💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › law › homeless.law captured on 2022-04-28 at 22:18:57.
⬅️ Previous capture (2020-10-31)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
November 1990
POLICE AND THE HOMELESS
By
Barney Melekian
Lieutenant
Santa Monica, California, Police Department
All across the country, from small towns to big cities,
communities face both practical and ethical problems associated
with the increasing number of homeless people. Police
departments, especially, have found dealing with the homeless to
be a significant law enforcement challenge. These departments
are learning that an effective approach to policing the homeless
is not easily formulated, nor is there a single solution. One
fact does remain, however--police departments must address the
problems and focus their efforts toward a solution.
TWO PHILOSOPHIES EMERGE
Much has been written on the causes of homelessness, and
the debate continues, both in Santa Monica and across the
Nation, as to the appropriate social policy to adopt. Citizens
and law enforcement officers are caught between legal and
ethical means of confronting this sensitive issue.
Nevertheless, as is usually the case, the responsibility of
dealing with the homeless on a day-to-day level ultimately falls
on the police department.
The City of Santa Monica has become a prime area for a
growing homeless population. Located within Los Angeles County,
the city has attracted homeless by its location and the several
homeless outreach programs begun there. The impact of the
recent homeless influx to Santa Monica strained the existing
resources of the department and focused public debate onto what
the role of the police department should be concerning the
homeless. Two distinct political philosophies emerged from this
debate, and the police department found itself caught in the
middle, looking for a workable solution.
Social Problem
One philosophy holds that the issue of the homeless is a
social problem that could not and should not be pushed onto
other jurisdictions. This point of view came from the city
attorney's office. In an interview given on May 3, 1990, the
city attorney articulated a position that the homeless issue
stems from a failure of the national and State governments to
deal with the issues of affordable housing and to provide a
workable public mental health policy.
The city attorney's office views the homeless issue as a
fundamentally moral one because of the larger-scale national
failures that caused the problem. It also holds that local
government, including the police department, must provide a
solution, albeit temporary and incomplete, until effective
long-range national and State public policies are put into
effect.
As an extension of these beliefs, several changes in
prosecutorial policies were instituted. These changes reflected
no prosecutions for public intoxication and no prosecutions for
"economic" offenses, such as sleeping in public parks,
possession of shopping carts, and other misdemeanors and
infractions which are, for the homeless, oftentimes necessary to
their survival. The city attorney's office also believed
alcoholism to be a disease and that jail was not a suitable
alternative to a detoxification center. There is a further
belief that many of the applicable infractions spelled out in
the Santa Monica Municipal Code are economically based and
should not be used against a class of persons who have few, if
any, financial options.
Menace
The alternative philosophy holds that while the problems of
the homeless are unfortunate, a city of 8.2 square miles cannot
and should not attempt to deal with an issue of this magnitude.
This point of view was espoused by both business groups and
individual citizens who find themselves confronted by persons
who are often intoxicated and/or mentally unstable. This group
views the role of local government, and in particular the police
department and the city attorney's office, as one of pressure
and enforcement--even to the point of moving the problem across
geographical lines into the City of Los Angeles.
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE HOMELESS
Predictably, the police department found itself squarely in
the middle between these two opposing points of view. The
demand for compassion often conflicted with the demand for
enforcement. Additionally, because of the political sensitivity
involved, there was little specific direction from the city
government.
Three distinct problem areas emerged for the police
department from this philosophical debate: 1) The conflict over
the use of public facilities, 2) public demands for enforcement
action against activities that are often only marginally
criminal, and 3) the need to provide police service to an
economically disenfranchised class of people. All three of
these problem areas needed to be addressed against a backdrop of
preserving constitutional liberties for all citizens.
Use of Public Facilities
The first problem area, that of the conflict over use of
public facilities, is nowhere more clearly illustrated than in
Palisades Park. The park is a narrow strip of land, 1-1/2 miles
long, located along the bluffs that overlook the Pacific Coast
Highway and the Pacific Ocean. At the extreme south end of the
park is the entrance to Santa Monica Pier. The pier, and the
park area adjacent to it, is a major tourist attraction. In
addition, a senior citizens center located there serves as a
major recreational area for Santa Monica's senior community.
The park is also one of the major gathering places for the
city's homeless population. For nearly 5 years, it was the site
of the city's feeding programs. Additionally, it is in close
proximity to several low-cost bars, liquor stores, and motels.
During daylight hours, it is not uncommon to see literally
dozens of homeless people sleeping on the ground adjacent to
senior citizens attempting to use the outdoor shuffleboard
court. The combination of senior citizens, tourists, and
homeless people produced demands that something be done about
getting rid of the homeless problem.
A traditional law enforcement response in times past would
have been simply to advise the homeless people to leave the
area. Indeed, the concept of law enforcement officers moving
``undesirables'' along is not new. However, from both a moral
and a legal standpoint, it is no longer an acceptable or
practical method. Officers might be able to move the transients
out of the park temporarily, but the fact that the city's
feeding programs were operated there specifically for the
homeless guaranteed that they would return. Additionally, when
homeless people believed that they were the victims of police
harassment, they often brought their complaints to the attention
of the police department's Internal Affairs Unit.
Frustrated officers found that arrests and citations for
drinking in the park, sleeping after midnight in the park, and
panhandling were not being consistently prosecuted. The
response was predictable. Officers began to issue warnings or
simply ignore the situation when possible. Thus, in spite of
great public pressure, the homeless remained in the park and the
problem remained unsolved.
Panhandling
The second problem area, the demand for enforcement action
for marginal criminal activities, is best illustrated by the
problem of panhandling. There is a local law that makes it a
misdemeanor to solicit money. (1) This law, together with a
similarly worded municipal code ordinance, has been used to deal
with those homeless people who ask for "spare change." This
activity is the one in which citizens experience their most
direct contact with the homeless. It can be a frightening
encounter and the one for which they are most likely to call the
police for assistance. Accordingly, the traditional police
response has been to issue citations or make arrests.
However, in 1984 the city attorney's office changed
prosecutorial standards for panhandling to include force or
assaultive behavior. This new definition of panhandling is
close to that of robbery, as defined in penal code section 211,
"...the taking of the personal property of another by means of
force or fear." (2) Also, homeless people who were arrested
under the new panhandling statute often would file harassment
complaints against officers.
In the panhandling problem area, there was obvious
miscommunication that was preventing an effective resolution.
The city council or the city manager's office did not direct the
police department to cease making panhandling arrests. Neither
did they advise that panhandling be redefined, nor did they
alter prosecutorial policies. A situation developed in which
the two enforcement arms of local government (the city
prosecutor and the police department) were working at
cross-purposes and little change was being made to bolster
public confidence that the homeless problem was being resolved.
The panhandling and public facilities issues are serious
concerns that reshaped the police department's understanding of
how the public perceived safety. What the homeless problem
produced was the presence of a large number of individuals whose
lifestyle is completely outside of the average working citizen's
frame of reference. Consequently, contacts with these
individuals often became cause for public anxiety. However
idealistic, the public expected the police department to make
the homeless people disappear. While carrying out this wish
might have provided a short-term solution, the mandate to
preserve constitutional liberties remained paramount.
Demands for Public Service
The third problem area was the increased demand for police
service created by the homeless population. These demands take
two forms. The first, increased calls-for-service, includes
calls both from the homeless themselves concerning assault,
rape, robbery, and homicide, as well as calls about the homeless
by an increasingly apprehensive and fearful public. The second
factor is the involvement of homeless people in serious felony
crimes.
In January 1990, the department began a program to track
the homeless-related calls for service. Officers were directed
to highlight every call on their daily service logs that
involved homeless persons as either victims, suspects, or other
significantly involved parties.
During the first 5 months of 1990, the following calls for
service patterns emerged:
* Of the 19,295 calls received during the Day Watch, 6,071
(31.5%) were homeless calls.
* Of the 14,008 calls received during the Night Watch,
3,569 (25.5%) were homeless calls.
* Of the 10,570 calls received during the Morning Watch,
2,141 (20.3%) were homeless calls.
In addition 3,483 persons were booked into Santa Monica
Jail during the same period. Of these, 1,234 were homeless, for
a total of 35.4% of all bookings. Thus, with over one-third of
police patrol services being generated by and for less than 2%
of the resident population, the impact of the homeless on the
police department's functions has been striking.
The second impact area is that of serious felony crimes
produced by the homeless population. The increase from 1985 to
May 1990, shows dramatic growth, both in the percentage of
homeless suspects arrested and the involvement of the homeless
as a large part of the overall increase.
During the same timeframe, the number of transient suspects
arrested increased from 39 to 98, for a 151% increase in
transient involvement.
Nowhere is the crime impact of the homeless population more
clearly demonstrated than in homicides. For example, in 1988
there were 10 homicides that included 7 homeless victims and 8
possible homeless suspects.
STEPS TOWARD A SOLUTION
During the last year, changes have been made in Santa
Monica to employ cooperative methods in order to face the
homeless problem head-on. One measure has been the city's
decision to move the feeding program from Palisades Park to the
front lawn of city hall. While this has not reduced the number
of homeless in the park, it has reduced many gatherings of
homeless people at meal times. This has had a positive impact
on public perception, because citizens have seen a visible
change in the community. Other programs are being implemented
to get the city involved in providing solutions to a situation
that cannot be ignored. The police department has also taken on
an increased role in dealing with the homeless through
HELP--Homeless Enforcement Liaison Program.
HELP Program
The Santa Monica Police Department developed HELP to focus
attention on the law enforcement problems involving the homeless
population. A team of two officers, assigned to work solely on
transient-related crimes, were chosen for their past experiences
with the homeless and their ability to handle transient
situations effectively.
In May 1990, the first month of operation, the HELP team
alone received 249 calls for service, 231 of which were
homeless-related. These figures reflect one of the program's
goals--to reduce the homeless workload on the rest of the
department. Of those calls for service, the HELP team made 84
arrests, gave out 73 misdemeanor citations, and filed 97 field
interview cards after talking to suspects. This specially
mandated team is beginning to have an impact on the homeless
problem area and to effect changes that the community can see,
while at the same time preserving constitutional liberties for
all citizens, including the homeless.
Future Plans
The department has been prompted to plan future additions
to the HELP program. One task, undertaken with the approval of
the city attorney, is to identify the most conspicuous criminal
offenders within the homeless population and arrest them. The
city has also just authorized seven more officers for the
department who will work specifically with the homeless, thus
expanding the number of officers who develop specific knowledge
and experience. These programs and other developments should
help boost the public's confidence that positive, cooperative,
and concrete steps are being taken to solve this problem in
their community. The real significance of this program is that
the city attorney's office and the police department are both
striving to work together to institute collaborative enforcement
actions.
CONCLUSION
The law enforcement problems generated by the presence of a
large homeless population present an unique public policy
dilemma. Unlike drugs, there is no clearly defined public
consensus as to whether a law enforcement problem truly exists
concerning the homeless, and assuming that it might, what ought
to be done about it. The idea of using the police to drive the
homeless out of town is emotionally appealing for some segments
of the resident population, but it ultimately presents grave
moral and constitutional conflicts.
The dimensions of the problem are national in scope, but
local in impact. Every jurisdiction in the Nation will have to
deal with the homeless in some form during the remainder of this
century. Until such time as public policy decisions have been
made at the local, State and national levels with respect to
mental health facilities and detoxification centers, the problem
will continue to fall largely on the shoulders of local law
enforcement. Cooperation between city authorities and the
police department, as well as the implementation of programs
such as HELP, are ways of confronting an issue that is
affecting more and more of our Nation's cities and towns every
day.
FOOTNOTES
(1) Title 15, sec. 647(c), Santa Monica Penal Code.
(2) Title 8, sec. 211, Santa Monica Penal Code.