Editor, Manteca Bulletin,

I was pleasantly surprised last Wednesday at the Homeless Summit to find a number of City leaders at this meeting and open to listening to citizen concerns about our homeless population. It seemed the majority agreed that more needs to be done to address this issue in a positive manner. The need for a shelter, provision of meals, etc. was voiced a number of times throughout the morning by those speaking, as well as the lack of services for the single adult population in our town. 

The positive outcomes I saw from this summit were open dialogue about this issue and a coming together of many government, non-profit and faith based organizations to share the services they provide. The negative side I saw was that the majority of assistance/services available to the homeless are available only in other County cities and there were no steps discussed or put into place to actually address the issue of homelessness in Manteca. This apparently means the City will be moving forward to pass new ordinances to cite the homeless and have the City Attorney move forward to prosecute them, without having come up with alternative solutions for the homeless. 

It should never be legal to urinate or defecate in public. However, everyone should have a private place available to take care of this very private business. The state has laws against urination and defecation in public. Even so, the City is passing a new ordinance that duplicates it. If I understand the City’s reasoning behind this, it feels a City ordinance is needed because the District Attorney’s office does not prosecute the State law due to fiscal and workload constraints. With a City ordinance in place, the City Attorney can be directed to make prosecution of these misdemeanors a priority in order to rid citizens of this public nuisance. The police department says there will be no fiscal impact to their department for them to take these actions. If the implementation plan is to just write out a ticket, the time spent doing so will be minimal. If it is to arrest the offending party, I have to disagree. As I understand it, arrest takes officers off the streets for a significant period of time to complete processing of the violation and the City is charged a fee for every individual taken to the County jail for booking. Additionally, the City will incur legal costs for the City Attorney to move forward with prosecuting each of these violations and bog down our court system prosecuting these misdemeanors. It would seem to me that the costs incurred to charge and prosecute these offenses would be better spent in providing one or two restrooms around town that are labeled for use by the homeless. Any who failed to take advantage of these facilities could then be ticketed with the consequence of the crime being community service hours to clean these facilities.

The second new ordinance will make it illegal to sleep outside, even in a vehicle. It appears the City is giving the word encampment, a new definition. The definition in dictionaries is; A group of tents or temporary shelters put in one place for a group of individuals. It appears the City’s definition extends to any one person who puts their head down to sleep on a bench, on the ground, behind or inside a dumpster, in bushes, inside a private vehicle, etc. Could I then be arrested for falling asleep on a blanket at a picnic in a local park? I am in agreement that we should not allow encampments, as defined in dictionaries, to be built and utilized within the City limits. However, where do homeless people find a legal place to sleep since there are no homeless shelters in Manteca? There is one faith-based organization and, at least, one church in town that will provide a motel voucher for one or two nights to an individual, but this does not take care of our homeless population of somewhere between 100-200 individuals. Again the police department says there will be no fiscal impact to implement this ordinance. How can that be if the plan is to ticket or arrest our city’s significant number of homeless people who are sleeping outside? I believe the same costs and court issues apply to rousting the homeless and charging them with this misdemeanor as to the public urination and defecation ordinance, with the impact being much more costly for this second ordinance based solely upon the higher number of individuals it will impact. Again, there is no alternative for those who remain homeless within our City limits. 

I spent a couple of hours in the pouring rain last Friday in Library Park with a group of 12 of our homeless people and 3 very well behaved and well cared for dogs. The vast majority of those I spoke to have spent most of their lives in Manteca. A couple was born here. One person’s parents’ graduated from Manteca Union High School in the early 50s. A couple of them had been homeless for as little as a month or two, but most have lived on the streets for much longer periods of time. This instance of homelessness was not a first for some. When asked about their needs, surprisingly, housing was not their first priority. Being able to keep their pets with them was the top priority for those with dogs. We had lots of discussion about their pets. Each dog is current on shots, etc. Like every dog lover, their animal comes first! Having a hot meal came next, either provided to them, or a place where they could prepare their own with food they purchase with Food Stamp (SNAP) benefits they receive monthly. They told me about the good Samaritan who brings them breakfast burritos some mornings. Whoever this man is, I applaud you, sir! Their second priority is a place to do their business that has a toilet, a shower and clean clothes or a place to launder the clothing they own. Most receive the County’s General Assistance benefits of a monthly $75 store voucher to purchase their toiletries and other essentials. They indicated that it is impossible to apply for jobs and be considered for them in the condition being homeless leaves them in, without those amenities. They all said they want to work and be able to support themselves. A safe place to safely leave their belongings was high on the list and a shelter to sleep came next. General Assistance will pay a maximum of $340 per month for rent with utilities included, but there is only one Single Residence Occupancy (SRO) hotel in town that accepts this amount. This hotel is known around town as Heroin Heights. Even if there were vacancies in this establishment, I got the impression they do not consider renting a room there to be any safer than sleeping on the streets. 

There will be no easy fixes to addressing our City’s homeless problem. We have a long way to go to adequately address it. Though nothing was done to truly address the issue at last week’s Homeless Summit, I am hopeful that our community will move forward to address the problem in a positive manner. This is my ongoing prayer! 

Sharon Herrera

Manteca