Citing property destruction, harassment, and the fallout of Mayor Charlie Hales’ push to sweep campers from the sidewalks outside city hall, Portland’s parks bureau is planning to fence off Chapman Square “sometime this weekend” according to a memo sent this morning from Commissioner Amanda Fritz’s office.

The email first went out from Fritz’s chief of staff, Tom Bizeau, to his counterparts in each of the other commissioner’s offices. It was then sent out to other staffers. It says parks officials need to be able to make repairs without, it claims, having workers get into scraps with campers and protesters. The claims echo the city’s comments during the eviction of Occupy Portland in 2011.

The memo says the decision is coming from Fritz (who’s currently in talks to move Right 2 Dream Too from Old Town into a legal location on city land in the Pearl). It also promises some kind of additional enforcement proposals that would come before the city council “in the following weeks” so that the city can have “better tools to manage the situation once the fences are removed.” It’s unclear, right now, what those changes might entail.

Fencing would come days after fences came down at Terry D. Schrunk Plaza, which had been closed for landscaping after campers set up there during the day. Campers had moved back to Chapman Square while the fences were up across SW Madison. It’s unclear if or why the city has stopped the sweeps it used to roust campers from Chapman Square late last month and earlier this month. It’s also unclear how campers will react.

We’ll update as this develops.

Here’s the email (emphasis on any particular phrase is all mine):

All,

As discussed at our weekly executive meeting there are obvious problems occurring in Chapman Park as a result of recent moves to push homeless sidewalk users away from City Hall. Some of the issues that have arisen are:

destruction of parks property (bathrooms, irrigation system, trees, grass),
abusive behavior to staff and pedestrians,
Inability of Parks Staff to maintain the park without being accosted
presence of weapons (batons, pepper spray, knives),
drug use,
aggressive and out of control dogs,
a consequent inability to properly enforce Camping on Sidewalks,
Fighting and
Several Arrests

Because of these constant issues and lack of compliance by the homeless to maintain the Park and Sidewalk in a peaceful and lawful manner for all users of the Park, the Commissioner has decided to close off the park and sidewalks surrounding the park to all users in order to make repairs, perform needed maintenance and maintain and deescalate the situation. To that end, a fence surrounding the park similar to that which was up around Terry Schrunk Plaza will be erected sometime this weekend. This strategy may be repeated in other Parks if necessary in the future. We are hoping that this inconvenience to the public will be limited in duration. We are also hoping to bring some additional enforcement changes to Council in the following weeks to provide the City with better tools to manage the situation once the fences are removed.

If you have any questions, feel free to call.

Denis C. Theriault is the Portland Mercury's News Editor. He writes stories about City Hall and the Portland Police Bureau, focusing on issues like homelessness, police oversight, insider politics, and...

12 replies on “BREAKING: Chapman Square Will Be Fenced Off This Weekend—to Boot Campers”

  1. Why don’t these people find something to do? They plan to move back and forth between the parks until… forever?

    The city can’t provide 10,000 affordable housing units. The money doesn’t exist. You can’t just complain a billion dollars into existence.

    Everyone there needs some sort of plan for moving on with their lives. Living on a sidewalk is not a long-term plan, and protesting for the right to live on the sidewalk is not dealing with the long term, just perpetuating an untenable situation for yourself.

  2. If the city of Portland can’t provide housing for homeless people, how can they possibly do it for themselves? They have much fewer resources than the city does.

  3. Um, they could do it the same way I provide housing for myself, and you presumably house yourself?

    They could avail themselves of the many many services which are already available to help Portland’s homeless with everything from food, clothes, and shelter to substance abuse and employment. They could call a relative or friend. They could kick a bad habit that is holding them back.

    If they need shelter they should check out the Resource Access Center that the City just built for $45 million dollars. If they are convinced the the City and its taxpayers don’t do anything for them, they could also check out the Resource Access Center that the City just built for $45 million dollars.

  5. Compromise: can the state fund a job for Blabby to yell in the face of the homeless?

    “STOP BEING MENTALLY ILL”

    “STOP CHOOSING TO HAVE A DRUG ADDICTION”

    “RETROACTIVELY BE RAISED IN AN ENVIRONMENT THAT GAVE YOU THE PROPER TRAINING AND RESOURCES TO NAVIGATE THE WORLD AND ITS CHALLENGES”

    “RETROACTIVELY ESTABLISH A ‘BACKSTOP’ OF FRIENDS AND RELATIVES YOU CAN AND WILL HELP YOU”

    “ON TOP OF THOSE OTHER THINGS I LISTED, RETROACTIVELY BE AS LUCKY AS I HAVE BEEN”

  7. I’m not calling them lazy, nor underestimating their obstacles.

    I simply don’t start from the (frankly bizarre) paradigm that it is the job of, or even remotely within the resources of, a local city government to provide housing for everyone who shows up.

    Not starting from the position that it is the job of local government to provide housing, I find it hard to understand people on the streets or their supporters who seem to expect that to happen, and seem to think the city is being “mean” for not doing it. Asking someone who is in no way obligated to provide a housing unit to you to do so, which we all no is not cheap, is a very big favor to ask for. People should be thanking the stars and clicking their heels for the few units the City has been able to supply. What a nice service from an entity in no way obligated to provide it.

    Liberals don’t understand that when you treat any person or population like they are helpless infants that need you to usher them through life while paying their way and patting their back, you are in fact dehumanizing them.

    In asking why they don’t pull themselves together, I’m actually giving them more respect then you are. I don’t think they are doomed to be useless wards of the state. You do.

  9. Yeah, then Blabby might have reliable health care benefits, an adequate pension and a feeling of self-worth. No one wants that!

  10. I have 25+ years in public assistance. All studies have shown that the most effective way of achieving long term self sufficiency is to give a person $5000. Those given $5000 hardly ever find themselves in a position of need again. Often they use it to move to where they do have support, or to get the health care they need before they can look for work. Instead we dole out little bits of help here and there, never enough to make a difference but enough to say “we’re enabling them and no change ever comes of it; let’s stop”. Over time the $5000 is much cheaper than years of “little bits” of taxpayers money. Of course, for those who are mentally ill or addicted, a little case/money management to coach them as to the best use of that money would be smart. The toughest sell is to the taxpayers who would be appalled at a $5000 giveaway.

Comments are closed.