Seems like a completely reasonable request.
Simply calling something a "red herring" doesn't make it so. The concerns about people using public records to track down folks (possibly abuse survivors that are now homeless) are legit.

And if you don't think citizens will perform "vigilante background checks" and start howling about *something* then you obviously haven't been working with vulnerable/underserved populations.

A list isn't a terrible idea, just have it maintained by social service/mental health groups so there's some level of records privacy for individuals instead of it being a public free-for-all of context-free conclusion-jumping when a camper (shockingly) doesn't have a crystal clean record.
"Finally, by allowing people to set up camp on city land and officially sanctioning it with a permit, the city becomes responsible for what goes on there."

City Hall is going to learn this one the hard way. At the expense of another camper or neighborhood resident. This current approach to camping will not/can not end well. It just won't.
I want a public list of everyone in the Overlook Neighborhood to be published by the ONA. We need to make sure that there aren't any criminals among them that might be a threat to the residents of Hazelnut Grove.
You can already find much of that info, Windy. That's the point.
You can already click along, house by house, on PortlandMaps, Windy, and see who lives there. It's publicly-available information. That fact was mentioned in the column. So your "gotcha!" point was pointless.
As noted in the article, we don't know who any of the renters are in the Overlook Neighborhood. Owners aren't necessarily the residents.
Dear Homeless people, Just hurt yourself at a city sanctioned camp and then you won't be homeless anymore, for awhile. Seriously, I know a great lawyer that will take your case(S!).
Portland Maps lists owners, not residents. We need to know who is actually residing in those houses, be they renters or guests. We need a census. We can't trust the owners, some of whom live out of state.
A Portland homeless man already in jail has now been linked to a second homicide, this one the death of a young woman whose body was found in Portland's Washington Park, police said.Portland police detectives said Mark Beebout killed the unknown woman earlier this summer. Her body was found in late June by park rangers just west of the Vista Bridge. Read more:…

This is why someone should have a list of campers & do background checks.
This is probably the crux: "While it is true that other landlords do not have to reveal who their tenants are, the city is not any landlord. It is a government body, too, and it is subject to Oregon public records laws."

I have no idea if a list of campers on public land counts as something required for public record law. If not, then I think Mitchell's got the right idea -- the government needs to maintain a list for its own use (sex offenders, size compliance, mental health needs, etc.) but that doesn't mean it has to be publically available for yutzes like me to review.

If the assertion is correct, however, then I think the city needs to lay some more legal groundwork before progressing. (For example, making sure that an ex post facto designation of the property as an encampment is legal.)
I don't agree with how Hales (or Adams) handles homelessness issues ("if you're at least semi-organized you can do whatever you want"), but this is an obviously punitive act of NIMBY-ism masquerading as a reasonable request.

Does Chris or anyone else have any authority whatsoever for saying that a person attacked by a camper could plausibly sue PPB/Portland for essentially "failure to roust?"
As Windy said, owners are public information, not residents. Campers are temporary residents, not owners, so the Overlook Association is asking for something that their temporary residents are not required to do.

The real reason why? Because they assume the homeless are criminals. Just to let you know, criminals, for the most part, are in jail. Poor people are on the street. No reason to increase their misery.

Camping is not permanent. The campers are looking for housing. Until they do, they should be allowed to have a secure place to sleep. Perhaps the campgrounds will be permanent, so there will always be a place for a homeless person to sleep safely, whoever they may be.

If you want to not have the homeless camp in your neighborhood, you could always invite them into your home. That's what I do.
Hey Windy, Those Overlook people, be they renters, owners, or guests are on PRIVATE property.
I cant help but think the roots of all this mess goes back to 'dignity' village....
Thanks Sam!!
The hippy-dippy liberals (I'm also a liberal, but not of the hippy-dippy sort) continue to ignore the OPB interview where people at Hazelnut Grove clearly stated they were choosing to live homeless and expected everyone else to pay for their lifestyle. Sorry, I don't want to pay for your poor life decisions.

Also, I had the opportunity to visit Dignity Village last month for a work-related issue and I was shocked at the conditions there. Those people are not "transitioning" back into the workforce, they have set up shacks and have no intention of ever leaving. Most lived in squalor, some were hoarding and the grounds were absolutely filthy. Don't believe me? Just take a visit there and see for yourself. I seriously don't know why the Health Department hasn't been called on that place.
Dignity Village is not a shining example of anything…
This just in: Homeless pedophile apprehended after committing 54 sex crimes:…

Yeah, there's no reason whatsoever why the Overlook Neighborhood might want the names of these campers, at the very least.
5 stolen rifles found at homeless camp:…

Homeless criminal attempts to evade police by ramming car:…

Homeless couple doing the "bump-ugly" across the street from a playground:…

More homeless sex in public:…

Homeless accused of murder:…

Homeless intimidating citizens on Springwater Corridor:…

My point in all of this? Not all of these people are families down on their luck. Some are criminals; it's just a reality. I think if the city is going to permit these tracts of taxpayer land to be used as homeless camps, then the residents have every right to ask for names. These camps are on our dime now, and I don't think it's too much to ask that there aren't wanted/convicted criminals living there.
BREAKING: the vast majority of people who commit crimes live in-fucking-doors. Should you have a constantly-updated, comprehensive list of all neighborhood residents delivered to you every week so you can do continuous background checks on them?
He seems nice.

I'm sure he just wants to ensure that everybody's happy, including himself and his neighbors with heat, and food. Their survival counts too! And they truly cannot survive knowing that somebody's taking advantage of their generosity by sleeping next to the freeway.

Since every homeowner has to have his name in some database somewhere, it only stands to reason that the city should compile and publish a list of these homeless people too. It's perfectly equal!!

And as everyone knows, the law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

Way to go, Overlook.
You get a homeless camp!!!! You get a homeless camp!!! Youg et a homeless!!! (Etc., etc., etc. In Oprah's voice)
Dude, this is unreasonable. Here's the deal: You want a list--a nice tidy little list of everyone all in one place--so you can run background checks to expose any past unsavory behavior.

While, yes, you are correct, homeowners--but not guests, family members, housemates, etc--contact information can be publicly found and checked against the various registries, the burden of conducting a massive background check on all of the "housed" residents in the Overlook Neighborhood is MUCH higher than the burden of running background checks on the 30 residents of Hazelnut Grove (one of whom works for me, by the way, and he passed his City of Portland background check with flying colors:

In other words, it would take you about 1-2 hours and maybe a $60 subscription to an online background check website to "vet" the residents at HG. If the HG residents wanted to background check you, they'd have to be VERY savvy and/or hire a private investigator.

I've about had it with some of you Overlook folk. I spend quite a bit of time at Hazelnut Grove. I'd encourage you to do so yourself before getting all NIMBY "oh the scary campers" on them.
Again, I've yet to see a supporter of Hazelnut Grove address the fact that people there stated they were choosing to be homeless and expected everyone else to pay for their lifestyle.

Any comment (excuse-making) on that tidbit of information?
Bud: Right now the city is paying a minimal amount for trash service, portable restrooms, and a fence. Do some research about how much money city-sanctioned tent cities save tax payers. I'm not going to do it for you. The truth is out there.
If public safety requires knowing who lives in the area, the city should publish a list of everyone living in the area. Everyone, homeowners and homeless alike. If someone has a criminal record, it isn't better or worse because of their housing status.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.