This is such an outrageous waste of money that I barely know where to begin.
The Portland Press Herald reports today that the Portland City Council approved $100,000 in federal funding to hire two people to drive a van and two people to walk around the city to locate drunks and drug addicts and urge them off the streets.
Um, let me see if I understand this situation. The City of Portland is in dire financial straights ($3 million shortfall this year and $4 million projected for next year beginning in July); the city manager has cut lots of staff positions and had big fights with the firefighter and police unions because he refused to give them promised pay raises and in fact had to fire some of them; the Portland schools are going to have something like $7 million less in state aid and may have to lay off 140 workers, and the Portland City Council is spending $100,000 on getting drunks off the street?
And I thought it was just the politicians in Washington that were out of touch.
Here’s my problem with this ridiculous decision.
Although some will undoubtedly disagree, we don’t have a serious drunk and drug addict problem in Portland. I live and work downtown. I go back and forth to the courthouse, to meetings in other lawyer’s offices, to lunch, to the bank, and a variety of other local places daily. I’ve worked in Portland for 30 years and I also live here and am often in the city during the evenings.
Weeks and often months go by and I don’t see a drunk person begging for money in this city. (During the winter months, the only time I’ve routinely seen homeless folks is near the Wayside Soup Kitchen on Lancaster Street.) It’s just too darned cold in January for drunks to be out asking people for spare change.
I lived in Boston for three years when I went to law school so I know what a problem the homeless and addicted can become in a city. Several years ago, I went to a conference in New York City in July and ran around Central Park early in the morning. I counted 53 homeless people sleeping in the park during that one jog. I imagine there were hundreds more throughout the city.
Do I want to see that happen in Portland? No. Will this one hundred grand van make a difference? Doubtful.
The simple fact is that the more services you provide, the more the homeless and addicted will take advantage of those services. It’s human nature. If this city shut down all its soup kitchens and shelters today, then our homeless and addicted population would be drastically reduced overnight, These unfortunate folks would naturally go elsewhere to obtain the services they need.
Am I in favor of doing away with these services as a way to reduce the homeless population in Portland? Of course not. I believe that helping those in need is the Christian thing to do. I’m in favor of keeping the current level of services provided to the needy of this city. But during these difficult financial times for this city, I’m not in favor of expanding services for addicted individuals while we fire teachers in our schools.
Truthfully, in all the time I’ve lived and worked in Portland, I’ve never been really bothered by a drunk or homeless person. Oh sure, in the summertime, I might get asked for some change once or twice a month by someone on the street. But I’ve never been concerned by someone being aggressive or threatening in any way.
Second, part of the rational in spending this money on the one hundred grand van, as described in the paper, is because store owners and others “now call police to remove publicly intoxicated people who may be fighting or loitering or even passed out.” That’s true. And you know what, it’ll still be true after we spend this money.
Do you think that some van workers are going to take on a drunk or drug addict that’s swinging for a fight? Not likely.
Van workers have no police powers to arrest these people or force them off the street. Unless the person wants to quietly accompany them into the van to head off to a detox center or shelter, there isn’t much they can do. And so police are often going to get called anyway.
Hey I have an idea — how about we save the $100,000 and spend it on teachers for our kids. Or we could hire a few more police for the city. Then they can handle the “problem” we have with street addicts.
Instead, thanks to our bleeding-heart city council, drunks can pass out serenely on our streets knowing that the one hundred grand van patrol will pick them up and safely transport them to their favorite shelter.
Comments