Homelessness [split from Leadville and Salida Ranger Districts]

[WanderingRose]

do you think the 14-day rule could challenge BML as unconstitutional by the homeless (no home base)?

I don’t believe this ruling applies to nomads with no home base, but within communities with inadequate shelter space for those living on their streets.

The 14 day rule on federal lands has been in place for many years, and requires that people move, not that they cease to occupy any space on federal land.

This seems to be more strictly enforced in recent years, from what I have personally seen.

“Dispersed camping is generally allowed on public land for a period not to exceed 14 days within a 28 consecutive day period.
Camping | Bureau of Land Management

Bureau of Land Management (.gov)
Camping or overnight occupancy in any dispersed areas by any person or group for more than 14 consecutive days within a 30-day period is prohibited.
14 Day Stay Limit at National Forests Campgrounds And Dispersed Areas
United States Department of ...”

 

[bullfrog !]

We have laws but it would be unjust to enforce them if the person breaking them had no other legal option in my opinion. Law enforcement used to be done and still is done at the officer’s discretion in many cases unless a higher ranking officer or city official directs them otherwise. Again the training, culture and social values of the community the officer works and lives in comes into play. Officers need to have options to offer to people who they observe potentially, in their judgment, breaking the law. When dealing with medical or mental problems where the individual is not capable of conducting themselves in a safe or reasonable manner there needs to be intervention by a specialist and courts get involved. Problem is none of these systems exist or if they do they are not working well. Usually the solution is to throw money at them but even that doesn’t work unless you have well trained people that care about what needs to be done. Our systems need improvement and people whose main concern is bettering the lives of people. If you vote for people that don’t have that as a primary goal improvement of our systems isn’t going to happen. It’s just that simple. Depending on private organizations doesn’t work because their only enforcement power is expulsion limiting their effectiveness. My point is throwing them in jail or forcing them to move is just causing a larger problem. We need people that care about helping people improve their lives in charge of improving and creating systems and laws that do just that. Other countries with less resources are doing a better job than we are in some cases it seems to me. There is only one reason it isn’t getting done here and that is us as a country not dealing with the problems by voting for people who care and can get what is needed done.

 

[WanderingRose]

When dealing with medical or mental problems where the individual is not capable of conducting themselves in a safe or reasonable manner there needs to be intervention by a specialist and courts get involved. Problem is none of these systems exist or if they do they are not working well.

The “threat to self or others” is the standard for involuntary intervention nationwide, I believe, which is a fairly high bar and requires sanction by a judge for then time limited hospitalization.

I have noticed in the past few years a more coordinated enforcement of time limits on public lands, and it is to prevent them from becoming permanent homes to those who have chosen a nomadic lifestyle.

And all the associated issues.

I suspect that the most handicapped, with mental health and/or substance abuse issues, do not go miles out into federal lands but stay in communities where food and other amenities of choice are more readily available.

 

[rruff]

Officers need to have options to offer to people who they observe potentially, in their judgment, breaking the law.

Where I live, the favored response seems to be to buy them a bus ticket to Roswell...

I suspect that the most handicapped, with mental health and/or substance abuse issues, do not go miles out into federal lands but stay in communities where food and other amenities of choice are more readily available.

Maintianing a vehicle that can reliably venture far into the boonies and be livable, requires a pretty high degree of functioning. Plus income.

Regarding the theory that "city administrators are so highly paid that they have incentive to *not* solve the problem"... I've actually thought about it, and think the opposite is true. Any funding or activity that they are able to garner will only enhance their position, and it will never be eliminated. There is no "solving" especially on a local level. The more you spend, the more will come. If a city instead has a policy of kicking the homeless out, the administrator will be out of a job.

 

[WanderingRose]

Exactly.

 

[LoupGarou]

Will you let me know what you think about homeless nomads being exempted from the 14-day limit on BLM land?

Great question.

There will never be an exemption. If anything, the rules will become more strictly enforced. You might start seeing signs that read "NO RESIDENTIAL CAMPING, RECREATIONAL CAMPING ONLY, 14-DAY LIMIT".

Residential camping and squatting on Federal Land is illegal. The 14-day limit is for "Recreational Campers" only. "Residential Campers" are not allowed at all, period, for any length of time. If one is living in or out of a vehicle you can certainly say you're just camping, but be prepared to provide proof of a legal physical address elsewhere. Moving every 14-days doesn't make it legal. All one is doing is playing hide and seek with authorities.

Regarding Federal Land, the only residential camping exception that I'm aware of being the Long-Term Visitor Areas, LTVA. If one doesn't want to be moving around a Short or Long-Term Permit can be purchased.

 

[RonDean]

A number of years ago (this not being a new problem - it's just getting worse) my daughter was camp host at a forest service campground. There were several families that would be described as "residential campers." She turned a blind eye to their overstay because she had actually talked to them and learned their situation. They had no alternative legal options available to them and were not causing any problems. Over the course of one summer, they were able to save enough money to move on to a better situation. Too bad this required someone ignoring rules. With a little thought and very little money this could have been provided by authorities.

 

[WanderingRose]

This article in The Guardian this morning, about parking lots designated as safe space parking, complete with water, toilet facilities, no curfew, etc.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-sleep-in-car-rv-homelessness-housing-shelter

 

[Morgana]

A number of years ago (this not being a new problem - it's just getting worse) my daughter was camp host at a forest service campground. There were several families that would be described as "residential campers." She turned a blind eye to their overstay because she had actually talked to them and learned their situation. They had no alternative legal options available to them and were not causing any problems. Over the course of one summer, they were able to save enough money to move on to a better situation. Too bad this required someone ignoring rules.

Good for your daughter!
Not to disagree with anything you said, just to mention also that sometimes "rules" can be useful as a backstop -- if people behave, ignore them, but if they don't, then "out you go, sorry, I don't make the rules."
That sort of individual discretion is probably getting harder to exercise the more crowded we get and the more social trust breaks down -- but it's nice when it works.

 

[Morgana]

Story about how local government attempts to crack down on homeless encampments in Kalispell, Montana, have led to random acts of cruelty and even murder.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/09/...e_code=1.MU0.HPAe.ToP1AmwYOLqj&smid=url-share
Most of these homeless people are not nomads but local residents displaced by rising prices.
We humans have an ugly side for sure. We shouldn't let anyone give us an excuse to indulge it. Could be our turn tomorrow.

 

[Gr8ful]

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."
Thomas Jefferson I love his quotes, if you haven't read them you shoud.

 

[WanderingRose]

It sounds like city leaders led the charge, and sanctioned abuse and neglect of their homeless.

“In Kalispell, city leaders approved an ordinance to punish motorists who give money or supplies to panhandlers. They shut off water and electricity at a city park where some were seeking refuge. The county commissioners wrote an open letter to the community early last year, warning that providing shelter or resources to homeless people would “enable” them and entice more of them into the area.”

 

[Morgana]

I think it's really important these days to have our own "moral compass" and not let other people convince us it's OK to act in ways we know are not really OK. That was always important but there's so much cruelty floating around right now and so much /encouragement/ to be cruel, including sometimes from people in high places. We have to stay captain of our own ship (even if it's just a leaky rowboat with one oar )

 

[user 22017]

Story about how local government attempts to crack down on homeless encampments in Kalispell, Montana, have led to random acts of cruelty and even murder.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/09/...e_code=1.MU0.HPAe.ToP1AmwYOLqj&smid=url-share
Most of these homeless people are not nomads but local residents displaced by rising prices.
We humans have an ugly side for sure. We shouldn't let anyone give us an excuse to indulge it. Could be our turn tomorrow.

That article is infuriating. It's happening all over. Now can we tax the rich and corporations?

People are scared so they scapegoat. Rather than band together to address the causes of issues, they blame others. Usually the easiest targets. Cowards.

Educating the masses would help. We should do what FinIand did and scrap our current education system. Replace it with what works.

I guess this is another sign of end stage capitalism.

Why isn't the State involved? The local police and those employed to help the homeless should have contacted the state police and governor. If they fail to help, then the Feds.

Guessing that is all in the works.

Edit: Rep. Cori Bush, St. Louis, reintroduced her bill that addresses homelessness...

https://nlihc.org/resource/congresswoman-cori-bush-reintroduces-unhoused-bill-rights

 

[RonDean]

That article is infuriating. It's happening all over. Now can we tax the rich and corporations?

People are scared so they scapegoat. Rather than band together to address the causes of issues, they blame others. Usually the easiest targets. Cowards.

Educating the masses would help. We should do what FinIand did and scrap our current education system. Replace it with what works.

I guess this is another sign of end stage capitalism.

Why isn't the State involved? The local police and those employed to help the homeless should have contacted the state police and governor. If they fail to help, then the Feds.

Guessing that is all in the works.

Edit: Rep. Cori Bush, St. Louis, reintroduced her bill that addresses homelessness...

https://nlihc.org/resource/congresswoman-cori-bush-reintroduces-unhoused-bill-rights

If anyone hits the paywall reading this story, here is an alternative link:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/city-campaign-against-homelessness-brings-125214332.html
Aside from the morality, or lack thereof, we should also remember that there might be many people out there that do not distinguish between homeless people and Nomads.

 

[WanderingRose]

Kalispell is an example of the power of leaders, wherever and whenever, in whatever context is at hand.

It sounds like the issues primarily revolved around tents and other temporary shelters springing up in public places.

The leaders made it okay to target these people, and criminalized helping them, so your basic sheep personality multiplied down a really negative path.

Sadly, Human Behavior 101.

Always have and try to hold onto your own moral compass, is the moral of this story.

 

[Morgana]

If anyone hits the paywall reading this story

It was a gift link. There was no paywall.

 

[RonDean]

It was a gift link. There was no paywall.

Yet, I hit one. (shrug)

 

[islanderxx]

The most liberal city and the most liberal governor is asking for help to clear encampment in their City. Can we accuse them of being cruel because they want to clear the homeless encampment? This is an exert for Californiacity News "One of the cities still dealing with the aftermath of Boise is San Francisco, where a court recently barred the city from clearing homeless encampments. Officials are now urging the Ninth Circuit to vacate the order.

Hundreds of people, including Mayor London Breed, attended a rally outside the federal courthouse last week.

"The fact that the courts have crippled our ability to do our job to help get people into shelter is criminal. If we have a place for someone to go. They need to go. There has to be accountability," Breed said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom also took a shot at the courts for tying localities’ hands.

"In California, we are cutting red tape and making unprecedented investments to address homelessness, but with each hard-fought step forward, the courts are creating costly delays that slow progress,” he said. “I urge the courts to empower local communities to address street encampments quickly and comprehensively." We can't always accuse people who want to manage homeless encampments as cruel.

 

[RonDean]

The most liberal city and the most liberal governor is asking for help to clear encampment in their City. Can we accuse them of being cruel because they want to clear the homeless encampment? This is an exert for Californiacity News "One of the cities still dealing with the aftermath of Boise is San Francisco, where a court recently barred the city from clearing homeless encampments. Officials are now urging the Ninth Circuit to vacate the order.

Hundreds of people, including Mayor London Breed, attended a rally outside the federal courthouse last week.

"The fact that the courts have crippled our ability to do our job to help get people into shelter is criminal. If we have a place for someone to go. They need to go. There has to be accountability," Breed said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom also took a shot at the courts for tying localities’ hands.

"In California, we are cutting red tape and making unprecedented investments to address homelessness, but with each hard-fought step forward, the courts are creating costly delays that slow progress,” he said. “I urge the courts to empower local communities to address street encampments quickly and comprehensively." We can't always accuse people who want to manage homeless encampments as cruel.

I don't know that this is a liberal/conservative issue. According to the information I have seen, SF's biggest problem is a simple lack of sufficient housing - especially low-cost housing. They are surrounded on 3 sides by water and the 4th by already existing infrastructure. There is no place to expand. Thus SF has become a very expensive place to live. Cal may have a "Housing First" policy, which does work where there is sufficient available housing, but Cal in general and SF in specific just does not have that. Some groups oppose that policy in favor of more temporary group shelters while ignoring the fact that the majority of the homeless would rather stay on the street before using them and abiding by their policies. Then we have courts that hamstring all the efforts of municipal governments to deal with homelessness. It's a real mess and unfortunately is not likely to change.