The city’s Navigation Team, a group of Seattle police officers and social service workers that removes unauthorized encampments from public places and offers referrals to shelter and services to their displaced residents, has shifted its focus at the direction of Mayor Jenny Durkan. Instead of providing 72 hours’ notice and offers of shelter and services before removing unauthorized encampments (the “navigation” part of the equation), the Navigation Team is now focused primarily on removing encampments deemed to be “obstructions,” a designation that exempts the team from the usual notice and outreach requirements.
In response to this shift in focus, REACH, the nonprofit that serves as the social-service and outreach arm of the Navigation Team, will no longer participate in encampment removals except when camp residents explicitly request their presence, the group’s co-director, Chloe Gale, says.
I asked Sgt. Eric Zerr, the Seattle Police Department team leader for the Navigation Team, about the shift after a recent public safety town hall meeting in North Seattle. “[Durkan] just said, ‘Given that we have limited resources… these are the things you guys should focus on,” Zerr said. “And it isn’t that we aren’t still doing 72-hour cleans”—the city’s preferred term for what many advocates refer to as sweeps—”we still are. But I think the priority of the team has changed, [in that] the mayor wants us to focus on cleans that are more obstruction-oriented.”
“It isn’t that we aren’t still doing 72-hour cleans. We still are. But I think the priority of the team has changed, [in that] the mayor wants us to focus on cleans that are more obstruction-oriented.—Seattle Police Sgt. and Navigation Team leader Eric Zerr
Over the course of five weeks in April and May, 96 percent of encampments scheduled for removal on the Navigation Team’s weekly unauthorized encampment removals list were for “obstructions,” and therefore exempt from the usual notice and referral requirements. This list does not correspond precisely to which camps are ultimately removed, because many factors can contribute to whether the city removes a particular encampment on schedule. However, a comparison to previous schedules shows a clear upward trend—in August 2018, for example, 74 percent of scheduled removals were for “obstruction” encampments exempt from the notice and outreach rules.
Ordinarily, under rules the city adopted in 2017, the Navigation Team has to provide at least 72 hours’ notice—and two visits from outreach workers—before it can remove an unauthorized encampment. The “obstruction” designation functions like a declaration of emergency, allowing the Navigation Team to bypass those requirements. (They typically offer 30 minutes’ notice to allow people to leave voluntarily, but are not required to do so by law). “The mayor really wants us to focus on [removing encampments in] rights-of-way and parks,” said Sgt. Zerr. “Our calendar is still full, but it just doesn’t have the amount of 72-hour cleanings it used to.”
Mark Prentice, a Durkan spokesman, denies that there has been any change in the city’s approach to encampment removals. “There has not been a new shift towards obstruction/hazard removals, nor is this a new trend,” Prentice said in an email. “Rather, there has been long-term and concentrated focus by the team to remove obstructions that are impacting the public’s ability to safely access rights-of-way, such as sidewalks and mobility ramps.”
“There has not been a new shift towards obstruction/hazard removals, nor is this a new trend. Rather, there has been long-term and concentrated focus by the team to remove obstructions that are impacting the public’s ability to safely access rights-of-way.” —Mayor Jenny Durkan spokesman Mark Prentice
Prentice suggested that I may have missed coverage of the issue last summer by other local media, and provided a link to an August 2018 Seattle Times story that was about the increase in encampment removals in general. That story noted that at the time, about 40 percent of encampment removals for the year to date were exempt from the mandatory outreach and offer-of-shelter requirements. UPDATED: HSD’s most recent report on encampment removals shows that 82 percent of the removals were camps deemed to be “hazards” or “obstructions” and exempt from those requirements. That’s an increase from the last three months of 2018, when the report found that about 75 percent of removals were exempt from those requirements.
According to the city’s official encampment removal rules, a camp (which, as defined in the city’s rules, can consist of a single sleeping bag if it looks like it’s located in a public place for the purpose of sleeping overnight) is an “obstruction” if it’s “in a City park or on a public sidewalk; interfere[s] with the pedestrian or transportation purposes of public rights-of-way; or interfere[s] with areas that are necessary for or essential to the intended use of a public property or facility.” Interpreted broadly, this means that a single tent in a city park can be considered an “obstruction” of the park’s intended use, and subject to removal without notice or outreach.
REACH’s Gale says her organization’s outreach workers—who are supposed to help encampment residents hook up with shelter and services— “don’t always feel comfortable there. We’ve agreed that that’s optional. We’ll go if we’re requested by the people at the site, but we’re not going to just stand by” as a matter of course, she says. REACH will still participate in outreach prior to the increasingly rare 72-hour removals.
Instead, Gale says REACH is moving to a “neighborhood-based outreach model” that involves getting to know communities, including businesses as well as both sheltered and unsheltered residents—a better way to build trust, Gale says, than showing up for the first time on the day of an unannounced removal. REACH is in the process of embedding outreach workers in four quadrants of the city, where they’ll partner with local business improvement districts to identify people experiencing chronic homelessness and build relationships with them over time, with the goal of getting them into services and off the street.
As REACH phases out of its work with the Navigation Team, the city is taking its outreach services in-house, hiring two new “system navigators” who, according to Durkan spokesman Prentice, “will work in the same way as REACH does, providing outreach during encampment removals and lead[ing] on making offers of shelter, referrals to shelter, and transporting people to shelter.” (Zerr said SPD also provides outreach when they can.)
As REACH phases out of its work with the Navigation Team, the city is taking its outreach services in-house, hiring two new “system navigators” who, according to Durkan spokesman Prentice, “will work in the same way as REACH does, providing outreach during encampment removals and lead[ing] on making offers of shelter, referrals to shelter, and transporting people to shelter.”
In 2017, the ACLU of Washington unsuccessfully sued the city on behalf of encampment residents who said the city unlawfully seized and destroyed their property. ACLU spokesman Brian Robick said it was “especially troubling” to hear that the city had ramped up “obstruction”-related encampment removals, “given the undisputed fact that many unhoused people have nowhere else to go.”
“Seattle’s policy and practice of seizing and destroying unhoused residents’ property without adequate notice or an opportunity to be heard raises grave civil rights concerns,” Robick said. “Throwing away someone’s belongings without warning is not only unconstitutional—it is harmful, inhumane, and ineffective, and does nothing to help people get off the streets or address the housing crisis.”
15 thoughts on “City’s Outreach Partner Disengages from Navigation Team as City Removes More Encampments Without Notice”
The Durkan regime is violating international human rights by forcing people into more desperate situations. This is a crime and hundreds of people have died on the streets because there aren’t suitable options for them in this city.
I object that my taxes are used for this cruel and inhumane practice and that humane options are not provided. Millions are being spent on these removals when it should be spent on decent emergency housing for example. If people were offered decent housing most would take up the offer.
“If people were offered decent housing most would take up the offer.”
How do you know?
In these particular case that the City deems “obstructive”, moving people quickly may serve to get them to accept the Navigation Team’s assistance, if only because they’re tired of being moved. Or, it can force them to go to a site that is not “obstructive” and they can have 72 hours notice at that location. To me, this is a much better option with better outcomes than saying that a person can stay in an “obstructive” location for 3 days.
Immediate removals also prevent housed people from attempting to help encampment residents move their property to somewhere safe, so that it doesn’t get thrown away or bulldozed by the City.
I guess my impression was that the Navigation Teams are replacing REACH with their own in-house “system navigators”. I understand the concerns of the article, but I do believe and have already seen way too many situations for way too many years where I think the City should absolutely be able to immediately move someone who is “in a City park or on a public sidewalk; interfere[s] with the pedestrian or transportation purposes of public rights-of-way; or interfere[s] with areas that are necessary for or essential to the intended use of a public property or facility.” Obviously, I just feel strongly that more aggressive intervention is the more compassionate option for everyone involved and has been tragically lacking from our City leadership for 10 years now.
Stephen Hubbard, do you maintain that giving “actual residents” (I certainly hope you were including people who are homeless in that group) only 30 minutes’ notice to find another place to live instead of 72 hours, which included 2 outreach visits, is humane?
By actual residents, I do mean all residents. I think the very least humane thing to do is nothing and just leave people to live on the streets. My understanding is that the Navigation Team “offers referrals to shelter and services to their displaced residents” – isn’t this what we want? If it were my own child out on the streets, I’d want a Navigation Team there in one minute.
Perhaps you haven’t fully read Erica’s article. There’s no way that the Navigation Team can offer encampment residents information about alternate places to live, meaning shelters (which are most often full or not appropriate for the particular encampment residents), within the short period of time before they dissasemble the encampment. REACH has stopped being part of the Nav Team specifically because residents are not given sufficient time, and because there’s no pre-sweep outreach. If your daughter were in an encampment, she would have 30 minutes to move her property and herself. I doubt she would welcome the Nav Team under those circumstances.
I am so thankful that Mayor Durkan is finally just beginning to listen to the long-ignored and desperate concerns of the actual residents of this city. Rather than maintain the status quo of abandoning and ignoring the homeless, addicted and mentally ill on our streets and call it “compassion”, the Mayor is finally beginning to take actual actions that, at the very least, provide a much better chance to help people get out of their desperate situations. I believe that taking action to provide assistance to the homeless, addicted, and mentally ill immediately on the front lines is the tragically missing key to addressing this most-important issue, and we must re-double these efforts and actions and we must do it now.
We must’ve read different articles. This isn’t “taking action to provide assistance”, this is aggressively removing encampments with assistance as an afterthought. The city could’ve hired the in-house outreach coordinators at any time, and are only doing so since REACH is stepping back. The 72 hour rule for cleanups didn’t stop the city from providing assistance, it merely gave people time to pack up. Now, with the new focus on immediate removals, they don’t even get time to pack up.
Comments are closed.