blogdowntown
Not currently logged in. [Login or Create an Account]

Stay Connected



 

City Banned from Taking and Destroying Possessions on Skid Row

By Eric Richardson
Published: Friday, June 24, 2011, at 07:42AM
Central City East Check-In Center Eric Richardson / blogdowntown

The 500 storage bins at the Central City East Check-In Center offer a glimpse of the scale at stake in the issue of homeless possessions.

The City of Los Angeles faces severe restrictions in how it can pick up possessions left on the streets of Skid Row under the terms of an injunction reaffirmed on Thursday.

The case, filed by eight homeless individuals who say that the city took their belongings when they walked away for food, the bathroom or to appear in court, centers around Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims that the pick-ups violate protections against unreasonable seizure and the deprivation of property without due process.

The order did leave open the possibility of an acceptable program to store property taken off the streets and give individuals the right to come and retrieve it. The business community operates such a center in Skid Row, but it is currently "bursting at the seams," said Estela Lopez, head of the Central City East Association.

District Court Judge Philip S. Gutierrez did not mince words in shooting down the city's arguments that homeless individuals abandoned their property by walking away from them. In one part of the ruling, Gutierrez took that the city's attempt to apply several past cases as precedent, calling the logic "beyond comprehension."

In issuing the injunction, Gutierrez ruled that "Plaintiffs have clearly shown that they will likely succeed in establishing that the City seized and destroyed property that it knew was not abandoned."

While the city argued that it holds all possessions seized for 72 hours before destroying them, plaintiffs in the case testified that they had promptly gone to the city's dump site only to be told that their belongings had already been trashed.

Gutierrez' temporary restraining order, originally filed in April, forbids the city from "seizing property in Skid Row absent an objectively reasonable belief that it is abandoned, presents an immediate threat to public health or safety, or is evidence of a crime, or contraband," and requires that any property taken under that provision must be held for 90 days before being destroyed.

Lopez worries that the ruling is another step in forcing the community around Skid Row to put up with things that would be unacceptable elsewhere. "If a community -- not Skid Row but anywhere else in the city -- awakened to tons of mattresses, soiled clothing and debris on their sidewalks, the police would take it away," she said.

"It is only in Skid Row where the people who live and work in this 50 block area can not have the same service or expectation of sanitation that the rest of the people in the city have."

Lopez' group operates the Central City East Check-In Center, providing storage to hundreds of people on the streets of Skid Row in 20,000 square feet of donated warehouse space.

The facility recently expanded to 725 bins, and has been frequently cited as a model for other sites. Still, replication has been slow.

"In Los Angeles, we are the only one and we keep expanding," said Lopez. "CCEA has for years begged the city for an expansion of these types of centers citywide."

The facility costs the organization more than $100,000 per year, money that comes from assessments on neighborhood property owners. For the past few years, a grant from the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority has also offset costs.

Still, the need remains more than the facility can bear.

"We could double and triple it and it would not be enough," said Lopez.

Judge Gutierrez' Ruling (Download)

SHARE:

||

Related Stories:


Conversation

Robert Hawkes on June 24, 2011, at 09:00AM – #1

Very disappointing. Unfortunately, rulings such as this, in the name of "civil liberties" are constricting the ability of our elected officials to enact real improvements in Skid Row.

I don't think I'll ever understand the twisted logic that extends fourth amendment protection to property dumped on public streets, in alleyways, etc.

This ruling has implications for the process of basic sanitation in Los Angeles. If a shopping cart full of soiled clothes is left next to a dumpster, will refuse service personnel be restricted from hauling it away, for fear that that they may guilty of "unreasonable search and seizure?"


User_32

downtown vibe on June 24, 2011, at 10:59AM – #2

This was predictable.

The City opened the door to this kind of legal challenge by trying to define "skid row" as a viable neighborhood.

It is not.

The current situation violates the rights of all property and business owners who rely on the City to keep the streets paved and clean, so that they can use their properties. I feel sorry for Estella Lopez. She is in a very difficult situation.

As long as we have a industry of nonprofits, and politicians who feed off of these people, keeping them on the streets, we will never break this cycle homelessness.

Skid Row should be strategically dismantled. Los Angeles should be ashamed that we have a HUMAN GARBAGE DUMP within our City borders.


Marc Caldwell on June 24, 2011, at 12:35PM – #3

Estela Lopez, head of the Central City East Association said, "It is only in Skid Row where the people who live and work in this 50 block area can not have the same service or expectation of sanitation that the rest of the people in the city have."

Estela Lopez is comparing the entire city of Los Angeles with Skid Row, as if this is an apples to apples community comparison.

The people of Skid Row, whose residence there predates the last 10 years of surrounding gentrification, clearly require unique protections for people living under undeniably harsh and destitute circumstances.

(Did ya' notice how she used the term "expectation of sanitation" as if this were merely a sanitation issue and not one that is ultimately about people's possessions?)

Some of us are responsibly aware of the neighborhoods around us before we move in or set up shop.

Skid Row deserves a heightened level of compassion and protections due to it ultimately being the County's failed social services experiment in compounding all homeless services to one small area of the County so that the rest of us can live in ignorant bliss nor have to confront the issue of homelessness in our own neighborhoods.


User_32

on June 24, 2011, at 03:26PM – #4

So how long do the piles of stuff have to be left unattended on the streets before they can be legally considered abandoned and taken away?


User_32

David McBane on June 24, 2011, at 03:36PM – #5

Marc Caldwell - You make some great points but I think what frustrates people is that if Skid Row is continued to be treated differently, how do you actually end what is rightly regarded as the failed experiment that is Skid Row? If the normal rules don't apply to Skid Row, all that will do is perpetuate the area of Skid Row as the dumping ground for the County's homeless. It has taken a long time for the consensus to be reached that Skid Row should end but now the courts reinforce keeping Skid Row as Skid Row by treating the people in Skid Row differently than everyone else.


User_32

Tony Hoover on June 24, 2011, at 06:11PM – #6

I can’t think of another American city outside of California that would allow these things to happen. It’s simply tragic. Where did we go wrong?

Rather than use our courts and political system to get people OFF the streets we, ironically, allow the mentally unstable to RULE the streets (and this is the screwed up part) in the name of human rights. What?!

I see it EVERY single day … not just in Downtown but also in Hollywood. Young homeless people dressed in punk outfits taunt tourists because they think it's funny to see them run away in horror. Paranoid schizophrenic’s chase away customers from businesses and demand shop owners give them money (or food) to go away. Angry and hallucinatory drug addicts scream profanities and threats to passersby on the sidewalk after being treated to a meal in one of the local soup kitchens. Gee thanks.

When we call the police, they say nothing can be done until the laws change. They tell me we can have them arrested, but they will either thank me for the free meal and a bed, or they will retaliate with even more extreme violence. They’re right … that’s exactly what happens.

Where is the common sense (and common decency) to allow people to do this?

Listen. I’m a compassionate person. I believe that anyone who is down on their luck deserves help. There are lots of people out there, including myself, who truly want to help. I also believe that most people don’t help because they see this as a hopeless cause. Why? Because there are some people (and organizations) out there who are hell bent on giving people who are mentally unstable the right to do basically whatever they want on our public streets. If there is no hope in getting them off the streets then why bother to help. Then we have the environmental people getting pissed off because we want to clean the streets after they are defecated on.

When will someone with the power to do something step up? Who will protect the rights for the rest of us? What about the people who are truly down on their luck who don’t get help because we’re tired of dealing with the others?


User_32

downtown vibe on June 24, 2011, at 06:31PM – #7

In 1892 San Francisco had over 900 children die from disease caused by open sewers.

Allowing People (capitalized) to sleep and defecate in the street is not sanitary. How the ACLU or anybody else could argue that sleeping on the street is a right, is beyond ridiculous.

The primary responsibility of the City is to set and maintain standards for PUBLIC right-of-ways.

On the other hand, the county has the primary responsibility for public health.

The City should be insisting that the COUNTY resolve the homeless issue downtown. The City government made itself open to lawsuits by VOLUNTEERING to solve the problem. Now they are accused of being negligent for failing.

Everyone wants to help the homeless, but for the courts to hold the City responsible for protecting stuff that was left in front of other peoples doors is plain twisted. ABSOLUTELY NO LOGIC INVOLVED HERE.

Why is Estela Lopez and the Business Improvement District having to pay for all of this CHAOS at all? They are victims.

If you really want an eye opener, take a survey to see how many people have achieved non-profit status, claiming to provide some sort of service to these people.

A non-profit does not mean charity.

It means, unlike a real business, the manager pays himself regardless of whether or not his service provides any tangible results. What little oversight comes from unionized government bureaucrats who really don't have any incentive to crack down on waste or fraud.

As a result, the people of skid row provide a paycheck for a lot of people who would be lost if the homeless found homes.

They also show NEED. This is important if you are a politician who wants to collect money from the State or Federal government to help pay your bills.

I hope we can start having some honest discussions about what is going on here.


User_32

Tony Hoover on June 24, 2011, at 07:53PM – #8

Mr. Vibe -

I getting a real education here.

So what you're telling us is that one of the reasons the homeless problem continues to exist is because some of the non-profit organizations on Skid Row want homelessness to thrive otherwise they are out of a job? Is this correct?

Local governments want homelessness to thrive because its a way to get bigger checks from the Federal government? Is this correct? What do they use the money for?

If these things are true then no wonder so many people are jumping out of windows on Spring Street. Its depressing.

So who has the power to turn this around?


User_32

KJ1 on June 24, 2011, at 09:56PM – #9

Thank you Mr. Richardson for your continuing coverage of issues surrounding Skid Row. For some commentary from someone who actually lives in Skid Row, follow link to get an insider's view.

http://treesonsanpedrostproject.wordpress.com/2011/06/25/judge-philip-s-gutierrez%e2%80%99-decision/

Signed, Katherine (proud Skid Row resident/future tree planter)


User_32

Downtown Resident on June 25, 2011, at 01:08PM – #10

I think everyone is a little tired of paying city taxes, county taxes, assessments to BID's with few results. The only thing any of these entities manage to do is complain, cry poor us, and try to push the problem outside of their area rather than entertaining real solutions.

Collective salaries of CCEA are over 750,000 a year with poor Estela Lopez taking 220,000 + of that number. She is at top of the heap of people "profiting" off the homeless.

Setting up the homeless to arrest them for unpaid "j-walking" or "crossing on red" tickets ticket's or CCEA being sued by the ACLU for their "red shirts" abusing and harassing clearly lost souls speaks to the character of Lopez and this organization and well as certain members of the LAPD.

Although the homeless rate has dropped in LA in recent years, almost 20% of the homeless is represented by veterans.

Instead of handing money to these BID's to push the homeless elsewhere and house their "stuff" how about creating a coalition of of non-profits, residents and government that puts funding into housing with counseling and treatment available as proposed by the federal government for veterans.

Gentrification? Well, maybe, then let's give some credit to the people who have invested in the area. If they wanted to be in yuppyville they would have bought on the westside.


User_32

downtown vibe on June 26, 2011, at 11:21AM – #11

Downtown Resident,

You make a point about the BID salaries. No one in a BID position should make over $120,000. $220,000 is obscene. Sorry Estela, I'm sure you work very hard, but you should be working very hard for $120,000 a year. You should also be ashamed to be working so closely with the homeless and taking home such a salary. If the salary figure is not accurate, I encourage you to set the record straight.

About the Vets.... Again this comes back to the issue of who should be dealing with this problem. All of the people of the United States are supposed to be taking care of these Vets. They fought for the Country, not the City of Los Angeles. We have a Federal Veterans Administration. Why are they not being held accountable for the situation. Call your congressman.

And as far as the non-profits go, I don't think most people realize that many of them are part of a "coalition" In the same way that the mafia is a coalition in New York City.

The FBI is currently investigating, what will probably turn out to be the largest "affordable" housing scam in Los Angeles history. 100's of millions of dollars stolen with the help a network of local politicians and bureaucrats. The trail will lead back to the Mayor's office and several city council offices.

Again, people are being used by vile human beings who are making themselves rich off the suffering of others.

If you really want to end homelessness start asking questions and following the money. Then, remove the criminals from office.

Hint...Villaraigosa, Huizar, Cardenas, Alacarcon, and Perez...a few names to get you started.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/06/fbi-investigates-growing-housing-scandal.html

Who do you want to be your representative when the new Council Districts are drawn...



Add Your Voice


In an effort to prevent spam, blogdowntown commenting requires that Javascript be enabled. Please check your browser settings and try again.

 


blogdowntown Photo Pool

Photos of Downtown contributed by readers like you.

Downtown Blogs


Downtown Sites


Elsewhere