(November 29, 2018) -- In a The requested report would include the "number of rehab, medical detox, sobriety, and other addiction related beds available in Long Beach and the surrounding area." It also seeks "an estimate of how many of these types of beds would be necessary to best serve the Long Beach homeless and those suffering from addiction" as well as a "report on the feasibility of the City providing incentives to create additional homelessness and addiction related beds, including medical detox beds in the City of Long Beach." Councilwoman Price's agendizing memo (on her letterhead) explains the request in plainly-worded terms: "When asked 'how many rehabilitation and detox beds are needed to adequately manage the need in Long Beach,' the City Health and Human Services Department replied December 18, 2017 explaining that the data to determine the level of need for detox and substance use treatment for homeless individuals was incomplete.' [cites this memo.] However, with the lack of certainty, and likely small number of beds available in the City causing our law enforcement officers to be less able to enforce ordinance violations, an audit should be conducted of number; and types of beds for those experiencing homelessness and/or in need of treatment." [Scroll down for further.] |
A very significant part of the memo is its statement that the "lack of certainty" leaves "law enforcement officers to be less able to enforce ordinance violations..." LBREPORT.com surmises this is an unstated reference to a federal constitutional principle most recently voiced by the 9th circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in Martin v. City of Boise, which opened with this statement: "We consider whether the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment bars a city from prosecuting people criminally for sleeping outside on public property when those people have no home or other shelter to go to. We conclude that it does."
However the Court's opinion also noted: Our holding is a narrow one. Like the Jones panel [Jones v. City of Los Angeles (2006), vacated as the parties reached a settlement] "we in no way dictate to the City that it must provide sufficient shelter for the homeless, or allow anyone who wishes to sit, lie, or sleep on the streets . . . at any time and at any place." Id. at 1138. We hold only that "so long as there is a greater number of homeless individuals in [a jurisdiction] than the number of available beds [in shelters]," the jurisdiction cannot prosecute homeless individuals for "involuntarily sitting, lying, and sleeping in public." Id.<.i> That is, as long as there is no option of sleeping indoors, the government cannot criminalize indigent, homeless people for sleeping outdoors, on public property, on the false premise they had a choice in the matter." And to its above statement the Court attached this significant footnote: Naturally, our holding does not cover individuals who do have access to adequate temporary shelter, whether because they have the means to pay for it or because it is realistically available to them for free, but who choose not to use it. Nor do we suggest that a jurisdiction with insufficient shelter can never criminalize the act of sleeping outside. Even where shelter is unavailable, an ordinance prohibiting sitting, lying, or sleeping outside at particular times or in particular locations might well be constitutionally permissible. See Jones, 444 F.3d at 1123. So, too, might an ordinance barring the obstruction of public rights of way or the erection of certain structures. Whether some other ordinance is consistent with the Eighth Amendment will depend, as here, on whether it punishes a person for lacking the means to live out the "universal and unavoidable consequences of being human" in the way the ordinance prescribes. Id. at 1136.
The Councilmembers' agendizing memo touches a number of other hot-button homeless issues; we provide their memo's full text below.
LBREPORT.com has learned that the Dec. 4 Price-Pearce-Supernaw request for information comes one week before city staff plans to bring forward on at the The Mayor-chosen thirty-member group (names visible at this link, scroll down) didn't include representatives of neighborhood groups impacted by transient/vagrant-related crimes but did include a number of entities receiving funds for dealing with homeless individuals. It met five times between June and November in meetings nominally open to the public that didn't comply with Brown (open meetings) Act requirements, using a loophole in the law exploited by Mayor Garcia who created his Task Force without Council voted action. LBREPORT.com's informal efforts to obtain minutes or recordings of the Task Force's meetings and recommendations have thus far been unsuccessful. We presume its recommendations will appear within the Health/Human Services staff-prepared report that will be publicly agendized for the Dec. 11 Council meeting. Developing.
blog comments powered by Disqus Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:
Follow LBReport.com with:
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com |
Hardwood Floor Specialists Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050 |