Whittierites, Election Time is Near and Our Homeless Crisis is the Top Issue

The Whittier City Council Election is on March 3rd. Homelessness is the top issue facing the City. Please ask all candidates where they stand and what solutions they favor.

This homeless encampment at the Whittier Boulevard green belt was taken down nearly a year ago, but Whittier continues to deal with the problem of encampments. Source: FriendlyPlaces.net

The Crisis of Homeless Encampments

While not directly a land use planning issue, homelessness is related and is without question the biggest issue facing Whittier. Encampments are going up all over the City. When the City manages to take one down, homeless residents migrate to other parts of town or the surrounding area. This is why new camps and tents go up in new locations all the time. Homelessness is not being reduced. It's simply being shuffled around from one spot to another.

The most recent example is Parnell Park where 22-years old Corinna Megan Ortega passed away on New Year's Day, likely due to an overdose. Before the Council took action on Parnell on January 6th, it acted to enforce the curfew at Leffingwell Park last November.

Now that the couple dozen or so homeless individuals at Parnell are being forced out through enforcement of the curfew there, we can expect to see tents or new encampments appear in other parks. Next, we could see tents going up at Michigan Park, Palm Park, Anaconda Park or any other Whittier park. We could see new tents going up on the Greenway Trail. Once residents in these neighborhoods begin speaking up, the Council may try to counter with a citywide park and trail curfew.

If the Council were to adopt a citywide curfew without offering shelter beds, the homeless may very well move onto our sidewalks. This has happened in many streets in Downtown Los Angeles, Chinatown, and other parts of LA.

With tents on our sidewalks, the Council may try to get tougher and enforce an anti-camping ordinance without offering shelter beds, and this would likely lead to us getting sued by Legal Aid, the ACLU, or some other advocacy group. They would sue for violating the Boise Ninth Federal Circuit decision. And a lawsuit only hurts us more. The Boise decision prevents police departments in California from ticketing homeless people without first offering them a shelter bed. Boise also requires a shelter bed be made available for each homeless person in a city's jurisdiction before enforcement of a camping ban can begin.

And in case you didn't hear, the United States Supreme Court, last month, refused to hear Boise thereby leaving the Ninth Circuit Court's decision in place. Boise is the law of the land and is not likely to change anytime soon. Therefore, our Council needs to be smart.

Residents do not want a homeless encampment at the park down the street. Residents don't want to walk by homeless tents on Painter Avenue. And residents don't want the City getting sued again.

Regional Solution versus a City Solution

For a good discussion on how an anti-camping ordinance can be enforced under Boise, please watch the discussion from the City Council's January 6th meeting. Go to 2:13:30 in the video.

In order to provide shelter beds to meet its legal obligation under the Boise ruling, the Whittier Council will need to spend more money. Now, there are two main ways to go about this and they are not mutually exclusive. Both approaches feature advantages and disadvantages.

The first would be a regional solution where the City of Whittier enters into an agreement with one or a few of our neighboring cities and possibly the LA County too. The point would be to share the costs and responsibility of providing shelter beds.

One possible model is three cities partnering, with one providing the site while the other two provide the funds. Maybe Whittier and Pico Rivera provide the funds while Santa Fe Springs provides the location. Once a shelter is opened, wrap around mental health and substance abuse service providers (County and nonprofits) can be brought on board.

The advantages are obvious. The costs and responsibilities are shared. The disadvantage is this type of agreement would take some time to be negotiated and implemented. Instead of getting one council on board, we need at least two or three to agree. That could be challenging and difficult. Also, once implemented, Whittier loses some control and must coordinate with our partners in accessing the shelter beds. Good communication and cooperation are of the essence.

The second way is a Whittier city solution. In this way, the City of Whittier goes it alone and provides both the site and funds for a new emergency shelter. According to the 2019 homeless count, the City of Whittier has 286 homeless individuals; so we have to build a shelter with at least this many beds. Fortunately, the City has both land and funds available. Also, LA County Measure H funds are available and have already been awarded to the City.

The advantage of this approach is that we could implement it faster than working out a regional approach. Also, the City maintains complete control over the shelter and process. If we have a new encampment, the City and Whittier PD can respond quickly. The disadvantages are that we assume all the financial costs. Also, this approach may face significant resistance on the question of location. Many Whittier residents don't want a homeless shelter nearby.

It makes sense to go forward with our own City shelter and focus on our own homeless population first. Then, if we get the encampments under control, we can close it.

If we decide not to close it, we can enter a regional agreement with reciprocity. This may entail our shelter and another new shelter outside of Whittier being shared according to need. With this arrangement, we may actually have available beds for the other city to use. And if our homeless population begins to grow again, we may then call on the other shelter for available beds for our homeless if the need arises. This would work to the benefit of both cities by offering flexibility of capacity.

A State Solution?

Just within the last week, California Governor Gavin Newsom ordered State agencies to identify State owned land that could be used for temporary shelters for the homeless. This order could really open up a number of sites around the State. In our area, Metropolitan State Hospital in Norwalk appears to be a good site with a number of large, vacant pieces of land.

Metropolitan State Hospital in Norwalk appears to have large structures and large vacant pieces of land. Source: Google Maps

While the Norwalk location seems promising, Whittier City may still have to pitch in some funds to build and operate a regional shelter there. Also, the State has something of a track record of being slow to implement many of its programs. So even if a shelter in Norwalk is opened, it could take several months or longer.

In the end, Whittier is our city and our community. We must decide what we are willing to accept and give in order to reduce homelessness here. Are we willing to allow our tax dollars to pay for a shelter? Are we open to a new shelter opening within a mile of our homes or anywhere in the City?

If we are not interested in tackling this problem head on, we can expect more of the same: tents, encampments, and deaths in our parks and streets and maybe the Greenway Trail too.

In some sense, we've already paid through the loss of use and enjoyment of the picnic tables at Parnell Park. Our tax dollars are already paying to clean up these encampments time and again. And it's possible the homeless crisis may begin to impact Whittier property values.

In any case, Whittier voters must decide who to vote for on March 3rd for Mayor and Council.