Editor’s note: Wausau Pilot & Review gladly publishes commentary from readers, residents and candidates for local offices. The views of readers and columnists are independent of this newspaper and do not necessarily reflect the views of Wausau Pilot & Review. To submit, email [email protected] or mail to 500 N. Third St., Suite 208-8, Wausau, Wis. 54403.
Dear editor,
While I share former alder Tom Kilian’s concern for the homeless, as any compassionate person would, I respectfully disagree with his observations of the legal cases, litigated and pending, as well as with some of his proposed remedies.
In all fairness, his opinions of the recent Johnson vs Grants Pass U.S. Supreme Court case, argued this past April and awaiting a decision any day now, seemingly rest on what “The National Homeless Law Center” appears to interpret. A quick glance at its web site and it is quite clear that The National Homeless Law Center checks “all of the boxes” of a traditional left-wing non-profit advocacy organization, including its commitment to DEI. One wonders why their name hasn’t been changed already to The National “Unhoused” Law Center?
(Pardon my momentary lapse into conservative humor, but I promise to proceed with this subject seriously — because it is.)
Many of the facts that Mr. Kilian lays out are factually correct. The ruling in Martin vs Boise does apply only to the states within the Ninth Circuit court, so it is not applicable to Wisconsin, and it was limited to “Should sleeping on public property be a crime?” But the Boise case concluded, incorrectly I believe, that the City of Boise violated the 8th Amendment clause of “cruel and unusual punishment”. The 8th amendment, as written and intended, was for judges in imposing illegal and cruel punishments that are unknown to established law, such as excessive bail or fines (Trump has more of a case) or actual physically cruel treatment. Municipal fines hardly meet this bar.
And much, much more was discussed in Johnson vs Grants Pass than what Mr. Kilian and the Center describe as simply a “criminalization of the homeless.” I listened to the entire case on April 22, which lasted about 3 hours. The particular argument of the case was of course, about the homeless persons right to sleep in public places, but the general argument of the case, through much questioning by the nine Justices of the petitioner and respondent, was whether the City of Grants Pass could enforce any nuisance laws at all on the homeless.
The respondent argued that enforcing “no camping” regulations particularly targeted the homeless, that it was the unavoidable “status” of the individual as homeless that should be considered. This met with powerful questions from the conservative leaning justices that focused on the “conduct,” and the equal application of enforcement, rather than the “uncontrollable status” of the individual as “homeless.” Questions were asked whether defecating in public could be fined if the status of the person was “homeless,” or should drug use or theft go unpunished if the perpetrators status was that of an “addict?” One cynically wonders, should child abuse be excused if one’s status is that of a “pedophile”?
The term “slippery slope” came up often in this case and there was great concern that police would not be allowed to control abhorrent behaviors in their downtowns. Wausau Chief Matt Barnes, who has logical ideas about protecting our downtown and serving the homeless, is caught in the middle. This resolution of Grants Pass will provide the city and him guidance. Being that the Supreme Court only rules specifically and narrowly, the case may go either way. We will see.
Some thoughts on how to help. I have had firsthand experience doing “home visits” for a local Wausau charity, and my deceased father, a physician, was Head of Medicine (not Psychiatry) at one of the old mental health state hospitals outside of Chicago. (You are over 55 if you remember those!) Let’s first acknowledge that there are two problems that require addressing. One, is to keep our downtown safe for children and commerce. Sadly, most urban downtowns are “adult” only. Second, truly help the homeless. Not all ideas from the ever growing “charitable industrial complex” here in Wausau are the right ones, and we certainly lack the resources to “import” more homeless!
For too long, the homeless problem has been falsely portrayed as an economic one, that “anyone of us” is a job loss away from being on the streets. The truth is that most suffer from mental health issues or substance abuse, and the combo is lethal! These are people that have lost their connections or “bridges” to supportive society, basically, their family and friends. Prior to the 1970s, many of these were in mental health hospitals, like the one my father worked at, but they no longer exist.
True help needs to discourage homelessness. Temporary shelter is of course necessary, but “wet” houses, as some propose, have poor track records. The ultimate help is in helping these people restore their relationships with others, their “bridges.” St Vincent de Paul has a wonderful program called “Getting Ahead” that works precisely on this aspect of poverty in general.
Some very difficult observations regarding temporary shelters. Why do they have to be built in our downtowns? Why do they have to be so close to all the stores, restaurants, libraries, and other facilities that law abiding citizens want to enjoy? Some may say that the help and resources are already located there. But whose fault is that? There is no doubt that assistance for the homeless needs to be adequate — but does it need to be attractive? The dirty little secret of homeless living, is that the urban downtown provides a more entertaining life style for those that want to continue in their anti-social ways. A “barrack type” temporary shelter, in an industrial park, with a Community Partners type facility nearby would provide a healthier environment, and better serve those that truly want to change.
Humans are not capable of solving humanity’s problems, only the Creator can, but hopefully people on both sides of the ideological spectrum can come together and ameliorate homelessness.
Orlando Alfonso, Wausau
