A
A Texan from Connecticut
Guest
######In 1999, the Giuliani administration attempted to change that,
with a plan
that would have denied shelter http://www.right2shelter.org to anyone
not
eligible for welfare, and ejected anybody who did not comply with the
Pataki-enunciated rules. The Giuliani plan would have put children of
ejected families in foster care while their parents were relegated to
the
streets.
Dozens of groups joined together to oppose the move. After legal
challenges,
State Supreme Court Justice Stanley Sklar in February, 2000, blocked
implementation of the plan for homeless adults. Arguing that it
violated the
provisions of the Callahan consent decree, Sklar wrote, "The simple
bureaucratic error which might send an individual out into the street,
because he or she was unable to understand or cooperate with these
requirements, might be the error which results in that individual's
death by
exposure, death by violence, or death by sheer neglect. The risk is
simply
too great to take." He concluded, "If [the city and state] sincerely
want to
create a system in which our homeless citizens can rejoin and
contribute to
society... they should do so by means which do not endanger those very
persons."#####################
Evicting the Homeless
by Patrick Markee
December 16, 2002
Last week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced an ambitious plan to
build and
preserve 65,500 affordable homes in the city over the next five years.
The
proposal includes new housing for homeless families and individuals.
When
combined with federal housing funds that the Bloomberg administration
has
already pledged, the mayor's plan represents a powerful commitment to
address the housing needs of New York City's homeless, a commitment
unquestionably deserving of praise, particularly in the current fiscal
environment.
However, at the same time that he took this major step forward, the
mayor
and his administration continued to seek court approval for a plan
that
would allow the city to eject people from shelters and turn them out
onto
the streets for 30 days or more. If the courts approve the plan, New
York
City would lose its distinction as the only city in the United States
that
provides a legal guarantee of shelter for homeless adults and
children.
The consequences of such a change could be literally deadly during the
winter months for some of the more than 37,700 New Yorkers, including
16,600
children, who bed down each night in the municipal shelter system --
an
increase of 26 percent in the last year alone.
Mayor Bloomberg ought to reconsider his proposal, halt the court
action and
resume discussion with advocates and providers.
The Right to Shelter
The city's plan represents the latest chapter in a seven-year attack
on the
legal right to shelter for homeless New Yorkers. This right in the
city
dates back to the landmark class-action lawsuit, Callahan v. Carey,
which
was brought in 1979 by the Coalition for the Homeless on behalf of
homeless
single men who had been denied shelter in the early days of the modern
crisis in homelessness. Under the consent decree (in pdf format) that
settled the case in 1981, the city and state agreed to provide shelter
to
all homeless men who met the needs standard for welfare or who were
homeless
"by reason of physical, mental or social dysfunction." Subsequent
litigation
extended the right to shelter to homeless single women and finally to
homeless children and families. State courts must approve any change
in the
decree.
The legacy of Callahan has set New York City apart in its approach to
homelessness. There is evidence that before the consent decree was
signed,
more than 30 homeless people died on city streets every month, and
hypothermia and injuries were common. Robert Callahan, the lead
plaintiff in
the litigation, was found dead on a Manhattan street in 1981, just
months
before the consent decree bearing his name was signed.
In 1995, the Pataki administration issued regulations that required
localities in the state to deny and terminate emergency shelter to
homeless
families and individuals for at least 30 days for any of the following
reasons:
Failure to cooperate and complete an assessment of their needs;
Failure to develop and comply with a social service plan developed by
the
shelter or the city. This plan could require a person to meet
regularly with
a caseworker, to get treatment for an addiction or to enroll in a
mental
health program or job training.
Failure to actively seek permanent housing;
Violating shelter rules involving health or safety;
Failure to comply with public assistance requirements, including
workfare
rules.
The regulations have been implemented elsewhere in New York State,
often
with harsh consequences for homeless children and adults. But, so far,
they
have not gone into effect in New York City because of the Callahan
agreement
and other court orders.
In 1999, the Giuliani administration attempted to change that, with a
plan
that would have denied shelter http://www.right2shelter.org to anyone
not
eligible for welfare, and ejected anybody who did not comply with the
Pataki-enunciated rules. The Giuliani plan would have put children of
ejected families in foster care while their parents were relegated to
the
streets.
Dozens of groups joined together to oppose the move. After legal
challenges,
State Supreme Court Justice Stanley Sklar in February, 2000, blocked
implementation of the plan for homeless adults. Arguing that it
violated the
provisions of the Callahan consent decree, Sklar wrote, "The simple
bureaucratic error which might send an individual out into the street,
because he or she was unable to understand or cooperate with these
requirements, might be the error which results in that individual's
death by
exposure, death by violence, or death by sheer neglect. The risk is
simply
too great to take." He concluded, "If [the city and state] sincerely
want to
create a system in which our homeless citizens can rejoin and
contribute to
society... they should do so by means which do not endanger those very
persons."
The Latest Challenge
Now, nearly three years later, the Bloomberg administration is
appealing
Sklar's decision and moving forward with a plan to throw people out of
shelters. The city's Department of Homeless Services has proposed a
"Client
Responsibility Demonstration Project" that would let the city evict
homeless
families and individuals from shelters for up to 30 days.
In announcing the plan, Department of Homeless Services Commissioner
Linda
Gibbs stated, "It is my belief that the current service system does
not set
the appropriate expectations for clients." The city claims that many
homeless families repeatedly turn down apartments or miss appointments
with
caseworkers. Gibbs and other officials say the threat of ejection
would
encourage homeless people to seek permanent housing more quickly and
would
also address instances of "gross misconduct" in shelters.
In Bloomberg's proposal, unlike the Giuliani plan, the loss of welfare
benefits will not automatically lead to loss of shelter. However, an
applicant who failed to cooperate with an intake worker during an
assessment
interview could be denied shelter. A resident who repeatedly missed
appointments with caseworkers could be ejected.
The Bloomberg plan also calls for "respite care" for children of
homeless
families ejected from shelter. The families would be permitted to
leave
their children in such care -- similar to foster care, but without a
Family
Court proceeding -- for up to 30 days.
Homeless advocates and shelter providers, who have first-hand
knowledge of
the homeless population and are aware of the prevalence of psychiatric
and
medical disorders among homeless adults, acknowledge that problems do
exist
in the shelter system. Ultimately, however, they disagree with the
city that
ejection from shelter is the only way to address these problems. They
have
recommended alternative measures that would improve the safety of
shelters
and encourage families to quickly seek permanent housing. They
suggest, for
example, stationing security officers with arrest powers at large city
shelters. And they also propose that families who unreasonably reject
suitable apartments should be placed in those apartments anyway.
The groups working on the front lines in the current homeless crisis
maintain that the best way to help clients who do not follow the rules
is to
find the right mix of incentives and sanctions. The most extreme
sanction --
ejection from shelter to the streets -- would make things worse. In
the
words of the Association of Service Providers for Homeless Adults, "it
would
be more difficult for shelter providers to accomplish the objective of
assisting homeless adults to achieve self-sufficient and productive
lives."
Reverend Calvin O. Butts, pastor of Abyssinian Baptist Church, said,
"we
know that there are better solutions, and that a city as great as New
York
can do better by its homeless citizens."
Out in the Cold?
A state court hearing on the city's plan for homeless families is
scheduled
for January 17, with oral arguments on the shelter-termination plan
for
homeless single adults tentatively set for mid-February. In the
meantime,
the homeless crisis is once again in the news, not just because of the
cold
weather and the holidays, but because the police department is again
stepping up its arrests of homeless people.
The Giuliani administration's legal attack on the right to shelter
three
years ago also coincided with a similar police crackdown on the street
homeless. Many observers then, as now, noted the contradiction in a
policy
that sought to eject homeless people from shelters and put them on the
streets, while at the same time directing police to arrest other
homeless
individuals who did not want to go to a shelter. Among the critics is
Patrick Lynch, president of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.
"When
all the other agencies fail," he told The Chief newspaper, "it falls
on the
shoulders of the police officers in the field."
Ultimately, the greatest fear among homeless service providers and
community
groups is a return to the "bad old days" before the legal right to
shelter
was established. Although Gibbs and other city officials have stated
that
they hope few people will be ejected from shelters, the loss of the
legal
right to shelter would give future administrations extraordinary
latitude to
deny shelter to an untold number of homeless New Yorkers. Amid
bitterly cold
weather, the issue becomes, literally, one of life and death.
Patrick Markee is senior policy analyst for the Coalition for the
Homeless.
with a plan
that would have denied shelter http://www.right2shelter.org to anyone
not
eligible for welfare, and ejected anybody who did not comply with the
Pataki-enunciated rules. The Giuliani plan would have put children of
ejected families in foster care while their parents were relegated to
the
streets.
Dozens of groups joined together to oppose the move. After legal
challenges,
State Supreme Court Justice Stanley Sklar in February, 2000, blocked
implementation of the plan for homeless adults. Arguing that it
violated the
provisions of the Callahan consent decree, Sklar wrote, "The simple
bureaucratic error which might send an individual out into the street,
because he or she was unable to understand or cooperate with these
requirements, might be the error which results in that individual's
death by
exposure, death by violence, or death by sheer neglect. The risk is
simply
too great to take." He concluded, "If [the city and state] sincerely
want to
create a system in which our homeless citizens can rejoin and
contribute to
society... they should do so by means which do not endanger those very
persons."#####################
Evicting the Homeless
by Patrick Markee
December 16, 2002
Last week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced an ambitious plan to
build and
preserve 65,500 affordable homes in the city over the next five years.
The
proposal includes new housing for homeless families and individuals.
When
combined with federal housing funds that the Bloomberg administration
has
already pledged, the mayor's plan represents a powerful commitment to
address the housing needs of New York City's homeless, a commitment
unquestionably deserving of praise, particularly in the current fiscal
environment.
However, at the same time that he took this major step forward, the
mayor
and his administration continued to seek court approval for a plan
that
would allow the city to eject people from shelters and turn them out
onto
the streets for 30 days or more. If the courts approve the plan, New
York
City would lose its distinction as the only city in the United States
that
provides a legal guarantee of shelter for homeless adults and
children.
The consequences of such a change could be literally deadly during the
winter months for some of the more than 37,700 New Yorkers, including
16,600
children, who bed down each night in the municipal shelter system --
an
increase of 26 percent in the last year alone.
Mayor Bloomberg ought to reconsider his proposal, halt the court
action and
resume discussion with advocates and providers.
The Right to Shelter
The city's plan represents the latest chapter in a seven-year attack
on the
legal right to shelter for homeless New Yorkers. This right in the
city
dates back to the landmark class-action lawsuit, Callahan v. Carey,
which
was brought in 1979 by the Coalition for the Homeless on behalf of
homeless
single men who had been denied shelter in the early days of the modern
crisis in homelessness. Under the consent decree (in pdf format) that
settled the case in 1981, the city and state agreed to provide shelter
to
all homeless men who met the needs standard for welfare or who were
homeless
"by reason of physical, mental or social dysfunction." Subsequent
litigation
extended the right to shelter to homeless single women and finally to
homeless children and families. State courts must approve any change
in the
decree.
The legacy of Callahan has set New York City apart in its approach to
homelessness. There is evidence that before the consent decree was
signed,
more than 30 homeless people died on city streets every month, and
hypothermia and injuries were common. Robert Callahan, the lead
plaintiff in
the litigation, was found dead on a Manhattan street in 1981, just
months
before the consent decree bearing his name was signed.
In 1995, the Pataki administration issued regulations that required
localities in the state to deny and terminate emergency shelter to
homeless
families and individuals for at least 30 days for any of the following
reasons:
Failure to cooperate and complete an assessment of their needs;
Failure to develop and comply with a social service plan developed by
the
shelter or the city. This plan could require a person to meet
regularly with
a caseworker, to get treatment for an addiction or to enroll in a
mental
health program or job training.
Failure to actively seek permanent housing;
Violating shelter rules involving health or safety;
Failure to comply with public assistance requirements, including
workfare
rules.
The regulations have been implemented elsewhere in New York State,
often
with harsh consequences for homeless children and adults. But, so far,
they
have not gone into effect in New York City because of the Callahan
agreement
and other court orders.
In 1999, the Giuliani administration attempted to change that, with a
plan
that would have denied shelter http://www.right2shelter.org to anyone
not
eligible for welfare, and ejected anybody who did not comply with the
Pataki-enunciated rules. The Giuliani plan would have put children of
ejected families in foster care while their parents were relegated to
the
streets.
Dozens of groups joined together to oppose the move. After legal
challenges,
State Supreme Court Justice Stanley Sklar in February, 2000, blocked
implementation of the plan for homeless adults. Arguing that it
violated the
provisions of the Callahan consent decree, Sklar wrote, "The simple
bureaucratic error which might send an individual out into the street,
because he or she was unable to understand or cooperate with these
requirements, might be the error which results in that individual's
death by
exposure, death by violence, or death by sheer neglect. The risk is
simply
too great to take." He concluded, "If [the city and state] sincerely
want to
create a system in which our homeless citizens can rejoin and
contribute to
society... they should do so by means which do not endanger those very
persons."
The Latest Challenge
Now, nearly three years later, the Bloomberg administration is
appealing
Sklar's decision and moving forward with a plan to throw people out of
shelters. The city's Department of Homeless Services has proposed a
"Client
Responsibility Demonstration Project" that would let the city evict
homeless
families and individuals from shelters for up to 30 days.
In announcing the plan, Department of Homeless Services Commissioner
Linda
Gibbs stated, "It is my belief that the current service system does
not set
the appropriate expectations for clients." The city claims that many
homeless families repeatedly turn down apartments or miss appointments
with
caseworkers. Gibbs and other officials say the threat of ejection
would
encourage homeless people to seek permanent housing more quickly and
would
also address instances of "gross misconduct" in shelters.
In Bloomberg's proposal, unlike the Giuliani plan, the loss of welfare
benefits will not automatically lead to loss of shelter. However, an
applicant who failed to cooperate with an intake worker during an
assessment
interview could be denied shelter. A resident who repeatedly missed
appointments with caseworkers could be ejected.
The Bloomberg plan also calls for "respite care" for children of
homeless
families ejected from shelter. The families would be permitted to
leave
their children in such care -- similar to foster care, but without a
Family
Court proceeding -- for up to 30 days.
Homeless advocates and shelter providers, who have first-hand
knowledge of
the homeless population and are aware of the prevalence of psychiatric
and
medical disorders among homeless adults, acknowledge that problems do
exist
in the shelter system. Ultimately, however, they disagree with the
city that
ejection from shelter is the only way to address these problems. They
have
recommended alternative measures that would improve the safety of
shelters
and encourage families to quickly seek permanent housing. They
suggest, for
example, stationing security officers with arrest powers at large city
shelters. And they also propose that families who unreasonably reject
suitable apartments should be placed in those apartments anyway.
The groups working on the front lines in the current homeless crisis
maintain that the best way to help clients who do not follow the rules
is to
find the right mix of incentives and sanctions. The most extreme
sanction --
ejection from shelter to the streets -- would make things worse. In
the
words of the Association of Service Providers for Homeless Adults, "it
would
be more difficult for shelter providers to accomplish the objective of
assisting homeless adults to achieve self-sufficient and productive
lives."
Reverend Calvin O. Butts, pastor of Abyssinian Baptist Church, said,
"we
know that there are better solutions, and that a city as great as New
York
can do better by its homeless citizens."
Out in the Cold?
A state court hearing on the city's plan for homeless families is
scheduled
for January 17, with oral arguments on the shelter-termination plan
for
homeless single adults tentatively set for mid-February. In the
meantime,
the homeless crisis is once again in the news, not just because of the
cold
weather and the holidays, but because the police department is again
stepping up its arrests of homeless people.
The Giuliani administration's legal attack on the right to shelter
three
years ago also coincided with a similar police crackdown on the street
homeless. Many observers then, as now, noted the contradiction in a
policy
that sought to eject homeless people from shelters and put them on the
streets, while at the same time directing police to arrest other
homeless
individuals who did not want to go to a shelter. Among the critics is
Patrick Lynch, president of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.
"When
all the other agencies fail," he told The Chief newspaper, "it falls
on the
shoulders of the police officers in the field."
Ultimately, the greatest fear among homeless service providers and
community
groups is a return to the "bad old days" before the legal right to
shelter
was established. Although Gibbs and other city officials have stated
that
they hope few people will be ejected from shelters, the loss of the
legal
right to shelter would give future administrations extraordinary
latitude to
deny shelter to an untold number of homeless New Yorkers. Amid
bitterly cold
weather, the issue becomes, literally, one of life and death.
Patrick Markee is senior policy analyst for the Coalition for the
Homeless.
