HomeMy WebLinkAbout4/13/2021 Item 2, Radis
Wilbanks, Megan
From:loren radis <
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Carts and Tents Proposal - Public Comment
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
Hi, I'm Loren Radis, a lifelong resident of SLO County.
The news article regarding the proposed amendment states the following :
“With the new policy, the city wants to:
Ensure pedestrian and vehicle safety
Ensure the flow of traffic
Protect streams and other natural areas
Reduce litter, clutter, and visual blight associated with abandoned shopping carts.”
Of course no evidence of any impact to safety, traffic, or natural areas are cited in the article or the 68 page proposal
itself. The only legitimate complaint appears to be the “visual blight”, so the city is basically saying that making things
look pretty is more important than the safety of its citizens who are currently experiencing homelessness.
The article also shares the following quote :
“These ordinances may seem to some to be directed at the homeless and they are not. They are directed to
illegal behaviors, not someone's status or standing,” Shelly Stanwyck, assistant city manager of San Luis Obispo,
said.”
With whatever small amount of respect such a statement deserves, this is bullshit. Laws have been passed for decades
that don’t directly mention disadvantaged groups even though they are explicitly intended to harm said group. Jim
Crow laws didn’t mention preventing black Americans from voting, even though that was their intent. The wording of
the law that allowed for the internment of Asian Americans during World War 2 didn’t specifically mention Asian
Americans anywhere in its wording, even though that was clearly its intent. The voting restrictions that were just passed
in Georgia (and similar restrictions currently in legislation all over the country) don’t mention black Americans explicitly,
even though their intent is obviously to prevent black Americans from voting.
You cannot simply say “We don’t mean for this to impact people experiencing homelessness” when you know full well
that that group is exactly who will be most negatively affected by this. That does nothing to absolve you.
1
The article you shared in the public notice regarding this amendment also states the following facts :
-Missing carriages (which cost between $75 and $100 apiece) represent big losses for supermarkets.
-Harold Slawsby spent $18,000 to equip 135 carts and says the system has already paid for itself, adding that
he’s lost only about 18 carts since installing the system a year ago. "You’re never going to be able to stop
someone who really wants to take a cart," he admits, "but at least they’ve got to put in some extra effort now."
$18,000 divided by 135 carts is $133 par cart. That's almost double the cost of a low end cart. He also says he's still lost
18 carts in a single year and admits explicitly that the system doesn't actually work, it just adds frustration.
So this isn't about saving money, because it's more expensive. It's not about keeping carts on grounds, because it
doesn't accomplish that goal. It is explicitly about punishing people experiencing homelessness. Like many knee-jerk
reactions to the issue of homelessness, taking this measure simply punishes those most in need of help, at increased
cost to the public at large (whether directly through the use of public funds or indirectly by adding costs to retailers
within the community).
Especially now, during a global pandemic, at a time when record numbers of people are losing employment and homes
due to circumstances completely outside of their control, and retailers are closing down at record number due to lost
revenue, neither money nor energy should be spent on punishing people for not having a home. They should be spent
on helping people.
Spend the money on getting them backpacks, you can buy them from a local luggage retailer and thereby support local
business at the same time. Spend the energy and time on an informational campaign to make people aware of the
programs available to them. Send social workers to encampments to do wellness checks, instead of sending police to
arrest them, or tell them "I don't care where you go but you can't stay here".
Punishing people for not having a home doesn't help anyone, and it does hurt people without a home.
Help people. Please.
Thank you, take care,
-loren
2