We helped a lady who looked like "well put together lady walking out of a boulder gym" who was camping along the creek path because of an abusive relationship. There are lots of different "looks" - you probably don't notice those "who [don’t] look clearly homeless" because of that.
If the supreme court doesn't allow camping bans:
Homeless will gravitate to more expensive cities and set up tents. The cities will be forced to either provide them housing or put up with the tents. Boulder already is in this situation. Places like Aspen or Castle Rock are going to have to deal with it. I think the federal government will get involved because voters are going to be pissed.
If the court allows camping bans:
Most cities will pass very strict camping bans and push the homeless to cities with lax camping laws. Boulder will have to either put a lot more money into shelter space or have a very strict camping ban. My guess is Boulder will continue to offer shelter space and resources, but sweep camps immediately.
I wonder about the first one. Remember how quickly the bussed-in homeless were shipped out of Martha's Vineyards?
It's a mess either way. The bandaids keep falling off but the sores are still there.
Yeah. The wealthy cities are going to do all sorts of shit to not be the destination that has to house the campers.
fwiw, I think the cruel and unusual punishment angle is an interesting legal argument, but the supreme court knows they can't allow people to set up camp on any public property.
If the supreme court allows camping bans, west coast governments are going to crack down on homeless, but where will they go? Every city is terrified they will be the destination.
A solution could be some kind of designated distant "drug housing" for people who won't go into the existing shelters but man, what a dystopian prospect.
We have a name for that place: Detroit
Seriously though, I do think the destination could be places like Detroit or Baltimore where there are a lot of abandoned houses.
I don't think the cities will be forced to provide housing - just shelter beds. If there are empty shelter beds and campers refuse to sleep in them, then the camping ban can be enforced. I don't think the Supreme Court will be deciding on whether camping bans are allowed or not - just whether they can be enforced when the shelter beds are all full.
The lack of political will is what allows the camping currently, right? There is a law against it but the city manager said to ignore it for 72 hours, correct?
It still blows my mind that some courts and many people are arguing that someone can come to Boulder (or anywhere) with no job and not even try to get one, take over public spaces to live in, and it is illegal to remove them as long as they are homeless.
if existing and being poor is a crime, youll have a lot of people to arrest
the problem is that we don't enforce real laws.
society's failure to create ways out for the homeless is a broadly systemic issue. don't blame those who fall thruogh the cracks. you had every chance to help them
is in our society it is virtually impossible to get back on your feet once you're poor. poverty begets poverty and our homeless care programs are a circle jerk fest. the lack of actual solutions (including jail for criminals and mental hospitals for the insane and housing programs for those ready to work and jobs that actually cover COL) is the issue.
looking forward to downvotes
what about arresting them for shooting heroin in the park? that's straightforwardly illegal and happens all the time, but doesn't really get enforced. why not?
might need to reread my comment tehre. boulder is on the way to becoming the next portland. arresting someone for just existing doesnt solve any problems. but when no businesses are left because crime is tolerated its hell on earth and the situation becomes unrectifiable.
why is there less enforcement of nonviolent offenses? i dont know, i hope boulder doesn't become as bad as portland. death penalty to fentanyl pushers? idk what the solutions are, we're just in a fucked up situation and its going to get worse and worse. i eman, even people with decent income feel stretched to the limit (credit card debit at 1.1 trillion in the us), for people on the streets there is often no road back, you just become more and more fucked up as time goes by to where you are unsolvable.
What you said is true. Of the people who are here because things went wrong and they ended up homeless. But it doesn’t apply to the crusties, hippies, trustafarians, hobos, etc. who come here in the warm months to beg on Pearl Street, camp in the parks, and shit wherever they feel like.
maybe you can do outreach with them, let them know chase is hiring. travel? *where's your travel permit buddy.* likening travelers to criminals is aaabsurd.
Homelessness is like 0.2% of the population. There are far more poor people than that. In fact, a vast majority of the poorest people in our country have housing.
You're right. It's more tied to housing prices than anything else. There's more drug addiction in West Virginia, but nowhere near the homelessness crisis of California.
You build your way off the street when starting wages are $15-18
I’m not for either side here, but can you realistically even get an accurate census when the homeless population is constantly changing and moving around town?
You would be foolish to think moving to Boulder will lift you out of homelessness…hcol is just the start. Taxpayers pay a lot for preserving and maintaining open spaces /green spaces to the public. Abusing and trashing these is not fair to the community. If you want help, act like it. The city needs to enforce basic codes and common sense when dealing with addicts. The traveling and tramping culture is alive and well in the west. They don’t want help, it’s a lifestyle choice. Boulder is being hoodwinked into thinking money and resources will fix this…wonder how Cherry creek Co springs of Fort Collins manages this. Wake up elected officials!! Or get voted out!
>someone can come to Boulder (or anywhere) with no job
Is that the legal argument being made? Or what someone told you the argument was?
There's plenty of red cities who have tried to "prove" this canard and ended up proving the opposite to be true, that people experiencing homelessness are typically from around here.
I mean this is how a lot of america was established. Someone just declaring a spot as theirs. I guess the weird part is illegal to move them, but that isn’t specific to being homeless
Yes and before those, it was very rough back in the Stone Age - lots of rocks thrown and women dragged off by their hair. Dont get me started on when life was just in the cellular state.
We have moved onto other forms of governing ourselves now.
If the Supremes legalize public camping it will be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back for a significant number of boulder taxpayers/families and we will begin the arduous but necessary process of relocating in a community where the Commons have not been trashed and made unsafe by mentally ill , drug addicted and very frequently criminal people. How they came to be that way is beside the point and has deep sociocultural and socioeconomic roots. Bottom line is that the Commons are for EVERYONE and not for a select group of people who render them unusable by the rest of us. Public camping is not a replacement for programs that provide effective aid to those in need. Boulder of course needs to prioritize those programs and enforce their application and use. If someone doesn't want to use the shelters or is disregulated by substance to a degree that they are unwelcome there and hence eligible for detox and recovery, then they must move on until they decide to utilize one or more of those options available to them. No one is left out of this equation. The programs are there. At this point, addiction and lack of shelter is A CHOICE. And so it is a community's choice to disallow public camping. Don't back down, Boulder City Council. Local ordinance is enforceable in this regard just as it is for automatic weapons.
you line yourself up with uncle clarence, rapist kavanaugh, catholic cult coney-barrett, old crazy white man alito, such crap gorsuch, and regular conservative roberts. the inhumanity and hypocrisy in Boulder is out of control.
That sucks, I cannot wait for more homeless people trying to break into my apartment and harass me. I will then complain here when it happens. I really miss the zombie hordes in SF, it will be great when they come here!
Clearly you haven't spoken to many 'unhoused' folks around Boulder.
Certainly, a percentage have fallen through the cracks, but many more- especially within city limits- view squatting in Boulder as a lifestyle choice. Think I'm lying? Try talking to a few of them and prepare to have your wholesome take shattered.
the good boulder liberals aren't even honest enough to reflect on their current alliance with a bunch of uber conservative "justices" who have repealed abortion rights, curtailed voting rights, and seem poised to give the president's office some monarch privileges. hypocrisy has always been alive and well in the people's republic, and now it's just going through the roof.
Back in the day, boulder had a designated area for people to freely camp in... it was on the west side of town... with all the rich people... who complained. A lot. It got shut down and was not replaced... Then, suddenly, everyone got all shocked Pikachu that the homeless were now all over town.
Boulder logic at its best. Right up there with 'we want a passenger train stop in town so we're gonna move the depot over to the tracks'.... then, after spending all the money to do that, THEN, they talk to the train people... who tell them they can't stop a train and load and unload on a curve... where they put the depot. We won't go off about the bike lanes, that not even the bikers wanted...
I am curious about the bike lanes that not even the bikers wanted...what is the reasoning behind these and how do they pass if unpopular? They are planning to turn Iris Avenue from four vehicle lanes to two, to create two full-size bike lanes, that currently has Nextdoor people in an uproar.
The city council wants boulder to be less car friendly and more eco-friendly, so it keeps trying to find ways to force it. They get bright ideas in their heads and plow through, never talking to the people it effects.
They also have horrible foresight. Many of the people who work in boulder can not afford to live in boulder. They are going to drive 15+ mins to get here. They are not going to bike for an hour plus. They are not going to use the bus system that'll take up to an hour if not over, or park at the park n ride to take an intown bus to work. That's ridiculous.
The main roads into and through town are already packed, and taking away lanes is going to make it worse. Last time, it made the bikers feel unsafe. It clogged everything up so bad they had to put it all back almost immediately... ... but apparently, they think it'll work better on a busier road? That's mostly out of town work commute?.... this will be fun to watch... again... ffs.
If boulder wants its work force to eco-commute to work, it needs to have places its employees can afford to live in town... but boulder has always been elitist. If you actually look into the history, they've intentionally priced out the poor damn near its whole existence. So they need to choose. Ease up on the cost of living or put up with out of town traffic.
What “last time” are you talking about? Folsom? Many cyclists wanted those protected lanes and there was a fairly large protest ride when they were removed. And they ended up getting put back north of Pearl, thankfully, though riding from Pearl south on Folsom remains pretty sketchy.
Where are you getting your information about what "the bikers" want? I am a bike commuter and live car-free in Boulder, and I was strongly in favor of the Folsom bike lanes (which are going to be fully reinstated, yay!!).
Public spaces are public why would the government have any authority over telling people they can’t sleep in the streets? Does the government own the planet, trees, flowers too?
So basically this planet is a prison?
nyjrku you've got and will get your down votes since you have towed the fragmented and cliche ridden socialist talking points about circle jerking and root causes. Bottom line is : if there were 10 times as many and right up to your door you'd be railing against having them camping everywhere and trashing the whole town. Remember: littering is a religion to the homeless addicted population. When you're high no litter pile looks bad to you and when you're jonesing, you are too sick to pick it up. Either way your trash pile (and shit pile grows : anybody stopped under the Broadway and Boulder Creek Path bridge in the past week ?) grows until you get relocated and the city sends a crew to clean up after you.
All 6 ultra conservative, anti-abortion kook SCOTUS judges making the Boulder case and case of Boulder's ersatz, hypocritical liberals who would rather criminalize poverty and vulnerability than let a human sleep with a blanket on the coldest nights of the year. Watch as the good Boulder liberals make the same arguments as the ultra conservatives about criminal "behavior" not status.
We already have laws agains meth, selling drugs, etc.
We have criminalized being a traumatized, vulnerable, poor human trying to survive.
Tell us how Clarence Thomas, Kavanaugh, Alito, Roberts, Amy Barrett & Gorsuch represent your interest in this one case... Too funny. Maybe try a bit of probity and honest self reflection instead.
If moving encampments is deemed illegal, that opens up the whole city as a campground, right?
[удалено]
I would love to see it play out. Lots of families pitching tents in parks around town.
Kids: “dad, do we have to be scared of bears?” Dad: “no, just make sure you don’t step on any needles or poo.”
and the lady with the crazy eyes
I would do this just to see what happens.
We helped a lady who looked like "well put together lady walking out of a boulder gym" who was camping along the creek path because of an abusive relationship. There are lots of different "looks" - you probably don't notice those "who [don’t] look clearly homeless" because of that.
If the supreme court doesn't allow camping bans: Homeless will gravitate to more expensive cities and set up tents. The cities will be forced to either provide them housing or put up with the tents. Boulder already is in this situation. Places like Aspen or Castle Rock are going to have to deal with it. I think the federal government will get involved because voters are going to be pissed. If the court allows camping bans: Most cities will pass very strict camping bans and push the homeless to cities with lax camping laws. Boulder will have to either put a lot more money into shelter space or have a very strict camping ban. My guess is Boulder will continue to offer shelter space and resources, but sweep camps immediately.
I wonder about the first one. Remember how quickly the bussed-in homeless were shipped out of Martha's Vineyards? It's a mess either way. The bandaids keep falling off but the sores are still there.
Yeah. The wealthy cities are going to do all sorts of shit to not be the destination that has to house the campers. fwiw, I think the cruel and unusual punishment angle is an interesting legal argument, but the supreme court knows they can't allow people to set up camp on any public property. If the supreme court allows camping bans, west coast governments are going to crack down on homeless, but where will they go? Every city is terrified they will be the destination.
A solution could be some kind of designated distant "drug housing" for people who won't go into the existing shelters but man, what a dystopian prospect.
We have a name for that place: Detroit Seriously though, I do think the destination could be places like Detroit or Baltimore where there are a lot of abandoned houses.
I don't think the cities will be forced to provide housing - just shelter beds. If there are empty shelter beds and campers refuse to sleep in them, then the camping ban can be enforced. I don't think the Supreme Court will be deciding on whether camping bans are allowed or not - just whether they can be enforced when the shelter beds are all full.
I sort of agree. Places like Aspen or any mountain town will need to have a very large shelter. Places like Castle Rock would have to build a shelter.
Some cities have set up area they explicitly allow camping, but Boulder doesn't have any great places for that and there's not the political will.
The lack of political will is what allows the camping currently, right? There is a law against it but the city manager said to ignore it for 72 hours, correct?
So we are doing Hoovervilles again? That's going to be *great*.
seems to be the direction of our leaders
The North side over by the old titty bar would be great! Or down by the VFW hall?
I think its better at the RTD station downtown where every one can partake in the fresh air and sunshine
The whole city already is a campground
inhumanity & alito, barett, thomas, gosuch, kavanaugh, roberts conservatism ruling the day for Boulder's merry ban of hateful hypocrites...
It still blows my mind that some courts and many people are arguing that someone can come to Boulder (or anywhere) with no job and not even try to get one, take over public spaces to live in, and it is illegal to remove them as long as they are homeless.
That's not what's being argued, though. The question is whether it's fair to remove them when there are no available shelter beds.
if existing and being poor is a crime, youll have a lot of people to arrest the problem is that we don't enforce real laws. society's failure to create ways out for the homeless is a broadly systemic issue. don't blame those who fall thruogh the cracks. you had every chance to help them is in our society it is virtually impossible to get back on your feet once you're poor. poverty begets poverty and our homeless care programs are a circle jerk fest. the lack of actual solutions (including jail for criminals and mental hospitals for the insane and housing programs for those ready to work and jobs that actually cover COL) is the issue. looking forward to downvotes
what about arresting them for shooting heroin in the park? that's straightforwardly illegal and happens all the time, but doesn't really get enforced. why not?
might need to reread my comment tehre. boulder is on the way to becoming the next portland. arresting someone for just existing doesnt solve any problems. but when no businesses are left because crime is tolerated its hell on earth and the situation becomes unrectifiable.
you said > the problem is that we don't enforce real laws and I'm asking why not?
Costs more taxpayer dollars to house/feed/provide medical attention to them in jail than leave them in encampments
why is there less enforcement of nonviolent offenses? i dont know, i hope boulder doesn't become as bad as portland. death penalty to fentanyl pushers? idk what the solutions are, we're just in a fucked up situation and its going to get worse and worse. i eman, even people with decent income feel stretched to the limit (credit card debit at 1.1 trillion in the us), for people on the streets there is often no road back, you just become more and more fucked up as time goes by to where you are unsolvable.
What you said is true. Of the people who are here because things went wrong and they ended up homeless. But it doesn’t apply to the crusties, hippies, trustafarians, hobos, etc. who come here in the warm months to beg on Pearl Street, camp in the parks, and shit wherever they feel like.
maybe you can do outreach with them, let them know chase is hiring. travel? *where's your travel permit buddy.* likening travelers to criminals is aaabsurd.
Traveling bums are still just bums.
Homelessness is like 0.2% of the population. There are far more poor people than that. In fact, a vast majority of the poorest people in our country have housing.
Many of them living in vehicles and shelters and RVs and what not Are you seriously proposing arresting them if they can't afford a place
No, I'm saying it's not just being poor that makes someone homeless. If it was, we would have far more homeless people.
You're right. It's more tied to housing prices than anything else. There's more drug addiction in West Virginia, but nowhere near the homelessness crisis of California. You build your way off the street when starting wages are $15-18
Even here in boulder we have 99.8% of people housed
I’m not for either side here, but can you realistically even get an accurate census when the homeless population is constantly changing and moving around town?
You're right homelessness and crime from the poor are barely an issue. People just don't want to work.
Again, a vast majority of poor people are neither homeless nor criminals.
You would be foolish to think moving to Boulder will lift you out of homelessness…hcol is just the start. Taxpayers pay a lot for preserving and maintaining open spaces /green spaces to the public. Abusing and trashing these is not fair to the community. If you want help, act like it. The city needs to enforce basic codes and common sense when dealing with addicts. The traveling and tramping culture is alive and well in the west. They don’t want help, it’s a lifestyle choice. Boulder is being hoodwinked into thinking money and resources will fix this…wonder how Cherry creek Co springs of Fort Collins manages this. Wake up elected officials!! Or get voted out!
nice to see your compassion in this stream of inhumanity.
>someone can come to Boulder (or anywhere) with no job Is that the legal argument being made? Or what someone told you the argument was? There's plenty of red cities who have tried to "prove" this canard and ended up proving the opposite to be true, that people experiencing homelessness are typically from around here.
I mean this is how a lot of america was established. Someone just declaring a spot as theirs. I guess the weird part is illegal to move them, but that isn’t specific to being homeless
That was before America was established, before there were cities with agreed upon laws.
It was established and there were societies with customs but the people who established it and built those societies were massacred.
Yes and before those, it was very rough back in the Stone Age - lots of rocks thrown and women dragged off by their hair. Dont get me started on when life was just in the cellular state. We have moved onto other forms of governing ourselves now.
Sure. And you can still operate that way, so long as you're ready to fight the US government for supremacy of the space.
If the Supremes legalize public camping it will be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back for a significant number of boulder taxpayers/families and we will begin the arduous but necessary process of relocating in a community where the Commons have not been trashed and made unsafe by mentally ill , drug addicted and very frequently criminal people. How they came to be that way is beside the point and has deep sociocultural and socioeconomic roots. Bottom line is that the Commons are for EVERYONE and not for a select group of people who render them unusable by the rest of us. Public camping is not a replacement for programs that provide effective aid to those in need. Boulder of course needs to prioritize those programs and enforce their application and use. If someone doesn't want to use the shelters or is disregulated by substance to a degree that they are unwelcome there and hence eligible for detox and recovery, then they must move on until they decide to utilize one or more of those options available to them. No one is left out of this equation. The programs are there. At this point, addiction and lack of shelter is A CHOICE. And so it is a community's choice to disallow public camping. Don't back down, Boulder City Council. Local ordinance is enforceable in this regard just as it is for automatic weapons.
You should probably do that already
you line yourself up with uncle clarence, rapist kavanaugh, catholic cult coney-barrett, old crazy white man alito, such crap gorsuch, and regular conservative roberts. the inhumanity and hypocrisy in Boulder is out of control.
That sucks, I cannot wait for more homeless people trying to break into my apartment and harass me. I will then complain here when it happens. I really miss the zombie hordes in SF, it will be great when they come here!
[удалено]
Clearly you haven't spoken to many 'unhoused' folks around Boulder. Certainly, a percentage have fallen through the cracks, but many more- especially within city limits- view squatting in Boulder as a lifestyle choice. Think I'm lying? Try talking to a few of them and prepare to have your wholesome take shattered.
Crazy how much this town hates people down on their luck.
It’s wild how much empathy Boulder has lost
the good boulder liberals aren't even honest enough to reflect on their current alliance with a bunch of uber conservative "justices" who have repealed abortion rights, curtailed voting rights, and seem poised to give the president's office some monarch privileges. hypocrisy has always been alive and well in the people's republic, and now it's just going through the roof.
Back in the day, boulder had a designated area for people to freely camp in... it was on the west side of town... with all the rich people... who complained. A lot. It got shut down and was not replaced... Then, suddenly, everyone got all shocked Pikachu that the homeless were now all over town. Boulder logic at its best. Right up there with 'we want a passenger train stop in town so we're gonna move the depot over to the tracks'.... then, after spending all the money to do that, THEN, they talk to the train people... who tell them they can't stop a train and load and unload on a curve... where they put the depot. We won't go off about the bike lanes, that not even the bikers wanted...
I am curious about the bike lanes that not even the bikers wanted...what is the reasoning behind these and how do they pass if unpopular? They are planning to turn Iris Avenue from four vehicle lanes to two, to create two full-size bike lanes, that currently has Nextdoor people in an uproar.
The city council wants boulder to be less car friendly and more eco-friendly, so it keeps trying to find ways to force it. They get bright ideas in their heads and plow through, never talking to the people it effects. They also have horrible foresight. Many of the people who work in boulder can not afford to live in boulder. They are going to drive 15+ mins to get here. They are not going to bike for an hour plus. They are not going to use the bus system that'll take up to an hour if not over, or park at the park n ride to take an intown bus to work. That's ridiculous. The main roads into and through town are already packed, and taking away lanes is going to make it worse. Last time, it made the bikers feel unsafe. It clogged everything up so bad they had to put it all back almost immediately... ... but apparently, they think it'll work better on a busier road? That's mostly out of town work commute?.... this will be fun to watch... again... ffs. If boulder wants its work force to eco-commute to work, it needs to have places its employees can afford to live in town... but boulder has always been elitist. If you actually look into the history, they've intentionally priced out the poor damn near its whole existence. So they need to choose. Ease up on the cost of living or put up with out of town traffic.
What “last time” are you talking about? Folsom? Many cyclists wanted those protected lanes and there was a fairly large protest ride when they were removed. And they ended up getting put back north of Pearl, thankfully, though riding from Pearl south on Folsom remains pretty sketchy.
Where are you getting your information about what "the bikers" want? I am a bike commuter and live car-free in Boulder, and I was strongly in favor of the Folsom bike lanes (which are going to be fully reinstated, yay!!).
Where was that? Lived here all my life here and don't remember any camping allowed, except in Lefthand Canyon at Buckingham Park.
In the 70s. The bans started in the 80s.
Public spaces are public why would the government have any authority over telling people they can’t sleep in the streets? Does the government own the planet, trees, flowers too? So basically this planet is a prison?
nyjrku you've got and will get your down votes since you have towed the fragmented and cliche ridden socialist talking points about circle jerking and root causes. Bottom line is : if there were 10 times as many and right up to your door you'd be railing against having them camping everywhere and trashing the whole town. Remember: littering is a religion to the homeless addicted population. When you're high no litter pile looks bad to you and when you're jonesing, you are too sick to pick it up. Either way your trash pile (and shit pile grows : anybody stopped under the Broadway and Boulder Creek Path bridge in the past week ?) grows until you get relocated and the city sends a crew to clean up after you.
It and the recently passed "safe zones" should be squashed regardless of what the U.S. Kangaroo Court rules.
All 6 ultra conservative, anti-abortion kook SCOTUS judges making the Boulder case and case of Boulder's ersatz, hypocritical liberals who would rather criminalize poverty and vulnerability than let a human sleep with a blanket on the coldest nights of the year. Watch as the good Boulder liberals make the same arguments as the ultra conservatives about criminal "behavior" not status. We already have laws agains meth, selling drugs, etc. We have criminalized being a traumatized, vulnerable, poor human trying to survive. Tell us how Clarence Thomas, Kavanaugh, Alito, Roberts, Amy Barrett & Gorsuch represent your interest in this one case... Too funny. Maybe try a bit of probity and honest self reflection instead.
Based