Wilson's shelter plan winning people over
Some residents see progress while others are not so certain
Is Portland getting better? Do we see progress toward unraveling the Gordian knot of homelessness/addiction/mental illness? Is normal life and commerce returning?
We’ve been asking ourselves these questions daily, leaning on our personal optimism or pessimism but finding few benchmarks on which to measure our course.
Leaving ambiguity behind, large numbers of Portlanders went on record last month with a clear conclusion: Things are getting better.
It was not an opinion poll, nor a representative sampling of the population. It flowed from engaged citizens attempting to influence a policy at the heart of the conundrum: Should sweeps of homeless camps be defunded?
Results of in-person testimony during a three-hour hearing on Nov. 12 as well as written comments were solidly against defunding, but they also spoke of faith in the city’s future, which may be of far greater consequence.
City Councilor Angelita Morillo introduced the defunding amendment five days before the council vote. Despite the late notice, 84 people testified and 1,108 submitted written comments. The amendment ultimately died because one promised supporter, Councilor Loretta Smith, reversed her position the day before the meeting.
The same result would have been reached if representatives were listening to their constituents.
31% supported defunding
Only 31% of speakers supported defunding, the same percentage as those submitting written comments. The primary reason given against blowing up Mayor Keith Wilson’s broad plan of shelters and adjacent nuisance abatement is that citizens believed the system is working. They said Portland is getting better.
Almost 40% of those opposing defunding said they think conditions on the ground are improving and/or the Impact Reduction Program is helping. Most said nothing one way or another on that topic, but it is notable that nobody said that things have gotten worse since the shelter and mitigation system was instituted.
“Two years ago, I was daily cleaning human feces, needles, burnt foil and chasing drug addicts and violent offenders out of the back alley,” said Laura Curry, who lives next to Interstate 405. “Because of what is now currently happening with the mayor’s overnight sheltering system, my neighborhood is getting safer. … This is progress that’s happening in the city of Portland.”
Downtown resident Sandeep Divakar said, “Because of the Impact Reduction Program and the responsiveness from Shelter Portland and the mayor’s office, the neighborhood is much safer than it was two months ago. I wasn’t a fan of Mayor Wilson and his shelters before, but I am now.”
“The good news is that Portland is slowly and surely beginning to shed its reputation as a city in trouble,” Pearl resident Stephen Kafoury said. “The mayor’s actions have laid the groundwork for its reemergence. Streets are being cleaned, graffiti is being removed, shelters are being opened.”
“Since the IRP increased its presence, our neighborhood has never been cleaner or safer,” said Katherine Applegarth, administrator of the International School of Portland in downtown. “We see it: our families feel it. The promise of renewal is working. The IRP isn’t just about garbage removal or campsite assessments. It’s about dignity, safety and keeping hope visible for the next generation.”
“[This] is a dismantling of one of the few programs that’s actually working — the Impact Reduction Program,” said Bruce Studer, president of the Pearl District Neighborhood Association.
“For the first time in years, we have seen real and measurable progress on our city streets, progress that has improved public safety for both housed and unhoused residents since the program’s implementation,” said Matthew Sweitzer, a Realtor and District 4 resident.
“We are seeing a difference,” said Rachel Clark, owner of the Goose Hollow Inn. “The city is on a course that is reducing the impacts of camping on the people who walk, run and play in the city.”
“I had become more and more of a prisoner in my own condo,” said Pearl District resident Yasmine Sahul, “and last week, for the first time, I felt safe. Thank you, Mayor Wilson, that I felt safe walking from Safeway to my doctor’s office on Kearney and 18th.”
These and other glowing progress reports found no disagreement at the council hearing. That does not mean the conclusion is unanimous.
Oversight committee’s finding
Linda Witt, who chairs the Pearl District Neighborhood Association Shelter Oversight Committee, has been leading a meticulous project measuring livability changes brought on by the 200-bed Northrup Street Shelter that opened on Sept. 2. In a series of five reports to date, nuisances and safety/livability incidents have been logged alongside reports of effective work done by the Impact Reduction Program and other agencies.
Witt’s reports, based on daily inspections by volunteers in 10 zones across the district, have chronicled the good and the bad, as well as offering suggestions for improvement.
Her assessment? In a report to the PDNA board last month, Witt said, that despite diligent work by the Impact Reduction Program, “It really does feel like one step forward, two steps back.”
The citywide program to end unsanctioned camping by Dec. 1 might be having the opposite effect locally.
“We’ve seen an explosion of people sleeping outside in the Pearl,” she said.
How does she explain the rosy reports shared at the council hearing?
“Not everyone can see everything,” she said.
Witnesses may have accurately reported what they saw, but without a methodical system of observing and logging findings, they faced limits.
“They may not see the hot spots,” Witt said.
Another factor perhaps leading to the comments of Portland on the rise could have been the mission of the speakers. Advocates for continued camp sweeps and nuisance abatement might have been less persuasive had they said the plan is not working.
“We need the Impact Reduction Program to continue — that was their play,” Witt said.
John Hollister, a Pearl resident devoting hundreds of hours to the homeless issue in the past five years, concurs.
“I don’t believe it’s gotten better in the Pearl District,” he said. “I think there is a high increase in drug activity around Safeway … and Jamison Park is getting worse.”
The bike parking alcoves around ASA Flats remain troublesome. People leaving the overnight shelter in the morning spread out across the neighborhood, impacting a much larger area, Hollister said.
“This largely tracks with our observations in Old Town,” said Kevin Guinn, an Old Town resident who serves on the Old Town Community Association board. “Maybe a baby step forward, but not much more than that.
“[There is] drug use in vestibules, little coteries of users fanning out from Oasis [day center at Northwest Glisan and Broadway]. They do aggregate a lot of people at the Oasis, some of whom are being bused in from the Eastside (which hardly seems fair). They’ve effectively made Old Town even more of a camping/trespassing “‘oasis.’”
But even some involved with the Shelter Oversight Committee see a brighter side.
Mattt Zmuda makes two loops along the Western edge of the Pearl District daily while bicycling his daughter to school. He used to report a couple of incidents per day, and now the typical number is zero.
“I’ve been canvassing the southeast side of the Pearl since Sept. 23,” Glenn Traeger said. “At that time, I typically saw seven to10 tents, graffiti, and occasionally someone laid out on the sidewalk.
Since Nov. 1, when the mayor’s new tent policy took effect, I’ve seen a reduction to about one to three tents, fewer instances of people passed out on the sidewalk and less graffiti. … The area is looking better than it has in the past.”
Little difference seen
Another member of the Shelter Oversight Committee is Stan Penkin, who was president of the Pearl District Neighborhood Association for seven years.
“Contrary to what some others have been observing, I have not seen a significant difference in day-to-day livability issues since before the opening of the shelter.
“Having made many reports when I do see a tent or a poor condition, the city shelter team has been responsive. Had PDNA not spoken up as it did and continues to do, I am not sure that the city would have paid the same level of attention to the Pearl.”
One downtown resident took a deeper dive into why some say things are looking up.
“I think part of the reason is the very beneficial effects the expansion of Clean and Safe and GuardaWorld (a private security firm hired by the city) is having on western Ddwntown,” he wrote. “We have seen remarkable improvement in our area; far from perfect, but improvement.
“But the problem is we just are upping the cost and sophistication of moving the problem rather than solving it. It will result in spending more money to move things without ever solving the problem while using up problem-solving resources.”
Another message, though unspoken, could be drawn from the council hearing in which many affirmed the city’s direction.
No one speaking in support of Morillo’s amendment offered an opinion on that topic. Incremental progress or decline was not on their minds.
Their position—repeated by many—was that homeless sweeps do not work, while causing further suffering for those uprooted. As to whether the city itself works in the current disequilibrium or whether there’s a light at the end of Portland’s long, dark tunnel, they had nothing to say.
Speaking for myself and the testimony I wrote in supporting IRP - it’s not that I think Wilson’s shelter plan is great or a long term solution. In fact, I think it unfairly overburdens the neighborhoods they put these in, because the city does not follow through on their promises they make in regards to keeping the neighborhood safe. Is there some reason the Pearl can’t get even a normal police presence at some point? Why are known hotbeds of drug activity allowed to continue blocks away from the shelter, as the article points out? Going to Safeway is a crappy experience pretty much any time of day and the Asa alcove remains open to drug dealing. Businesses and residents continue to struggle to exist here. Why is it so difficult to just address these things? Why is any camping allowed at all (there are still tents around 405) or disruptive loitering in our parks? People were forced to “choose a side” on the IRP issue because we all know that if they defunded IRP then we’d be stuck living with these low barrier shelters in our neighborhoods AND not even the minimum amount of garbage pick-up or whatever they are providing now, because ultimately this city council doesn’t care about taxpayer livibility whatsoever. The DSA pretending the 4M they were hoping to redirect was going to make any sort of difference to the overall problem if they just used it “their way” was a complete joke, and I hope Mitch Green goes down in the next election for betraying a large part of his constituents with that frankly malicious move on the few services we do receive to help combat the constant issues we deal with.
If Wilson thinks the way to revitalize the city center was imbedding hundreds of low barrier overnight shelter beds, then letting the inhabitants roam the neighborhoods all day, he’s delusional. His plan I’m sure seems more appealing if you don’t live blocks from a shelter. Unfortunately, thousands of us now do.
We are moving a problem around. It is clearly better during the fay around Safeway Downtown, the South Park Blocks and the Portland Art Museum, but the efforts of the expanded Clean and Safe District and the additional foot traffic from the renovated Portland Art Museum have efficiently and effectively moved the daytime drug use and mental health problem elsewhere. With the help of a needed new day center service, OASIS, the flow went back to Old Town, where the bulk of homeless services have been concentrated. People and now able to do laundry, get showers and fresh clothing, connect to services and even participate in medically assisted outpatient treatment. Naturally, the "overflow has to go somewhere, so it moves into the Pearl and any spot that is lacking oversight equal to to what is provided elsewhere. It flows like water. At night, everywhere in the Central City is the province of the homeless with behavioral health and the dealers who service them. I dare you to set an alarm, get in your car and take a drive through Downtown, Old Town, Goose Hollow, Northwest and Lloyd District or the Central Eastside from 1:00 to 3:00 AM. There is a lot of activity, and if you don't have agency with those with behavioral health illness, you will not feel safe. That is why you see so many people sleeping in alcoves and on sidewalks during the day. Clean and Safe does a count monthly during these hours. The numbers are stunning. That is why I believe that the shelters are at once a success and a failure. They work for some, they don't touch the problem for the rest. By now, anybody who reads my comments knows that the problem is lack of treatment, and that as a recovered addict, I am convinced that is because we need to obligate addicts and people with psychosis to engage in treatment; for their own good and for the rest of us. In my opinion, Multnomah County and Portland especially, despite its best efforts, has a problem with democracy. It is too interested in ideology and not asking all voters about all the things they need to be happy and secure. More on that later.