There’s been a lot of buzz lately in Oakland about so-called “co-governed” homeless sites. These are encampments on land sanctioned by the city that “residents and service providers would operate together.” At least two such sites are currently in the planning stage, located on vacant lots, with potentially more opening in all seven City Council districts.
The plan sounds good, on paper. Move tents from their current scattershot locations, where they’re in parks, near schools, in residential neighborhoods, in shopping areas, under freeways, and along BART tracks, and centralize them in a few defined locales.
However, the devil is in the details.
For one thing, nobody knows how this “co-governing” would work. Who makes the governing decisions? Who enforces them? What if a resident is unruly? Will hard-core druggies be permitted? Are meth heads or crack addicts capable of self-governing? What happens in the event of a violent crime? Are the police to be called? We’re supposed to get the police out of responding to homeless issues. These are all legitimate questions, with no answers yet provided.
For another thing, who are these “service providers”? EMTs? Social workers? Psychologists? Violence interrupters? City employees? Church groups? Are they going to be paid? Will they work at night, or get overtime? Do they receive benefits, including healthcare, vacation days and retirement? Nobody knows. Nor does anyone know how long these “co-governed” sites are supposed to last. Forever? Will they be able to elect their own representative to the City Council?
There’s a third problem: When the city passed its Homeless Encampment Policy in October, 2020, it included—at City Council President Nikki Bas’s request--Oakland’s “first co-governed encampment in the next four months,” to be funded to the tune of $600,000.
Well, four months from October, 2020, was February, 2021. But Oakland never did get around to establishing that “co-governed encampment.” Why not? If the plan didn’t work then, why should we believe it will work now? And what happened to the $600,000?
There’s one final problem that may well prove unsurmountable. What about the campers who refuse to leave unsanctioned areas? Everybody knows there are a number of campers who want to live in our parks and on our streets and who insist on their right to do so. It may be a large number. Who will make them move? When our Coalition met with Vice Mayor Rebecca Kaplan, a month ago, I asked her if she would approve the use of force to remove recalcitrant campers. She tried to dodge the question, but I pressed, and pressed, until she finally said, “Yes…under certain circumstances.” I think we all know that her loophole, “under certain circumstance,” was big enough to drive a truck through. This City Council will never approve the use of force against any homeless person, and unless the Oakland Police Department believes the city has their backs—and no cop believes that--they will never intervene in such a case.
So “co-governed” encampments? Doesn’t sound promising, but I’ll keep my fingers crossed and hope for the best.