Homeless Camp In Affluent Neighborhood

[Wahoo Redux]

This story:

Proposed homeless camp in church parking lot unsettles progressive Denver

On the one hand, I totally understand why the Denverians are being chided for being hypocritical.  "Black Lives Matter" on the lawn.  A camp for the homeless?  Not so much.

On the other hand, I'm from a temperate region on the west coast and grew up dealing with the broad category of people we call "the homeless."  These experiences were very often far from positive.  I can understand a very practical concern for putting a homeless camp in the middle of a residential neighborhood.

I'm just curious about what people have to say.

[AvidReader]

When I was in grad school, spouse and I spent a year in frigid squalor above the parish hall of a church, where we paid low rent in exchange for unlocking the church each morning and locking it up in the evening. One evening, two transients asked if they could sleep under the awning in front of the church, and we took them down two blankets for the night. The minister was furious and bought a big heavy chain and an ostentatious padlock to add to the front gate because "we don't need those sorts of people here."

This Denver church sounds like the sort of church I would like to attend.

AR.

[financeguy]

I'm in one of the many cities in the US that is under liberal democrat control that has encampments springing up everywhere. At least in my city, the homeless situation is being exacerbated INTENTIONALLY to provide cover to pass one bill after another as a sweetheart deal for developers who will "solve" the homeless issue. (At 600k per unit or 370k per portable restroom placed in these areas.) It amazes me that the citizens still believe this is the case despite city council members being federally indicted for real estate kick backs and elected officials refusing to disclose the use of proceeds from another massive homeless funding bill in a recent election despite court order. Apparently the technique of creating (or refusing to even attempt to solve) a problem if it allows you to promote an existing agenda is called "nudging."

[dismalist]

You will have as many homeless people as you are willing to pay for.

[Hegemony]

Matthew 25: 34-40:  Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.' Then the righteous will answer him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink?  And when did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you?  And when did we see you sick or in prison and visit you?'  And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'

[mamselle]

The minister of the church I joined in the 70's used to bring soup out to the homeless folks on the public common in front of the church.

They opened a soup kitchen a few years later, and I think it's still going.

I was most impressed the day I was leaving from choir practice in the pouring rain and saw our vestry's senior warden take off his Burberry raincoat and give it to one of the people leaving the soup kitchen after dinner.

He didn't just hand it to him.

He stood there, helping him try it on, seeing if it fitted at the shoulders and back, and then went back in the church, ostensibly to get something.

He waited to be sure the guy could wear it and was comfortable before going back out to his car and driving off.

You can't teach that kind of compassion....it's caught, learned by example.

That's not to say there aren't potential problems. They had to take off the red silk damask cushions from the pews because people would go to sleep on them and wet themselves. They didn't want to close the church--it was open from 7 AM until 9 PM every day--but to save the cushions, they got a set of less expensive ones and put those out for the weekdays instead.

And you do have to watch about letting people actually sleep in the church building--fires have gotten started from a stray cigarette ash, and the insurance might not cover it, so the person in charge of the building has to be able to set clear limits and maintain them with friendliness and firmness.

We also had a series of wallet thefts, which were traced to one individual, and he had to be banned after he did it all a second time after having been warned.

But the point is to take things on a case-by-case basis, be considerate and respectful, know how to defuse things with wisdom and steadiness, and be able to anticipate difficulties and prevent unnecessary problems while making the resources you can share available to the fullest extent possible.

As Hegemony points out, basically, the church is not your house. Its land is not your land--or not only yours.

It's Someone else's, and They've told you how they want you to treat their guests.

So you do.

M.

[Economizer]

In one of writer Stuart Woods first major successes, "CHIEFS", he has a major character instructing an incoming sheriff as to why homeless camps, hobo jungles, and such cannot be allowed to appear and to thrive. It is quite compelling in defeating charitable reasoning instances.

[Wahoo Redux]

See, I think maybe we are missing part of the equation here.

As I posted, I am from a part of the world known for it "homeless problem."  And I'm sorry, but in my experience the homeless are often a problem, and not the 'I'm-annoyed-that-a-poor-person-is-within-my-sightlines' kind of problem.

I think all good people will agree that we must do more for all sorts of people, but we might also acknowledge the reality of the homeless population.

I am male and large enough physically that I would not make an ideal victim, but I was menaced on more than one occasion by vagrants and drug addicts; I always managed to back them down or safely ignore them and I am lucky.  I had a friend in college who was assaulted by two homeless men and hospitalized because he would not give them admission to a dormitory party.  I had another friend who was threatened with a knife and ran away.  And I had several female friends who were followed by men who were apparently homeless.  I personally have witnessed at least a dozen brawls in the street involving people who looked like indigents.  And I have had a car broken into...I do not know who, exactly, but I suspect it was a desperate person trying to burgle me (they only got some change in the ashtray and a mixed tape).

Not to mention that homeless camps tend to produce a great deal of garbage and squalor.  I'm sure the church in question here had some sort of sanitation plan----still, you have people living outdoors without tidy indoor private bathrooms and a garbage disposal in their sink and you are going to have waste problems.

There are also crime statistics dealing with homeless populations we can look at.

What this boils down to is that I have some sympathy with the neighborhood in the story.  Sure, let's help people, but let's keep ourselves safe too.  A neighborhood might not be the best place for an encampment for obvious reasons.  And there is a difference between helping a family who has been displaced by a layoff or a victim of domestic violence and a violent sociopath or a violent drug addict.

I truly appreciate the idealism here...but can we make that work in this circumstance?

[pgher]

I volunteer weekly at a local homeless shelter. One of the things I love about it is that everyone is welcome and loved. It doesn't matter what they have done before they came. The flip side is that they have a fairly substantial list of people who have been banned because they would not follow the shelter's rules. Some people cannot return love in the way it is given to them. That's reality.

There is a perception in our town that this shelter is attracting the homeless from other communities. The reality is that we have fewer homeless individuals in total, and a less troublesome homeless community, than comparable towns in our state. The shelter's staff works very hard to help people transition to a stable life--connecting them with agencies that can help with addiction, mental health, etc. Working through the bureaucracy that is purportedly to prevent fraud, but actually to prevent service to the unworthy. Supporting people until they can get into Section 8 housing. Helping them find work.

In this particular case, it appears to me, as an outsider, that the Park Hill church is doing the right thing. No violent or sexual offenders. Keeping things orderly. The best quote is the last line: "So I would really, really invite people in the community who feel like, 'My neighborhood isn't the right place for this,' to rethink: Whose neighborhood is?"

[ciao_yall]

The homeless have to go somewhere. My city has opened up safe sleeping spaces with tents, portable showers and toilets, food and other services. I pass by there regularly and it seems pretty quiet and well-run.

Near my neighborhood there is a huge homeless problem. A nonprofit wanted to open a shelter right in the neighborhood and, while most neighbors were supportive, a few complained. Really? You would rather have people sleep in the street? And if you deny this shelter, where do you think they will go?

Just read the article - a young woman is worried about walking home late at night after parking her car. Wouldn't she feel safer if people were settled, sleeping in a camp, than out wandering around?

[apl68]

While I understand the neighbors' concerns, the church is doing what it needs to do.  The downtown church that I belonged to in Nashville for some years was one of several churches that housed homeless people on a rotation.  These were not long-term street people, but we did have some of those attending off and on from the rescue mission nearby.  One of those visitors was an ex-con who ended up becoming a member of our Sunday school class.  He found work, moved in for a time with a guy I knew who had some room (In return he helped him remodel the place), and had plenty of visitors when he had to undergo back surgery at the local municipal hospital.  Victories like that over the streets are far too rare.  But they're wonderful to see when they happen.

In our town outright homelessness isn't common.  Our declining population means that there's an abundance of shelter that can be had cheap.  Unfortunately some of it is very old and dilapidated, and the poorest don't have money to maintain and repair it.  A number of local churches help out with repair and maintenance as they learn about needs and have opportunity.  There's a real need for a more coordinated and better-resourced effort.  I hear about "financial independence" types who are trying to hoard two million dollars or so to live on for the rest of their lives, and think what incredible things we could do around here to improve quality of life for dozens of households if we just had that kind of money available.

[mamselle]

I truly appreciate the idealism here...but can we make that work in this circumstance?

Several of us are saying "yes," and showing how.

There are resources for such projects. The American Friends' Service Committee helped establish the meals program I described above, and they had a very tightly-constructed, practical, workable program proposal that went through very three committees (the AFSC itself, that of the church involved, and the town's zoning board with some of its social services support folks present) before being put into place.

A few years later, two different churches in the 12-church ministerial coalition for that part of the town created night shelters (one has evolved into a fully staffed daytime/nighttime shelter) as well.

The meals program start-up was in 1980. The two shelters started 3-5 years later. They're all three still running, the regrettable necessity still being in existence.

M.

[Caracal]

See, I think maybe we are missing part of the equation here.

As I posted, I am from a part of the world known for it "homeless problem."  And I'm sorry, but in my experience the homeless are often a problem, and not the 'I'm-annoyed-that-a-poor-person-is-within-my-sightlines' kind of problem.

I think all good people will agree that we must do more for all sorts of people, but we might also acknowledge the reality of the homeless population.

I am male and large enough physically that I would not make an ideal victim, but I was menaced on more than one occasion by vagrants and drug addicts; I always managed to back them down or safely ignore them and I am lucky.  I had a friend in college who was assaulted by two homeless men and hospitalized because he would not give them admission to a dormitory party.  I had another friend who was threatened with a knife and ran away.  And I had several female friends who were followed by men who were apparently homeless.  I personally have witnessed at least a dozen brawls in the street involving people who looked like indigents.  And I have had a car broken into...I do not know who, exactly, but I suspect it was a desperate person trying to burgle me (they only got some change in the ashtray and a mixed tape).

Not to mention that homeless camps tend to produce a great deal of garbage and squalor.  I'm sure the church in question here had some sort of sanitation plan----still, you have people living outdoors without tidy indoor private bathrooms and a garbage disposal in their sink and you are going to have waste problems.

There are also crime statistics dealing with homeless populations we can look at.

What this boils down to is that I have some sympathy with the neighborhood in the story.  Sure, let's help people, but let's keep ourselves safe too.  A neighborhood might not be the best place for an encampment for obvious reasons.  And there is a difference between helping a family who has been displaced by a layoff or a victim of domestic violence and a violent sociopath or a violent drug addict.

I truly appreciate the idealism here...but can we make that work in this circumstance?

I went to grad school in an area where a fair number of homeless people hung around and never had any problems or heard of them. The large majority of homeless people don't commit violent crimes, usually they are more likely to be the victims of them.

Now, obviously, there is a higher rate of violent crime among people experiencing homelessness. Most of that crime is against other homeless people, but not all. However, the story makes it clear that people with violent criminal records aren't going to be allowed in this encampment and there will be security. Given that, all these worries about children and safety seem overblown.

Safety sounds nice, but it is often used to justify discrimination and cruelty. In this case, the argument seems to be that the proper place for homeless people is in poor neighborhoods. Why should poorer people have to bear all the costs?

[Wahoo Redux]

I truly appreciate the idealism here...but can we make that work in this circumstance?

Several of us are saying "yes," and showing how.

There are resources for such projects. The American Friends' Service Committee helped establish the meals program I described above, and they had a very tightly-constructed, practical, workable program proposal that went through very three committees (the AFSC itself, that of the church involved, and the town's zoning board with some of its social services support folks present) before being put into place.

A few years later, two different churches in the 12-church ministerial coalition for that part of the town created night shelters (one has evolved into a fully staffed daytime/nighttime shelter) as well.

The meals program start-up was in 1980. The two shelters started 3-5 years later. They're all three still running, the regrettable necessity still being in existence.

M.

I am well aware of these sorts of programs.

I am well aware of their failures.  As you note, they are still regrettably in existence.

My question is about the safety of a parking-lot encampment in a neighborhood.

[Caracal]

I truly appreciate the idealism here...but can we make that work in this circumstance?

Several of us are saying "yes," and showing how.

There are resources for such projects. The American Friends' Service Committee helped establish the meals program I described above, and they had a very tightly-constructed, practical, workable program proposal that went through very three committees (the AFSC itself, that of the church involved, and the town's zoning board with some of its social services support folks present) before being put into place.

A few years later, two different churches in the 12-church ministerial coalition for that part of the town created night shelters (one has evolved into a fully staffed daytime/nighttime shelter) as well.

The meals program start-up was in 1980. The two shelters started 3-5 years later. They're all three still running, the regrettable necessity still being in existence.

M.

I am well aware of these sorts of programs.

I am well aware of their failures.  As you note, they are still regrettably in existence.

My question is about the safety of a parking-lot encampment in a neighborhood.

Are there places that aren't neighborhoods where these could exist?