• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to footer
WRAP

WRAP

Western Regional Advocacy Project

  • Donate Now
  • Get Email Updates
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • About
    • History
    • Mission
    • Strategy
    • Members
    • Board / Staff
  • Campaigns
    • Business Improvement Districts
    • House Keys Not Sweeps
    • Homeless Bill of Rights
    • Oregon Right To Rest
    • Without Housing
    • Street Outreach
  • Organizing Tools
    • Without Housing Organizing Toolkit
    • Homeless Bill of Rights Campaign Manual
    • WRAP Organizers Manual
    • WRAP Artwork
  • Resources
    • Art in Action Power Point Slide Show
    • Hobos to Street People
    • House Keys Book
    • Political Education
    • Legal Research
  • Media
    • Blog
    • Hobos to Street People Art Show
    • Street Newspapers
    • Sweeps Gallery Videos
    • Videos
  • Support Us
    • Donate
    • Become a Monthly Sustainer
    • Volunteer
    • Support WRAP
    • WRAP Newsletters & Updates Sign Up

Denver, Co. City Council Voted Against Providing Trash Service to Unhoused People and Housing to Unhoused People: This Monday Council will have their final Vote on the 2021 Budget

November 9, 2020 by Jonathan Leave a Comment

Last Monday, November 2nd 2020, City Council voted  12- 1 against the two following amendments to the city budget.  The first would provide needed trash services to encampments and the other was to fund a master leasing option that the city could use to offer housing for the unhoused. Councilwoman Candi CdeBaca, proposed these amendments to move money from the inflated police budget to directly meet community needs. Many of the other council members offered a variety of excuses to why they felt the need to vote against these most basic human needs. 

The arguments made by council members and city officials are filled with holes and admissions of key facts. We want to take the time here to address some of these key facts and correct the record on these issues. 

Master Leasing Housing

This budget proposal – totaling $20mil – would have allowed the city to house people right away. The questions raised by council members were designed to shoot this amendment down

Arguments made against the budget  include:

Too Expensive – The city is currently spending 41.5 million on shelters and “services” from City funds (plus another 30mil of COVID FEMA money for shelters). It is not a matter of whether the City can spend money on homelessness, it is a matter of where they spend that money. Currently far too much of the budget is spent on shelters instead of housing which would end homelessness for every individual housed. 

In a master lease situation if the City was paying $1,500 a month (leaving the renter to pay $500 a month on a 2k apartment), this $20mil could pay for housing for over 1,000 people a year. Instead our city chooses to spend over $40mil on shelters for the same 1,000 people that could be in housing. There is no reason that we cannot house these people now. 

The City Doesn’t “DO” Housing – Britta Fisher Executive Director of the Department of Housing Stability. Brita Fisher stated that the city does not “do housing” but leaves that to DHA and other private entities.  (Entities get City funding to do this work).  It is an attempt to absolve oneself of the responsibility of seeing to it that our citizens are housed. When pushed on whether there were any laws preventing the city from providing housing, Fisher admitted, “no there were no laws they knew of – they just don’t do it.” The master lease amendment is an opportunity to actually house people.  For the same money as described above the city is both leasing and buying buildings for shelters. The city already has a process through which they use master lease housing through a program called Live.  They have been doing it for the past few years (a program they have invested very little effort or time in and are trying to use the shortfalls of this program as a reason to say it will never work). 

Landlords Won’t Rent – The city has never put the effort into getting landlords to rent to them. We agree private landlords need education and /or requirements to rent to homeless and poor people. Based on the recent vote on this amendment it would also appear our city council members need the same education. The city master leasing housing for this purpose would allow an opportunity for that education to take place. If you think it is hard to find landlords who will rent to the city, how hard do you think it is as an individual person who is homeless to rent from these people?!? The city can use their power to ensure more landlords open their doors to rent to poor residents under leases held by the city. Thus protecting the landlords and providing needed housing to our poor.  WIN – WIN!  As a homeless person who is used to being discriminated against by landlords and shut out of housing options, having the city as a landlord can open the door to housing options where they did not exist before.  WIN-WIN-WIN!

Lastly, it is important that this funding for master leasing be used as a pathway to city owned housing.  The most economically sustainable and effective way of creating attainable housing for all. While leasing units at exorbitant rates, the city can see the benefits of buying/building housing that is owned by the city so as not to have to pay the crazy prices that rise in our market based housing system. 

Trash Collection for Encampments

This budget proposal would fund trash removal services for encampments across Denver. It would be a small line item in the city’s budget so easy to fund -[$300,000] – a drop in the bucket compared to the police budget or any other city budget. Instead of providing this cost effective basic service especially in the midst of a pandemic, 12 out of 13 council members voted this cost effective health and safety measure down. The questions and comments made were all in support of trash services in theory…(who can’t be??), but ultimately voting against actually doing it. 

Arguments made include:

We Don’t Have the Data – This argument states that Council has not gotten data about the cost of trash services or sweeps so they can’t make a decision on funding trash services. First off, the Mayor refused to let city departments communicate directly with council members in the budget drafting process about the details of department spending. How can you expect to have the data you need to propose budget amendments when the departments spending that money now can’t tell you what they are spending??? Every attempt to get proper data from the City on the cost of sweeps has been met with no avail. Every attempt to get costs from the city on trash collection has been met with no avail. It would behoove the council to work more diligently on demanding needed data for a budget vote.

The Proposal Should be Priced Out – the argument that the proposal should be priced out based on real costs, not an arbitrary number. Because of the prior point about the city not given data on real costs, this makes pricing extra difficult. It is hard to say exactly what something will cost if the entity paying for it won’t tell you. Furthermore, we did actually price this out to the best of our ability. Here is the details of what we priced out and why:

-Doubling the size of the existing Triangle Works crew to employ at least 5 more homeless people to help clean the streets and encampments. (The current program run by Bayaud costs about $100,000 a year to employ a team of 5, 3 days a week. This funding would have provided another $100,000 to double the size of that program).

-Placing and servicing at least 100 or more trash cans at encampments where people live without trash services. (The city did this for a short time at two encampments – before they swept them – so the city has the data on real costs for this service).  The trash trucks already drive up and down our city streets in a city of nearly a million people. We are talking only an additional 100 or so more stops…. Very possible and very cost effective. 

-Placing and servicing at least 5 dumpsters at larger encampments where people live without trash services. (We were in the process of contracting for dumpsters – before sweeps pushed those sites away – so we know at least 10 encampments could be provided with dumpsters serviced twice a week for $100,000 with a standard private trash company – the city likely has contracts that could make this much cheaper). 

We Can’t Put Trash Can’s in the Public Right of Way – This is 100% bogus in all ways. Just place them where they are not in the right of way.  People do this all the time.  The Mayor’s office even promised to us that they would work with us on placing more trash cans at other encampments before they back tracked on all their promises.  Council could meet the need the Mayor’s office has refused to meet.  After failing to follow up on trash service for our homeless encampments the Mayor’s office started to sweep these encampments like mad, which according to the CDC, “increases the potential for infectious disease spread.”

Don’t Want to Take Money from the Police -This argument shows clearly what we are up against… so if policing is reduced by meeting other needs in the city why fund it.  That is the whole point of amendments like these.  Once in effect the need for policing will go down and that is a good thing all around. Currently police are being sent unnecessarily  to the streets in mass to conduct sweeps – partly under the auspices of “ trash clean ups” -however, when offered a chance to put funding toward solving the stated trash problem the council votes it down. Did Council forget their commitment to reduce the police budget to invest in community measures during the height of the George Floyd protests?

While Denver is refusing to provide this basic trash service and REMOVING community funded port-a-potties during a pandemic, other cities are providing trash services and port-a-potties to encampments. See some examples here: 

Portland, OR https://www.wweek.com/news/2020/10/17/should-the-city-provide-portable-toilets-and-garbage-cans-for-homeless-camps/

LA, CA https://laist.com/2019/06/20/homeless_encampments

Cupertino CA https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/06/03/after-months-of-complaints-cupertino-homeless-camp-gets-a-bathroom/

Why will our City Council not address problems with basic well known solutions??

On November 3rd, residents of Denver voted on initiative 2G, with a resounding YES. Initiative 2G “permits City Council to propose changes in how city funds already allocated in the current year’s city budget will be used, or to propose how to use any new, unexpected funds that were not accounted for in the budget because they came into the city after the annual budget was adopted”. WE will continue to push for our City Council to invest in the community and take care of all of our community members (not protect affluence) until it is done. 

The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members’~ Mahatma Ghandi

Contact:
info@denverhomelessoutloud.org
720-940-5291

Filed Under: #right2rest, #StopTheSweeps, Denver Homeless Out Loud

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Footer

Instagram Feed

Part 12... Infractions and Due Process Rights Ant Part 12...
Infractions and Due Process Rights 
Anti-homeless laws and ordinances and their application have, in fact, created a loophole that allows for the circumvention of a homeless person’s right to due process under law. The process by which homeless people face repeated incarceration generally follows this scenario: A homeless man is sleeping on the sidewalk. A local ordinance makes it illegal to do so. The man gets a ticket and is later arrested for not paying the ticket. He spends a couple of days in jail, and is just as homeless now as he was before, only now he has a criminal record. This was the case for many of the individuals interviewed by RWHP. One man relayed the familiar scenario, “I was sleeping in a tent in a hidden spot near the freeway. They gave me a ticket for trespassing. I don’t have money to pay it. I’ve never been in jail before. I keep to myself, but now they’re going to make me a convict just for sleeping.”
SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT TALKING DOWN THE PEOPLES TOWMH SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT TALKING DOWN THE PEOPLES TOWMHOMES ENCAMPMENT https://www.instagram.com/tv/ChAT9N5jNTY/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

This morning @phillysheriff ‘s came and evicted our protest encampment to Save the UC Townhomes. When asked why they were doing it, Rochelle Bilal responded that she “felt compassion for the townhomes residents but was just doing my job”

Even if the tents are gone WE AINT GOIN NOWHERE‼️
Saturday AUGUST 27 — 9 am to 4pm Sunday AUGUST 2 Saturday AUGUST 27 — 9 am to 4pm
Sunday AUGUST 28 — 12:30pm to 4pm

Westminster Presbyterian Church
1300 N Street, Sacramento

https://wraphome.org/2022/08/02/sacramento-ca-advocates-community-summit-on-homelessness-august-27-28th/
California. (S)Care Court Hearing Tomorrow 8/3 Las California. (S)Care Court Hearing Tomorrow 8/3 Last Hearing before floor Vote
https://conta.cc/3vzRoWo
Part 11 ... California’s “anti-Okie” laws of Part 11 ...
California’s “anti-Okie” laws of the 1930s and the South’s Jim Crow laws in effect from the late 1800s to the 1950s are examples of the kinds of local laws overturned in previous generations. Yet, modern “quality of life” legislation and enforcement targeting homeless people can be found in communities across the nation.
The City Council postponed their vote on the 41.18 The City Council postponed their vote on the 41.18 expansion to August 2nd. If passed, this motion will add approximately 1,900 additional sites–a 376% increase in exclusionary zones across the city. 41.18 would then cover at least 88 sq miles (that’s 20% of the entire city).

Services Not Sweeps is urging EVERYONE to come to City Hall at 9:00am on August 2 and tell City Council that 41.18 is BAD POLICY and should be repealed.

When we fight, we win. 
But this fight isn’t over.

The community flooded City Hall inside and out on Wednesday to protest the expansion of 41.18 but the fight is not over. It’s clear that President Nury Martinez and friends weren’t prepared for our numbers and realized they were unable to rally their (few but loud) 41.18 supporters. Council delayed the vote to Tuesday August 2nd in an attempt to erode our momentum and stifle our voices. 
 
We won’t let that happen. The fight now is to keep the pressure on and show up next week!! See you next Tuesday 9am. Bring a friend.
 
WHO: You and your friends!
WHERE: City Hall, 200 N Spring St 
WHEN: Tuesday August 2nd at 9:00am
HOW: Read more details on our toolkit.
AGENDA ITEM 14 https://lacity.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=102513
Part 10... In fact, however, enforcement is very m Part 10...
In fact, however, enforcement is very much impacted by both skin color and appearance. Local governments cannot legally discriminate against people strictly because they do not have housing. Federal protections prohibit local and state governments from removing people from their communities due to the color of their skin or economic/employment status.
Part 9... This nationwide pattern has escaped Civi Part 9... This nationwide pattern has escaped Civil Rights protections because on their face, these programs are not clearly discriminatory. Local laws are often drafted in such a way as to appear to apply equally to all people in a community.
Part 8... While certain communities highlight diff Part 8...
While certain communities highlight different controls at different times, often depending upon the outcome of local elections and legislative and court efforts, all have one primary common goal: to remove the presence and resulting impact of people without housing from local communities. As the Mayor of Las Vegas stated when she outlawed feeding people in city parks: “If we stop feeding them, they will leave.”
Part 7... This type of ticket is not uncommon. The Part 7...
This type of ticket is not uncommon. The most common public space and activity restrictions are those aimed at camping, sitting, lying, or trespassing on either public or private land, panhandling, sleeping, blocking the sidewalk and possessing “stolen property,” such as shopping carts and milk crates—to name just a few. Furthermore, these restrictions are often implemented in conjunction with the closure of public parks and the outlawing of free food and clothing distribution.
Load More... Follow on Instagram

Facebook Icon

Facebook Feed

Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons

... See MoreSee Less

Link thumbnail

Statewide fight against Newsom's "Care"-LESS Courts continues!

web-extract.constantcontact.com

Thank you to everyone who signed the open letter to Governor Newsom urging him to reconsider his CARE Court proposal. There were over 500 si...
3 hours ago
View on Facebook
· Share
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linked In Share by Email
View Comments
  • Likes: 0
  • Shares: 0
  • Comments: 0

Comment on Facebook

Twitter Icon

Twitter Feed

3h 1559579585251102720

On August 11th, Newsom's "Care" Act passed out of the Appropriations Committee. The bill was amended on the 15th and will be scheduled for a floor vote any time between August 17th and 31st. https://conta.cc/3JXM4SF
https://conta.cc/3QOytPM

Image for the Tweet beginning: On August 11th, Newsom's "Care" Twitter feed image.
Reply on Twitter 1559579585251102720 Retweet on Twitter 1559579585251102720 0 Like on Twitter 1559579585251102720 0 Twitter 1559579585251102720
11h 1559459020678713344

#NoCARECourt KPFK Lawyers Guild Show "CARE" court Wed. 8/17 - 2-3pm - WRAP

Image for twitter card

#NoCARECourt KPFK Lawyers Guild Show "CARE" court Wed. 8/17 - 2-3pm - WRAP

Tune in Wed., Aug. 17 from 2-3pm on KPFK 90.7 FM for this week’s edition of the Lawyers Guild Show. First...

wraphome.org

Reply on Twitter 1559459020678713344 Retweet on Twitter 1559459020678713344 0 Like on Twitter 1559459020678713344 1 Twitter 1559459020678713344
15 Aug 1559254754945015808

Thank you to everyone who signed the open letter to Governor Newsom urging him to reconsider his CARE Court proposal. There were over 500 signatories!

Image for twitter card

Sacramento, CA. Open Letter to Governor Newsom re: Opposition to CARE Court - WRAP

Dear Allies, Thank you to everyone who signed the open letter to Governor Newsom urging him to reconsider his CA...

wraphome.org

Reply on Twitter 1559254754945015808 Retweet on Twitter 1559254754945015808 3 Like on Twitter 1559254754945015808 6 Twitter 1559254754945015808
15 Aug 1559254073630527488

"Tiny homes" not a homeless solution in any location via @TheMiamiTimes

Image for twitter card

"Tiny homes" not a homeless solution in any location

While the bad reviews of Miami City Commissioner Joe Carollo's 'tiny homes' proposal for Virginia Key, now catching ...

www.miamitimesonline.com

Reply on Twitter 1559254073630527488 Retweet on Twitter 1559254073630527488 4 Like on Twitter 1559254073630527488 8 Twitter 1559254073630527488
Retweet on Twitter WRAP Retweeted
11 Aug 1557824221996130304

Join us and our friends @APTPaction to say NO to C.A.R.E Court next Thursday, August 18th for a teach-in followed by feeding the people, and a march!

RSVP on Facebook here: https://fb.me/e/1CFrMznNP

Image for the Tweet beginning: Join us and our friends Twitter feed image.
Reply on Twitter 1557824221996130304 Retweet on Twitter 1557824221996130304 9 Like on Twitter 1557824221996130304 11 Twitter 1557824221996130304
Load More...

YouTube icon

Youtube Code

Our Channel

Copyright © 2022 Western Regional Advocacy Project WRAP · Log in