homeless

I have known about the surveys of the homeless to discover their needs for a while now. People are hired to interview the homeless, and ask them what services they would like the city (or the state) to provide for them. I think the idea is wonderful, for then service providers aren’t just assuming themselves what the homeless need, but they are asking directly those with the needs.

But today, I discovered a new angle on this survey: There are teams of three that go out asking questions: a social worker, a medical provider and… well, some other professional type person, I don’t remember who. And the team of three goes out very early in the morning, so they can make sure to find the homeless folks, and they wake them up to ask them the questions. (It’s always good to wake up the sleep deprived to see what services they need…)

Maybe you aren’t as stunned (read: appalled) as I am about this, but perhaps this Pythonesque skit will give you the sense:

Scene: A small, suburban bedroom. There is a large bed in the middle, with George sleeping on one side and Carol on the other. George is wearing striped pajamas, while Carol is wearing a short nightgown, but both are covered by a comforter. A dresser with a filthy mirror is on one side of the bed, with clothes scattered about the floor. The remains of a hurried dinner rests on the dresser as well as a digital alarm clock. The two are in restful slumber, when suddenly there is a knock on the window, on George’s side of the bed.

Mr. Pierce: (Peering in) Hello? (Opens the window and sticks his head in.) Hello?

George: (Groggy) Huh? What… who?

Mr Pierce proceeds to climb in through the window and then falls. He is a tall, professional-looking man with a brown suit coat and a red tie. He holds a clipboard and a pen.

Carol: (Waking suddenly, then screaming, pulling the bedclothes around her) George, who is this?

Mr Pierce stands up and begins to brush himself off.

George: (Angry for Carol’s sake) Well, there, hey! What do you think you’re doing? Get out of my house!

Mr. Pierce: (Standing formally, with a clipboard, addresses himself to George) Hello, there, sir. Sorry to disturb you at this early hour…

George: (Looking at the clock on the dresser) Oh, my… It’s 4am! Who in the hell do you think you are? What are you doing in my house?

Mr. Pierce: As I said, I AM sorry to disturb you, but I am taking a survey of the neighborhood to discover what kind of services you might need.

George stares for a moment, stunned.

Carol: (Still in a panic) Who are these people, George? Is this your idea of a joke?

George: (Upset, but a bit of a pansy) I still don’t understand what you are doing in my house.

Mr. Pierce: As I said, I’m taking a survey of the neighborhood and just need to ask you a few questions.

George: Why didn’t you just knock on the door?

Mr. Pierce: I’m sure you wouldn’t have answered the door this early, Mr. … excuse me, what is your name?

George: Mr. Thomson. George Thomson.

Mr. Pierce: (Writing on his clipboard) Thomson… George. Fine.

Carol: (Upset, poking George) George, why don’t you get rid of these people!

George: See here. Why don’t you just come back during the day, not at this ungodly hour?

Mr. Pierce: Mr. Thomson, surely you understand our position. Do you not work during the day?

George: Well, of course.

Mr. Pierce: Well, then, we couldn’t really come during the day, could we?

George: (Pacified) Oh, I suppose not.

Carol: Well, then, why couldn’t they come see you at work?

George: Yes, why couldn’t you see me at work?

Mr. Pierce: Then we wouldn’t be sure you lived here.

George: Oh, I see. But it IS rather inconvenient…

Mr. Pierce: I appreciate your position, Mr. Thomson, but you see, it’s the only way.

George: (Pacified again) Well, if nothing could be done about it…

Carol: Yes, something could be done about it, you could throw them out!

Mr. Pierce: Are you disturbed, ma’am?

Carol: Yes, I am.

Mr. Pierce: Of course, you don’t have to participate in the survey. You may leave, if you like.

Carol: Leave! I can’t leave! I’m not even dressed!

Mr. Pierce: I would be happy to avert my eyes…

Carol: Get out!

Mr. Pierce: Just as soon as I finish the survey. Now then… (looking at clipboard) Mr. Thomson, how old are you?

George: 35.

Mr. Pierce: (Writing on clip board) Fine. And what is your ID number?

George: 491…

Carol: Don’t you think that’s a bit personal?

Mr. Pierce: It is just a basic question, ma’am. Sir?

George: 491, 327, 45, 49

Mr. Pierce: And could I see your ID, please?

George: Actually, I lost it last week.

Mr. Pierce: Oh, did you? That’s fine. We can help you with that. (Calls out the window) Officer MacDonnal? Could you please come in? (A police officer in full uniform climbs in. He wears dark glasses, speaks in a “Sgt. Friday” voice, and has a pair of handcuffs at his hip.) This is Officer MacDonnal and he’ll help you with your ID issue.

Officer: (Takes out notebook) Sir, ma’am. I just have a few questions to ask you.

Carol: And who let you in? What right do you have? Who said you could come into our bedroom?

Officer: Well, Mr. Pierce did, ma’am.

Carol: And who let Mr. Pierce in?

Officer: It’s all official business, ma’am. We are just here to help.

Carol: What kind of officials are you?

Mr. Pierce: This is all according to city policy, ma’am. Now, while Officer MacDonnel assists Mr. Thomson with the forms, would it be alright if I asked you some questions?

Carol: Why not? Might as well. Not going to get any sleep anyway.

Mr. Pierce: Fine, then. (He flips a page on his clipboard) Could I have your name, then, please?

Carol: Carol Drew.

Mr. Pierce: And your last name is spelled?

Carol: D-R-E-W.

Mr. Pierce: And are you a Miss or a Mrs?

Carol: A Miss.

Mr. Pierce: (Looking up from his clipboard, with eyebrow raised) So you are not married to Mr. Thomson, then?

Carol: (Voice raising) No. And what business is it of yours?

Mr. Pierce: I’m not judging, ma’am, just saying. But this kind of situation might require a health professional. You wouldn’t mind having a doctor ask you a few questions, do you?

Carol: I suppose not. It would be better if the doctor came over at the daytime, however.

Mr. Pierce: No need. (Calling out the window) Dr. Zook, could you please come in? (A woman in a white doctor’s coat with a stethoscope hanging out of the pocket climbs in through the window) Dr. Zook, it seems that we have an issue here.

Dr. Zook: (Looking at Carol) What seems to be the problem?

Carol: There’s no problem! Except I am having trouble sleeping!

Mr. Pierce: Well, you see, Mr. Thomson and Miss Drew…

Dr. Zook: (Nodding) Ah, I see. (Pulls out a clipboard) Miss Drew, if I could ask you a few questions…

Carol: (Flustered) I don’t think so…

Dr. Zook: Please, it will only take a few moments.

Carol: I suppose.

Dr. Zook: First of all, please tell me if you have ever experienced the following: Herpes?

Carol: Which kind? I mean, sometimes I have cold sores…

Dr. Zook: Mm hmm. (writing on clipboard) Positive. What about genital herpes?

Carol: I don’t think so…

Dr. Zook: Have you ever been tested for it?

Carol: No…

Dr. Zook: Well, we can work on that later. What about gonorrhea?

Carol: No.

Dr. Zook: (Looking at the clipboard) Ever been tested for it?

Carol: No.

Dr. Zook: Unknown. Have you ever been raped?

Carol: No!

Dr. Zook: Fine. What about date rape?

Carol: What do you mean?

Dr. Zook: I mean, has ANYONE (she glances at George still speaking to Officer) ever put you in a position where you felt you were sexually compromised?

Carol: I… I don’t think so.

Dr. Zook: Let’s be careful about this, now. Are you sure? I mean, for instance, has Mr. Thomson ever asked you to do something sexually you weren’t comfortable with?

Carol: Well, like what?

Dr. Zook: Anything.

Carol: Well, he brought out this book tonight and wanted me to try these positions and I wasn’t comfortable….

Dr. Zook: Did you tell him you were uncomfortable?

Carol: Well, yes, but…

Dr. Zook: And did he make you perform anyway?

Carol: Well, he didn’t MAKE me…

Dr. Zook: Did you feel coerced?

Carol: Perhaps a bit manipulated…

Dr. Zook
Officer: (together) I think we have a problem.

Mr. Pierce: Officer MacDonnal, you first, please.

Officer: We just discovered that Mr. Thomson is living in this dwelling under false pretenses.

George: That’s not true! I told you, I am staying here while my Uncle is at the coast. He invited me to stay here.

Officer: So this isn’t your house?

George: Right, I told you that. But I have permission.

Officer: I’m not sure about that. I just called your “uncle” and we couldn’t get an answer.

George: Of course not—it’s 4 in the morning!

Officer: That is no excuse under the law. The fact is: you are in a house that doesn’t belong to you. Let me ask you, do you have any place to live?

George: I moved out of my apartment in Maryland. I have moved into town just last week. My uncle is giving me a hand until I settle in.

Officer: So you are a homeless transient, eh? I’m afraid you’re going to have to leave immediately.

George: What do you mean? All my stuff is here!

Officer: What stuff is that?

George: Well, the dresser, the bed… all the furniture in the house.

Officer: Uh huh. Okay, just a second. (Calls out the window) Joe! Yeah, go ahead and get the dump truck over here. We’ll have to trash the whole place.

Joe: (Outside the window) Right away!

Officer: Mr. Thomson, I’m afraid you will have to vacate the premises…

Dr. Zook: Um, officer. I’m afraid there’s another issue…. (Dr. Zook goes over and whispers in the officer’s ear).

Officer: (Facial expression becomes angry and eyes grow large) Is that right? (He walks over to George and throws him against the dresser, knees him in the kidneys, and spins him around. He pulls off the handcuffs off of his hip and cuffs George) You have the right to remain silent, you…

George: (Voice groaning a bit from the pain) Wait! What am I being arrested for?

Officer: Sexual assault 3.

George: Carol, what did you tell them?

Carol: (To Mr. Pierce) Of course, I don’t live here. He seemed so nice at first. I actually live with my parents on the other side of town.

Mr. Pierce: You need to take care who your friends are in the future. Could I arrange a ride for you back to your parents?

Carol: Oh, that would be wonderful.

Mr. Pierce: Here, let me get you a coat to cover you. (He goes to the closet and takes out one of George’s coats and wraps it around Carol) There you are.

Carol: Thank you. I don’t even know what I saw in him really…

Dr. Zook: I was thinking that we could give you a pelvic exam right here in the living room. I have a rape kit right here…

(Dr. Zook leads Carol out of the room)

Officer: Come with me, Thomson. I’ve got a lot of paperwork to fill out now because of you…

George and officer walk out of the room.

Mr. Pierce: (Writing in notebook, reading his text) We found Mr. Thomson city-sponsored housing and Miss Drew received rape counseling and a physical exam. (Looks up from his clipboard) Hmm. I didn’t arrange for Miss Drew to get tested for her sleep disorder. Ah, well, we can’t help everything…