Injunction and Growing Encampments Bring Health Fears on Skid Row
Eric Richardson / blogdowntown
Encampments line the sidewalks on blocks of Skid Row where the city has been forbidden from removing unattended possessions.
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — A growing line of tents, sleeping bags, blankets, suitcases and shopping carts crowds the west sidewalk of San Julian Street between 6th and 7th, one of several Skid Row blocks that have been heavily impacted by an injunction put in place six months ago that greatly restricts the city's ability to remove possessions left in the public right-of-way.
As the legal case drags on, worry about the health risk that these sidewalks could create is also growing.
"It is a public health hazard," said Councilwoman Jan Perry, who represents the area most affected by the ruling. "If we cannot reach some understanding with the court about having the ability to get people's personal articles off the sidewalk for a certain period of time so that we can sanitize the sidewalk, people are going to get sick."
The concern isn't theoretical. In 2006, similar conditions helped to spread MRSA, a strain of staph infection resistant to treatment, among those living on the streets of Skid Row.
The city has appealed the injunction, which was issued in a 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.
Not all parts of Skid Row have been affected equally. The Central City East Association, which operates a business improvement district that covers much of the Skid Row area, has been able to continue its trash pickup and sidewalk cleaning efforts. The court cited the group's Central City East Check-In Center as a model that the city might emulate.
"The system that we've had in place since 2002 is still working overwhelmingly," said Estela Lopez, the group's executive director. Still, the ruling has created a "dramatic demarcation" between areas that are part of the business district and those that aren't.
"The public right of way is the community's space and we have a responsibility to make sure that space is safe and clean for everyone" whether homeless or housed, she said. "Those who are still out there because of a situation or by a choice, it makes no difference, we have a responsibility that we're not carrying out."
Molly Rysman, director of external affairs for the Skid Row Housing Trust, believes that the city needs to pay careful attention to where the encampments are popping up, including on a block next to LAPD's Central station.
"These are folks who are trying to find a safe place to live on the sidewalk," Rysman said. "Their needs are driving their decision to congregate where they are."
While Rysman agrees that there are health concerns related to the encampments, she would like to city the city focus more of its attention on solving the bigger picture of homelessness.
"I don't think [getting the injunction removed is] going to solve this problem. You may be able to break up the encampment, but these folks are still homeless," she said. "We need to look at how to really solve this."
Perry doesn't believe that the city can afford to look past the current legal fight. She fears what would happen if the Ninth Circuit were to rule against the city's appeal and leave the injunction in place.
"That will take us backward about 10 to 20 years and put us right back where we started when I was first elected, with an enormous amount of trash on the street," Perry said. "It's devastating to Skid Row for community-building and it would demonstrate an unrealistic viewpoint about what this community needs in terms of recovery."
iluvhatemail on October 26, 2011, at 09:02AM – #1
I know we need to help these people and all, but when they are preventing that area from any kind of improvements and creating a mess that helps hide criminal intent its hard to defend them.
Monica Morgan on October 26, 2011, at 11:40AM – #2
So, just to be clear, the City doesn't allow beautiful potted trees in front of a building without a revocable permit, but tents, trash bags, drugs, and people sleeping are allowed?
What happened to the public right away?
Where are all the handicapped people who always complain about ADA access? Why aren't they complaining about this?
What a joke!
Homelessness should be illegal. While im at it, begging for money should be illegal.
Look how high are taxes are: 40% of our income! There are a million programs and shelters for these people but they chose to be on the street.
Mental disorder? Cant take care of themselves? Fine...put them in a hospital. They would be better off.
A 2 year child cant take care of his or herself either and we dont allow them to be homeless.
im stopping while im ahead or rather behind..
Katherine McNenny on October 26, 2011, at 12:15PM – #3
As a resident who lives in Skid Row (proudly I might add) I can testify that the garbage build up has only gotten worse since this ruling. Yet, the most troubling thing about this article is that not one Skid Row resident who lives in the district was asked his or her opinion. There are thousands of people who live in Skid Row- in the beautifully renovated SRO’s, in converted lofts and yes on the streets and in the Missions.
When will the residents of Skid Row be brought into the dialog about what do in their own community? The policy makers cannot know what happens here as intimately as a resident-this is not a knock on them, just an observation. Every other district downtown has the RESIDENTS actively constructing their futures. Just like I cannot know what happens in the neighborhood where I work after I go home at 5pm- nor can the decision makers and people who work in Skid Row know what happens when they go home. That Skid Row has been “created” by a series of rulings by people who don’t live here is something that must change.
Healthy and harmonious communities thrive with neighbors talking to neighbors and innovative solutions emanating from the ground up based on actual experiences and rhythms of its streets. I see none of this happening in Skid Row now, while I see a lot of this happening in other more organized districts DT. This neighborhood is a lively and unique place that should be cherished as a place of intelligent human beings who have valid opinions about where they live. The homeless will obviously be part of the discussion and interactions- but the housed residents have rights that need to be heard here too.
One thing that strikes me as completely backwards is the lack of garbage cans in the area not covered by the CCEA BID. We need some garbage cans please- a lot of them! People are living on the streets here- where are they supposed to throw away their food, toiletries and soiled clothing? Why are there more garbage cans in other districts of DT and not here, where they are needed the most? This needs to be corrected.
Enough with the Skid Row as “victim”- Come on over- strike up a conversation with someone and let me know if you think we, as a community, are not capable of being involved in the decision making about our own neighborhood.
It’s refreshing to hear Ms. Lopez and Ms. Perry quoted about the state of the public space in Skid Row and the need for regular sidewalk sanitation. These things are of interest to me personally and I appreciate them keeping the topic alive.
The storage facility for homeless people’s articles run by the CCEA is amazing. Might the City set something like this up soon, considering the number of people on the streets of Skid Row seems to be growing by the LAPD’s last count instead of shrinking? Not to mention the new influx of women and families pouring into the area because of the hard economic times we still find ourselves in.
What about a “trash in Skid Row” Town Hall? Everyone should be invited.
Rich on October 26, 2011, at 01:27PM – #4
Used to live at 6th and Los Angeles, then moved. The trash is one of the worst parts of a lot of issues in the neighborhood. During heavy winds, you'll see cyclones of garbage blowing down streets devoid of all but the homeless people who sleep there. The city won't step in to fill in the voids that BIDs leave (see: Former Toy District, Fashion BID downsizing) when trash/cleanup/safety service ends.
And then the LAPD doesn't give a crap either, despite the reassurances that are given in the comments section of this very blog by commanders, captains, etc., when LAPD is mentioned in an article. "We're here for you." Try calling the station and hear the response when you need help with a situation, drug dealing, prostitution, gunshots. It's what made us decide to leave the area because it's not going to get better in our lifetimes.
Dion on October 26, 2011, at 04:01PM – #5
The courts and the ACLU can go to hell. they think they are helping the homeless with these rules? they are doing the exact opposite. How about the Judge and the lawyers all spend a couple weeks living in these shantytowns and see what kind of ruling they will come up with at that point.
julie on October 26, 2011, at 04:41PM – #6
@Monica Morgan
This is probably going to fall on deaf ears, but:
The US has one of the lowest taxes in the developed world. For real. Google it.
As for putting "them in a hospital"... who is going to pay for that? You seem like you aren't up for a tax hike and California recently cut funding by more than half a BILLION dollars on mental health care. Even if forced into a mental hospital, the hold is 72 hours, then they're back on the street.
And I'm also assuming you have no idea how full homeless shelters are and how the programs developed for homeless people are completely maxxed out.
As for homelessness being a choice, a recent study says one third of Americans are one paycheck away from homelessness...
Just sayin'.
Christopher Eaton on October 26, 2011, at 10:53PM – #7
NYC, Chicago, NO CITY in the U.S. puts up with this ridiculousness. This very bad, very destructive ruling creates barbaric conditions for the homeless and unhealthy and unsavory conditions for the entire neighborhood. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has simply got to rule in the City's favor on this, for everyone's sake.
Dion on October 26, 2011, at 11:52PM – #8
Wouldnt it be better for the city to build a massive rehab, housing, career center in the desert (or somewhere isolated) and move all the homeless there and give them a chance, rather than enabling them and letting them live in the middle of downtown with access to drugs, alcohol, temptation, etc? the majority of these people are sick, on way or the other, and the status quo just isnt working anymore.
Brady Westwater (@bradywestwater) on October 27, 2011, at 09:30AM – #9
It is a mistake to say this is a 'homeless problem'. The real problem is that the City and the courts are making it easier for people who are suffering from mental disorders and various addictions to resist being given the help and the treatment they need.
I have helped over fifty people get off the streets in the years since I first started to move down here in 1997 and the ones I am trying to help now, repeatedly reject getting off the streets.
Most of them openly tell me they do not want to get off drugs and that they do not want to change their lives; that they prefer to be on the streets and stay high 24 hours a day. And now, we are now making it easier for them to continue those lifestyles.
But they are not the only ones who are being affected. For the fist time in many years -every night I go out, i am aggressively offered heroin - and outfits - for sale - and our neighborhood has once again turned into a 24 hour open air heroin market. And this has all taken place since the court ordered sidewalk encampments appeared.
The news has finally reached both small time heroin dealers and increasing numbers of out of area gang members that Skid Row is once again a safe zone for them to exploit the homeless and the formerly homeless struggling with their addictions in the SRO's.
So, once again, it is the homeless and the formerly homeless who are the victims of this latest example of judicial misconduct.
Robert A on October 27, 2011, at 12:06PM – #10
Here is an article about the injunction. How do we contact the Judge Ramirez? He needs to spend some time on Skid Row.
http://www.scpr.org/news/2011/06/24/27432/judge-city-los-angeles-cant-confiscate-destroy-ski/
Simon Hartigan on October 27, 2011, at 07:35PM – #11
I agree with most of you. Something needs to change. Living on the streets, selling drugs, and excessive begging, should definitely be banned. And I'm not talking about a slap on the wrist. One of you mentioned that homeless and drug dealers surrounded by homeless and drug dealers are just extending the problem. We need to start be removing that court ruling, so we're allowed to clean the place up. Then we need to encourage developers to do what many might call a 4-letter word, "gentrification". No city in the world was built by homeless people. Homeless people just live in abandoned already built cities. It's time to take the city back.
Simon Ha on October 28, 2011, at 03:49PM – #12
I was driving down 6th Street with my 3 year old daughter. She asked me why people were camping with tents in the street. I told her they did not have a home so they live on the streets. She asked me if they can come live in our home.
A naive compassion it may seem but it is an instinctive solution to a very complicated problem - take them out of an isolated environment where it's conventional to be camping on the streets and house them among normal society where these behaviors are discouraged and controllable. I support and encourage Housing First with a mechanism to spread the population.
If police are allowed to arrest citizens for trespassing in a peaceful protest, why are we letting lawlessness exist in our city? If people choose to live their lives this way, let it be but let them do it in a controlled environment. Something like a refugee camp where they can continue live out their lives without conflicting with general society. Those who choose to accept help can find help in communities that are disassociated with that environment.
On the way back, we drove down 1st Street by City Hall. My daughter said, “Look at all the tents! Why are they camping here? We should go get our tent and go there.” An activist 3 year old - go figure…