In the lead-up to the PalCo Marsh vacation, city and county officials and members of the homeless working group, emailed around articles with suggestions for what worked in other cities and states. Among these was an article written by Iain De Jong, titled “Tent City: How to Respond Effectively.” De Jong, a consultant and professor of community planning and housing at York University, is credited with having effectively resolved tent cities and encampments in more than 100 cities, mostly on the East Coast. As part of our research for our two-part series, we emailed De Jong a rough timeline of events to get an outside expert’s opinion. (You can read in-depth coverage of this story on the Journal‘s website: Part 1, “Prelude to a Sweep,” describes the decades-long issue that led up to the May 2, 2016 eviction of the PalCo Marsh and Part 2, “Swept,” dives into the decision-making process and infighting that preceded the marsh’s final days.)
De Jong was not consulted by the city but, after looking at the Journal’s timeline of how Eureka responded to the PalCo Marsh encampment, described what he saw as a “dysfunctional response.”
“I would say it’s an example of elected officials looking for solutions but not having experience with the issue,” said De Jong. “They were flying blind and made some poor decisions.”
The biggest problem, according to De Jong, is that the city “looked at shelter as a solution to a tent city.” Along the lines of the report from city consultant Focus Strategies, which said resources put into a sanctioned camp rather than Housing First would be a mistake, De Jong said “any temporary shelter is not a solution.”
“If you enter the question of where do you shelter the people, you’ll get nowhere,” he says. This was a concern of Eureka Police Chief Andrew Mills, who did not want to see “200 tents on Fifth Street” the day after clearing the marsh. De Jong says many people living in tent cities may have access to shelter but choose not to use it because the delivery mechanism — such as religious institution — is flawed or not a personal fit.
“Why do you offer them the thing they already rejected?” he says. “It’s asinine.”
What works according to De Jong’s experience?
Don’t make tent cities a possible solution, regardless of a lack of existing shelter options (something the city did prior to the lawsuit, depending on who you believe).
Portable toilets and access to fresh drinking water are a good idea (the city refused to do this) but allowing charitable organizations to “hand out free food, sleeping bags, tents, etc” is not. (There was a tentative alliance between city workers and the United Universalist Church, as well as a group called Friends of the PalCo Marsh, to do exactly this.)
Do not let other parts of the service delivery system off the hook as you address the tent city. (De Jong referred to the Eureka Rescue Mission, which city officials insisted was evidence that there was ample shelter and resources for those camping, as an example as a “failed approach” due to its religious affiliation. If the Mission was an effective provider of resources for everyone, the tent city wouldn’t exist in the first place, he said.)
“There is perhaps no greater indictment on other failures in the service delivery system than a large tent city. This is especially true in communities that have shelters with loads of barriers, outreach teams that deliver more charity than solutions, and housing programs that go to great lengths to screen people out.”
– Iian De Jong
“There is perhaps no greater indictment on other failures in the service delivery system than a large tent city. This is especially true in communities that have shelters with loads of barriers, outreach teams that deliver more charity than solutions, and housing programs that go to great lengths to screen people out.”
– Iian De Jong
Do not try to arrest your way out of it or damage/take people’s belongings as a “tough love” approach to resolving the tent city. (This was something EPD refused to do, despite the popularity of this idea with some constituents.)
Finally, and most damning of all: Do not have multiple messages when engaging with people on the site.
While the city did many things right (the final days of the marsh cleanup could have been orchestrated by De Jong himself), a lack of consistency in approach, contradictory messages from advocates and city officials, and tension between city employees and the city council would create a quagmire of misinformation and fear. Looking back over the chain of events in 2015 and 2016, it’s apparent that people living in the marsh were hearing many different things from many different sources: This is a safe place to camp; you need to move in 10 days; bring your trash out and we’ll haul it away; Pack up every three days so we can clean; you need to move in 30 days; the deadline is May 2; you can camp in this parking lot temporarily; you can’t camp here anymore.
De Jong also says the surge in violence in the six months prior to the May 2 eviction — the spate of stabbings and the burning of several PortaPotties — is a trend he’s seen in other camps, a reaction to sudden changes and uncertainty.
“It’s clear as an outsider looking in, that the poverty rates are really high,” De Jong says, responding to the question of root causes. “The issue is economic poverty.”
Related Stories
Swept
Prelude to a Sweep
Eviction Day
‘A Place That Absorbs Lost Souls’
Adequate Shelter?
Fuzzy Numbers
This article appears in Prelude to a Sweep.
This expert says, “Keep track of where the semi-permanent people go that did not move into housing. Outreach needs to follow up with them daily for at least the next month and work on other options to living outdoors.” The fatal problem is other options. Eureka, Humboldt, California all have a severe shortage of affordable housing. In response some have chosen to live in tents or self-made structures. This is the “problem”. Why are we spending so much time and energy on “sweeps”, “clean-ups” and “addressing” camps?
“Don’t make tent cities a possible solution, regardless of a lack of existing shelter options”? What then, force people into the Mission or similar non-solution? Why is a legal camp not an alternative to opening another shelter?
“Do not try to arrest your way out of it or damage/take peoples belongings as a tough love approach to resolving the tent city.” Eureka Police Department may have refused to do this, but individual officers and City workers have done exactly that, or simple damaged tents to make them unusable. And though there are few arrests for camping, there are many tickets written that later become warrants for failure to appear.
And what is the Court’s response? For some it is summary probation with the condition of “obey all laws”. How is that possible for someone that does not have housing? I told a person to go back and talk to the conflict counsel assigned to the case. The answer was that the state and city have said camping is illegal; others manage out there without getting ticketed, you were sleeping in a doorway, find somewhere else. The officer there when the person’s camp was cleared told me some people have to hit rock bottom before accepting help. I didn’t tell him that I was told by a social worker that no matter how great the service, a high success rate only comes with the desire to participate.
“The issue is economic poverty.” And what do we do in the meantime? Clear camps and don’t let them reestablish? It was a textbook clearing of the Marsh, and now over a year without a “limited enforcement area” (to avoid having a legal camp). Still no solution to economic poverty, still a housing shortage. Still poor people sitting on sidewalks and sleeping under bushes and on doorsteps. Now there are people who decided Betty Chinn’s stored tents and sleeping bags should be given to those they were intended for. While there they took things intended for others. Betty didn’t deserve that, those who depend on St. Vinnie’s didn’t deserve to have it shut down, the person who got the first no sitting ticket didn’t deserve that, the woman trying to contact her social worker didn’t deserve to be politely told to move-on eight times in one day. I have heard people without housing refer to jail as three meals and a bed. Now what, Mr. De Jong?
The City and County have a Homeless Strategies and Implementation plan. It quotes the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, “The forced dispersal of people from encampment settings is not an appropriate solution or strategy, accomplishes nothing toward the goal of linking people to permanent housing opportunities, and can make it more difficult to provide such lasting solutions to the people who have been sleeping and living in the encampment.” On the other hand, “a legal encampment creates costs which can prevent funding from being directed to supporting and creating permanent housing and service options.” When will the costs of not having a legal option for those willing to accept living in a tent be considered?