The responses Nevius received over his articles in the Chron about the Homeless in the Golden Gate Park brought to my own mind a couple of things that need mentioning. First, formerly Homeless person Paul Boden, who is now the regional director for the Homeless Coalition, suggests a possible solution that - and please pardon my harshness here, it is not meant as an attack on him - borders on the absurd, and it reaches the level of inanity when one considers that he's been Homeless himself. I say this because it would appear that Mr. Boden has forgotten just how hard it is to have Homeless"people policing each other," since to do so almost certainly would lead to retaliatory acts and"snitch" jackets for those who do try to enforce traditional societal rules against their own.
And lets not forget here the possible ostracizing from the Homeless culture for those who do come forward and rat out their homeless brothers and sisters - something not very appealing to those who must live within its parameters on a daily basis. No, the Homeless need law enforcement to handle the troublemakers just like we do and it is pure folly to think that they can police their own any more effectively than we could take on a vigilante role in our communities.
The second thing that deserves a mention here is the statement that "Advocates want big, sweeping changes." This is absolutely the truth and I have been lamenting this fact since coming to Nashville and running head-on into the local advocacy groups' macro-level solution demands. My lamentation is not with the need for these changes, rather, it is with the unfortunate lack of effort at the micro-level, immediate-need demands that I must address with my clients as we await the passage and introduction of those long-term solutions. The wait has been very long indeed- at least two decades now and counting - and frankly, my clients are tired of waiting. They need medicines, clothes, food, shelter, healthcare, transportation and a host of other short-term needs that will simply not wait for those long-term solutions to be enacted.
Finally, there is the issue of meeting "standards of behavior," since "needles in the park are not acceptable." This is an area I think we advocates lose sight of occasionally when we fight for our clients. Look, I've said it before and I'll say it again, just because one is Homeless does not give one the right to break laws and create dangerous situations for the rest of the population. Used rigs (hypodermic syringes) and condoms, smashed alcohol bottles, human excrement and garbage are unacceptable to leave lying about in a public space. Period.
Most of the Homeless I advocate for are in complete agreement with this and work diligently to ensure they don't contribute to the negative image that the occasional bad Homeless apple brings to the population, as they are keenly aware that shitting in one's own bed merely brings more shit to one's daytime hours.
C.W. Nevius gives both sides a say on camping at Golden Gate Park
Nothing reflects the political and social climate of San Francisco better than the reactions to my columns about the homeless encampments in Golden Gate Park.
Readers who responded have been both thoughtful and sputtering mad. Their comments have ranged from deeply moving to utterly callous.
We've given a voice to the neighbors and residents, who are in most cases regular folks, often sympathetic to the plight of homeless people, but feeling that a line of decency has to be established. The blogs and the comments on SFGate.com have offered space for the angry, send-'em-all to prison types.
And then there are the rock-ribbed, adamant advocates for the homeless. They continue to write and call to tell me how disappointed they are in my one-sided point of view.
So I thought I would call some them to give them their chance. What is their solution to the homeless people in the park? Even they admit it isn't an easy question.
"We don't have options for them," says dark horse mayoral candidate Quintin Mecke of the Safety Network Partnership, a city-funded community coalition that addresses crime, public safety and drug abuse in neighborhoods. "So if not the park, where?"
That is often the jumping off point for advocates. The "Where do you want to put them?" argument leads down a familiar path of unaccountabilit
That may be. But what I was asking for was their answer to a specific problem - a park inhabited by homeless people, some of whom use it as a place to get drunk or to shoot up, after buying booze or drugs with money earned at a recycling center also located in the park, and leaving behind bottles and used syringes (needles that were supplied, as it turns out, by well-meaning city public health officials).
"I am not here to address the park," insisted Juan Prada, executive director of the Coalition of Homelessness. "You're talking about maybe 200 people in the park. We have between six and eight thousand homeless in San Francisco. As a problem, the park takes a back seat."
But eventually they did address it - even Paul Boden, a regional director for the Homeless Coalition, who has complained that "every single article about Golden Gate Park has been about how the problems are our fault."
The quotable Boden, who was homeless himself in the 1980s, is among those who doesn't think the campsites are a huge problem. In fact, he'd be willing to let campers live in the park, although he'd try to clean things up.
"If the sites were clean, and you had people policing each other," Boden says, "the impact of having homeless people in public places would be minimal."
Hilary McQuie, of the Harm Reduction Coalition, agrees, suggesting a kind of hotel arrangement.
"I think we should let people sleep there at night, but have enough staff to make them move during the day," she says. "I would rather see them sleep in the park on the soft ground, than see them on the sidewalk when I go to the show."
Really? That kind of idea - that homeless camps wouldn't really be a problem as long as they were well-managed - is exactly what sets off the conservative e-mailers and bloggers. But it has to be said that not all the advocates think Camp Homeless is a good idea. Mecke came out and flatly said that people should not be sleeping in the park.
"It is a difficult question," Mecke says, "but that is not to suggest that the park should be an option by any means." But he didn't offer an alternative.
"No, it is not OK for someone to be sleeping in the park," says Prada, but comes to that conclusion from the perspective of an advocate who believes it is a societal problem. "It is never OK that people are homeless."
Everyone agrees that this is where the discussion always seems to break down. The neighborhood residents always make the same point - I wouldn't mind them, but they leave trash all over the place - and the advocates want to turn the discussion to questions about "why are you blaming the homeless instead of working for solutions?"
As Prada says, "It seems like we are chasing our tails."
Advocates want big, sweeping changes. Boden talks about the sad state of some of the shelters. And he's probably got a point; some of the homeless people we spoke to hate the basic shelters. One park resident, who would identify himself only as Steven, said that when he went to a shelter he had to tie his shoes around his neck or they would be stolen while he slept.
"I will tell you this right now," Boden said. "If I was homeless I'd be living out on the street. Because there is no way I would put up with the crap they put you through in the shelters. "
Compare that to the residents around the park, who send us photos of scavengers raiding their recycle bins and stealing their mail. They don't advocate huge, sweeping changes. They'd just like to find a way to keep syringes out of the park.
"Standards of behavior have to be met," agrees the Safety Network's Mecke. "Needles in the park are not acceptable."
But that brings us back to the beginning. Is the problem the individuals or a lack of political leadership?
"What if the Giants kept striking out, every time they came to bat?" asked Boden. "Would you guys keep writing that they can't hit? Or would you look into it and find out that they canceled batting practice because they couldn't afford it?"
Actually, we'd probably write both of those stories. But the focus would still be that people were striking out at the park, day after day.
C.W. Nevius' column appears regularly. His blog C.W. Nevius.blog can be found at SFGate.com. E-mail him at cwnevius@sfchro
