Thanks for the article. Under Martin vs Boise, it is completely legal for the City to force campers to move. What is needed is repealing ORS 446.265. There are also disability laws applicable to homeless individuals. Would MERC readers be interested in a more thorough discussion of the points of law after a discussion with the ACLU and DRO?

In theory, new affordable housing should start to bring the numbers of homeless down.

In fact, we're:
(1) Not building enough of it,
(2) What we are building isn't affordable to the poorest people, and
(3) Even if a homeless person has enough to pay the rent, and finds a place they can afford, there's nothing to help them get that unit when they're competing against someone with more income and an unstable housing history.

Bottom line is, we say we're moving people off the street and into housing, but we just aren't.

When campers claim they feel unsafe in shelters that is usually code for they are unable or unwilling to get along with others and perfer the freedom of living on the streets, as the shelters are much safer than life on the streets

4 When terrified, vulnerable people tell you that they're safer outside than in a shelter, listen to them. They're not wrong.

It's time the city started focusing on all citizens instead of protecting the special privileges of a few. What's the number of emergency shelter beds required until the City will start enforcing OUR laws on all of us equally? Some back of the napkin math based on the Point in Time survey says we are about 1,600 short. So focus on that in the short term. Get enough beds built so that everyone has to follow our common laws, and only then refocus on transitional housing. Start with Wapato.

3 you can't leave soon enough, get out now. We need your housing. You don't fucking deserve to live here.

5 Repeat after me: being homeless is not a fucking crime.

I'm so sick of all these entitled fucks who think they are to good to live around poor people. Get the fuck out of my city.