Imagine you and your belongings being thrown out of the only place you currently call home. Imagine having 40 minutes of warning while the police hover over you as you collect your items.
This is what recently happened to the residents of a Near North Minneapolis tent encampment. This is not the first time we have heard this eviction story, and sadly will not be the last.
Tent encampments have become an inevitable fixture of city landscapes all over the world. While they are not a substitute for permanent housing or longer-term housing solutions, they can provide temporary relief for many individuals and households who do not have access to such housing opportunities. Municipalities need to collaborate with tent encampment leaders and advocates to support unhoused residents in our communities while also advancing housing as a human right. Unless there is enough permanent housing for everyone who is houseless, municipalities ought to start recognizing that living outside is inevitable for many.
The legalization of tent encampments can provide support and relief for some unhoused residents. In a recent MPR article responding to the protest of this most recent eviction at the tent encampment in Near North Minneapolis, one woman states that she has been evicted from three sites in the past week. She is not the only one with that story. Moving residents around does way more harm than good. By providing a home base, such as legalized or sanctioned encampments, local agencies and city leaders can effectively manage and respond in a humane manner. The cities only response at the moment is to ‘bulldoze’ encampments and evict residents as the encampments sprout up and become a nuisance to surrounding areas.
The plan about how to approach these encampments is so impetuous, that it is not even mentioned in the Minneapolis 2040 plan. Minneapolis is playing a game of whack-a-mole with tent encampments, and it is as if unhoused residents’ lives are not on the line.
[image_credit]Provided.[/image_credit][image_caption]Beth Yudelman[/image_caption]
Tent encampment residents in Minneapolis usually face eviction due to unsanitary conditions, sexual misconduct, drug/alcohol use, cold temperatures, and several other safety concerns. This was especially true for the Powderhorn Park Encampment that grew significantly after the murder of George Floyd and as the pandemic continued. There were temporary services on site that mitigated some of these issues for a while, but once those services dwindled out and there was not as much oversight, the situation at this encampment became dire. The Near North Encampment, while not nearly as large or problematic, has been around for 2 years with waves of individuals moving in and out and its final closure was due to sanitary conditions and safety concerns.
In some cities, tent encampments have become legalized. Missoula, Montana, for example, is home to a very successful legalized tent encampment the county calls ‘Temporary Safe Outdoor Space’. The NPR article describing this space states that even when shelters are at 50% capacity, some people still do not want to go. A Star Tribune article about the Near North Encampment in early 2022 explains why this might be the case. One of the residents told the Star Tribune that “she had bad experiences with overcrowding and disrespect from staff in emergency shelters.” This is far too common for many, especially for already marginalized individuals or individuals who experience significant mental health challenges. By creating a safe outdoor space, equipped with individual tents, bathroom facilities, outreach workers, wellness checks and screenings, community gardens, and more, legalized tent encampments can become an adequate alternative to any other temporary housing. Of course, this is one of many band-aid solutions for lack of permanent and affordable housing, but enough is enough with these evictions.
The data shows that individuals inevitably live outdoors either by choice or by force. This is the sad reality for many because our government has not prioritized making housing a human right. Legalizing tent encampments and creating safe outdoor spaces can support those who are unhoused while our society decides whether we are going to invest in solving the affordable housing crisis.
Beth Yudelman is a first-year Master of Urban Planning student at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs concentrating on Housing and Community Development. She lives in St. Paul.
Yes, but according to news and police reports, the existing encampments are not necessarily safe places. And if you’re using drugs, a homeless shelter would not want you around. If we had more police, could legal encampments be adequately patrolled?
No David. Police are not the answer. That has been shown in so many homeless encounter instances over the years. People without guns and tasers, people who have training in social fields, people who will listen and work with, rather than against, these homeless people.
Sorry can’t chew this one down. Kind of like saying lets make a safe place for criminals to be criminals. You don’t think that a tent encampment doesn’t effect the local taxpayer residents in an adverse way? Pan handling, drug needles, drug dealing/usage, (dealers), theft, loitering, harassment, the street/nearest tree is the toilet, noise, commotion, sex trade, trash, litter, these folks can’t take care of themselves much less a legalized tent encampment. We are/have been providing $Millions upon $millions for housing and services, seems that its not or ever will be good enough. Guess the next step is we should support there alcoholism and drug addiction? Why not dry them out and give them some options to rejoin society instead of living in the street? They get to chose. Suspect a fair amount have already chosen the street. “she had bad experiences with overcrowding and disrespect” Suspect we have all had those experiences at one time or another.
Well said Dennis
“Kind of like saying lets make a safe place for criminals to be criminals.”
That’s not at all what it’s saying.
The fundamental issue is that our society has drastically reduced the safety net for people struggling to make ends meet. There is higher demand for affordable housing than available units. The result is what you see today: tent encampments and people sleeping in their cars. If there isn’t housing they can afford, where do you expect them to go?
Thank you Brian, I share your perspective here.
With respect to previous commenters, nowhere in the essay does the author advocate for continuation of encampments under the circumstances of the previous ones. I think they are contending that legalization of tent encampments CAN be ONE type of temporary accommodation. I assume they cited the Missoula, Montana situation as an example of the type of adequately-regulated solution they propose as a stopgap measure.
It’s certainly true that drug use and violence are engaged in by some inhabitants of encampments, and pose a danger to others. That’s why adequate regulation would be needed for successful legalization. But I find it hard to believe that more than a small minority of inhabitants are there to commit such acts. Some unhoused people are able to be helped by the existing type of shelters. But, I can easily believe that many simply can’t endure that degree of lack of privacy and autonomy as a simple matter of mental heath. Fragility of mental health is every bit as incapacitating as fragility of physical health.
The social contract encompasses very many things. Public safety and security are among them. It seems really cruel to me to deny these things to people as a consequence of their lack of housing.
Lemme guess, lock’em up, right. That DOES seem to be your go to hammer, for a great deal of varying objects you collectively label nails, doesn’t it.
“Homelessness from heroin and meth addiction is a real problem that needs to be solved. But being dishonest about the problem solves nothing.”
Yes, and yes. But it is dishonest to solely attribute homelessness to meth & heroin. Which is to say I also agree that your prior observation that “some of the commenters are ignoring facts and pretending there is a reality that fits their own narrative” also applies to you.
“Kind of like saying lets make a safe place for criminals to be criminals.”
It may not be the objective but it will more than likely be the end result!
Per JE below
“These encampments all devolve over time into unsafe, unsanitary squalor. When they do, they inevitably have to be dispersed. The homeless remain a public safety problem that needs more police monitoring, but they’re also a public health problem that demands a stronger social services response. “
You missed acouple important caveats:
“By creating a safe outdoor space, equipped with individual tents, bathroom facilities, outreach workers, wellness checks and screenings, community gardens, and more, legalized tent encampments can become an adequate alternative to any other temporary housing. Of course, this is one of many band-aid solutions for lack of permanent and affordable housing, but enough is enough with these evictions.”
The larger point being: regular evictions exacerbate the problem. The proposal is intended to offer some stability & security that is currently absent for homeless people. Does it have downsides? Yes. If you have a better idea, let’s hear it!
“Any solution to this problem starts with being honest. With acknowledging that these people are in encampments because they are drug addicts”
Weird how you demand honesty & follow immediately with stereotype. Sure, there are addicts who are homeless. But not everyone who is homeless is an addict.
Even ignoring that, you’ve offerred no alternatives.
People weren’t thrilled about having a skid row full of flophouses but that actually looks like a better solution than tent cities in the public parks.
“The fundamental issue is that our society has drastically reduced the safety net for people struggling to make ends meet.”
Cites please. I believe that both the State and Federal government have increased the safety net by declaring more people poor by raising various income thresholds. And, just a week ago we had our incumbent politicians bragging about how much they have helped the poor and middle-class these last few years.
I’m calling B.S.
Homelessness is a real problem that needs to be addressed.
Kinda like poverty is a real problem that needs to be addressed.
You really need to vary your cop-outs. It’s bad enough that you don’t really care enough about either to even bother to propose a solution. Ask least make it look like you’re trying.
Dennis. You readily identify the negative attributes of some of the homeless, and easily put all of them into your ‘never good enough’ category.
You say “why not dry them out and give them some options to rejoin society instead of living in the street”.
Great thought Dennis. Now how about some specifics for that, kind of like the negatives that you so easily listed. Come with something concrete for your ‘$millions and $millions’.
Well the A part is I am not in the Social Services business, the B part is Henn. Cty. ~$330M proposed for public safety next year, ~$657M+ for human services, so, nearly a $Bil, sorry, don’t have the line items. And we aren’t even counting the local charities many for homeless out reach, Harbor Lights, Mary’s place, People serving People, adult connection. etc. etc. etc. etc. So it appears for some folks, unless you are living like Mother Theresa and donating every spare nickle to the homeless/charities etc. you qualify as a cheap heartless bastard, especially when you ask those down and out folks to take some responsibility and help themselves out of their predicament..
I’ll make sure to add homeless folks to your ever growing list of untouchables.
Thanks for your research on this subject.
These encampments all devolve over time into unsafe, unsanitary squalor. When they do, they inevitably have to be dispersed. The homeless remain a public safety problem that needs more police monitoring, but they’re also a public health problem that demands a stronger social services response.
This is all best done in a shelter environment. The biggest problem with shelters is that there aren’t enough of them, largely because it’s almost impossible to build them. Any neighborhood in which you would want to build one will have many opportunities to veto it. And they do.
These encampments demonstrate the need for more shelters, and we should be legalizing the building of more shelters, rather than legalizing tent cities in our parks.
Warehousing the homeless works about as well as warehousing the mentally ill. I get it, out of sight and out of mind and all that, but our problems don’t REALLY magically disappear.
No, those problems are just moved elsewhere, to other people.
I worked for the Mpls Park Board, and I can assure you, those encampments are unsafe and unhealthy physically and mentally. They are no place for a family or children. Europeans are more honest about such encampments, calling them what they truly are, open air drug and prostitution markets. Every single person I encountered there were mentally ill and or addicted to heroin and meth. It is unsanitary, unsafe and unhealthy for the people living there and for the neighborhood.
Thank you for providing a firsthand account to corroborate the assertion that everyone who lives in a tent encampments is either mentally ill or a meth addict.
A little racial internment camp history aside, I offer beautiful Pike Island, about 200 acres at the confluence of the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers. Undeveloped, road access in, near light rail (sort of). Pretty much unused except for the occasional hiker:
For centuries, Dakota people have considered the confluence area of the Mississippi and Minnesota rivers to be a sacred place, Bdote, which means “where two waters come together.” The two bluffs area was considered of place of creation, where the Earth gave rise to the first Dakota man and woman.
http://bdotememorymap.org/point/pike-island/
I cheerfully pay my taxes and use our parks: I should not have to wade through a pop up tent encampment in a widely used park like Powderhorn and neighbors who likely purchased their homes at a premium due to the amenity of a near by park also deserve better than a pop up tent encampment our their front door.
While I realize this was not a serious proposal, I will nevertheless note that Pike Island, a.k.a. Bdote, is part of Fort Snelling State Park, hosts many more walkers, runners, skiers, etc. than you seem to have registered, and is frequently underwater in the spring.
All that aside, it certainly seems like Saint Paul has a more humanitarian and effective approach to dispersing encampments than Minneapolis has. I think it’s unfortunate that Mayor Frey vetoed the proposal to collect data on better ways to deal with this problem, because what we’re doing sure isn’t working.
The hikers will likely go elsewhere.
Spoken like a true liberal elite. Spoken like someone from Martha’s Vineyard. NIMBY at its best. Well done!
Huh?
Put a homeless encampment 50 yards from any other kind of residence and everyone goes NIMBY
WHD gets the incisive comment of the day: “open air drug and prostitution market”
Who is raising their hand to live by that besides drug addicts and sex criminals?
Put them on the river barges. They can be easily fixed up to accommodate dozens of people each. They’re warmer and drier than a tent in a park anyway. They do it in Paris with barges moored along the Seine.
Let the barge owners step up and offer the barges when not in use during the off season. Thinking outside the box for today’s “urban planners” typically means expensive hotel accommodations paid for by someone else.
And for the summer months, let the local colleges offer their unused dorm rooms for the homeless. Let them put their compassion to work. The student bodies would be proud.
Who is denying anything? We already have the light rail ‘party barges’.
“You people”
How adult. And perhaps, how racist.
Can I give a rip about the poor and hungry and not give a rip about a recidivist drug addict that simply wants no help and just wants to maintain their addiction and could not give a rip about anything else?
I definitely give a rip about homeless people who are willing to live by reasonable rules (AKA the law) and need a hand up for food and housing and will support the taxes needed to achieve it.
The BIG question is how many folks willingly live in a tent in Minnesota in January because they have no other option or they live in a tent in Minnesota in January because they opt to not abide by reasonable rules (AKA the law) required to get available food and housing assistance. So far, I agree with this:
By William Hunter Duncan
on Nov. 16, 2022 at 9:15 p.m.
I worked for the Mpls Park Board, and I can assure you, those encampments are unsafe and unhealthy physically and mentally. They are no place for a family or children. Europeans are more honest about such encampments, calling them what they truly are, open air drug and prostitution markets. Every single person I encountered there were mentally ill and or addicted to heroin and meth. It is unsanitary, unsafe and unhealthy for the people living there and for the neighborhood.
I mean you can, but you might find maintaining yourself as purportedly ethical, empathetic, and compassionate to be difficult. I mean people hold intrinsic biases against all sorts of people, I sure you’re familiar with the regard we hold towards many of those sort.
Honestly you folks are just daft. WHAT DO YOU THINK HAPPENS WHEN THE TENTS ARE MOVED?! These people are not magically going away. Nor are millions of suitable housing arrangements about to spring up tomorrow. We get it, drugs bad hurrrr. Where do you think these horrible drug monsters are gonna go if they can’t stay in one spot? You don’t wanna pay to help them, you don’t wanna pay to imprison them, so what? Final solution time? It’s like you’re all just a cd stuck on skip, droning out the same chorus, oblivious to how ridiculous you sound.
You are again avoiding the question. We get that you desire to ignore those people you feel “just don’t want help”. They aren’t going anywhere, you HAVE to deal with them.
Tents are not solutions for homelessness nor the affordable housing crises, especially in cold climates like MN. While pushing people around and demolishing encampments isn’t a solution of any kind either, these encampments cannot be made fit for habitation. Nationwide experience has proven that attempts to push services into encampments fail for a variety of reasons. Legalizing ends up simply being a euphemism for normalizing homelessness and reclassifying them as differently homed. In other words this simply re-classifies homelessness out of existence, it doesn’t resolve the crises… it’s an accounting trick.
Even simple things like providing porta-potty’s turns into monumental fails. In LA which has some of largest tent encampments in the country if not the world, they thought they could resolve a number of sanitary problems by providing dozens of porta potty’s. Then the porta-potty’s became convenient locations for drug use, prostitution, and vanalism, so they ended up hiring security to guard them. Then the minimum wage security got bribed to look the other way by pimps and drug dealers and so it goes. Providing health care or any other social service in an encampment is even more difficult by many magnitudes.
The problem here is that we are failing as a civilization. We allow property owners and landlords the “right” to sit on tens of thousands of square feet of vacant or undeveloped space rather than build or provide housing to people who need it. We have no universal care so basic medical needs are simply not available let alone more complex mental health and chemical dependency treatments. We’ve never built the necessary robust social service regime that would address the various needs here, and then we defunded and dismantled much of what we did have in the name of “fiscal responsibility”. NJ Billionaire Ziggy Wilf and local billionaire Polad LITERALLY got their publicly funded stadiums next to homeless people living in tents. Whatever.
So yeah, pushing these people around doesn’t solve anything, but simple leaving them there and moving on doesn’t solve anything either. And no, shelters that people can’t live in, aren’t properly staffed with security, and are governed with ridiculous “drug” requirements don’t come close to a solution of any kind. But the idea that have to let people live in tents because we have NO other solution is simply institutionalizing failure.