As witnessed by a Westword item from October, Mayor Michael Hancock and Denver's business and outreach communities have spent months discussing and debating a push to ban overnight camping on public property. Now that the issue is reportedly scheduled to be addressed in a City Council committee meeting on Tuesday, the topic is sparking criticism from other quarters.

Joining the ring is the Colorado ACLU, which calls the ban "unwise, mean-spirited" and potentially unconstitutional.

City attorneys disagree. Already, neighbors in Boulder and Colorado Springs have banned camping on public property, with Boulder's own ordinance coming under fire and passing in court last year. In Denver, the proposed ordinance, fronted by City Councilman Albus Brooks, would make it illegal to live or sleep on public or private property anywhere inside the city limits -- pushing the city's homeless away from areas including the 16th Street Mall and the Platte River. This means no bedding and no personal belongings spread out, which could already come under the city's ban against encumbrances on sidewalks. At present, it is legal to sleep overnight on any city property excluding parks.

As the City Council meeting approaches, city officials are tackling plans for how to enforce the ban if it takes effect. Called the "CAM system," the preliminary implementation outline would apply its acronym through contact, assessment and mobilization. Advocates for the ban, including Hancock, stress that the goal is to help the homeless, not imprison them.

In October, when the issue began to gather steam, Westword talked to Amber Miller, spokesman for Mayor Hancock, about the potential ordinance's intentions -- namely, that it's not geared at Occupy Denver. Although Hancock has come out in favor of the ban, along with representatives of the business sphere who see it as a positive, Miller stressed the need for a "comprehensive plan."

In the intervening months, however, the ban has raised attention across the board, despite only being scheduled for discussion next week. (Votes aren't expected until the end of April, at the earliest.) While some view it as a healthy step for area businesses that interact with the homeless, the ban has been called a quick fix by those who don't think the city has the resources to apply it effectively. Statistically, this means beds, which Alexxa Gagner, director of public relations for the Denver Rescue Mission, says the city doesn't have enough of to provide a more permanent shelter option for the city's homeless population.

"I think our main priority is the safety of the people we serve every day, and sleeping outside isn't safe," Gagner says. "But we're limited in the number of beds we can provide, and while the city has provided us overflow beds, we still don't have enough. It's just not a permanent solution."

At the same time, Gagner notes that sleeping on public property is also not a permanent solution. But she worries about the ban's potential to criminalize homelessness inside the city. "We're concerned about the ban making it a crime to have nowhere to go without giving them anywhere to go," she says. The Colorado Coalition For the Homeless has also targeted the ban by distributing summaries of its negative effects, including the potential to "criminalize survival activities."

The Colorado chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union has come down hard on the same concern. Although director Mark Silverstein has not released the organization's full plan of action, both firm opposition and future investigation factor in. "The proposed 'no camping' ordinance is unnecessary, unwise, mean-spirited, and may violate the constitutional rights of persons who have no money and have no choice but to sleep outside," Silverstein says.

In 2011, according to data from the Metro Denver Homeless Initiative, Denver's homeless population was comprised of 62 percent families, up from 53 percent in 2009. Almost 25 percent of the city's homeless community is newly so. In reviewing the proposed ban, Gagner urges city officials and residents to reconsider the perception of the chronic homeless individual.

If the city does not have enough beds for those who would have to leave the streets, private organizations are a likely next step, she says, pointing to success stories associated with Denver's Road Home. The Rescue Mission's partner organization has formed relationships with local churches to house members of the homeless community, particularly women.

"I would hope that the goal of the ordinance would be shelter for people, whether that's churches stepping up or more community relationships or whatever that looks like," Gagner says. "It's not a long-term plan to just move them off the streets. We have to remember that they're a part of our community."

This blog by Westword writer Kelsey Whipple was published Wed., Mar. 28 2012 at 11:56 AM

     Under pressure from the ACLU of Colorado and local community activist groups, the Roaring Fork School Board unanimously voted to enter into an agreement urging the police departments of the Roaring Fork Valley to exercise “extraordinary discretion” before assigning a school resource officer (SRO) to additional police work that may implicate the immigration status of a student’s family. The agreement recognizes that assigning SROs to law enforcement work in which “a student’s family immigration status may come into question . . . may diminish the necessary trust the SROs have worked so long to build with the student and family.”

   The agreement followed a letter from the ACLU urging the school board to prohibit collaboration between SROs and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), as well as a significant and prolonged grassroots campaign in the Roaring Fork Valley led by the Association of Youth United in Action (AJUA) and the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition (CIRC). According to ACLU of Colorado Staff Attorney Rebecca T. Wallace, AJUA members, many of whom are undocumented students, courageously took on the Roaring Fork School Board and Roaring Fork Valley police departments to fight for their right to attend public school without fear, often taking the chance of revealing their undocumented status in the process.

   SROs are local police officers, but Roaring Fork School District SROs are partially funded by the school district. SROs partner with school districts to promote school safety and build stronger relations between law enforcement, students and the local community. Over the past year, it had come to light that one or more SROs working within the school district had been assigned to an ICE task force and had been participating in home raids with ICE that led to deportation proceedings against students’ family members and/or friends. In an October 17, 2011, letter to the Roaring Fork School Board, the ACLU explained that this collaboration threatened the sense of safety and security that students – whether documented or undocumented – have a right to feel. According to the ACLU’s letter, such collaboration violates federal law prohibiting schools from erecting barriers that discourage undocumented children from attending public school.

   “All children documented or otherwise, have a right to attend public school in this country," said Ms. Wallace. "When school resource officers work hand in hand with immigration authorities, students from immigrant families are at risk of being placed in the untenable position of having to choose between attending school or protecting themselves and their families from deportation. Children should never have to make that choice.”

   While this agreement is a step in the right direction, the ACLU of Colorado says that it does not go nearly far enough. “To be clear, the school board should outright ban any collaboration between SROs and immigration authorities, and its failure to do so is almost certain to increase students’ distrust of SROs because of their past collaboration with ICE,” added Ms. Wallace. “The Roaring Fork Valley police departments likewise should remove all SROs from any ICE task force in order to work towards re-establishing trust with immigrant students, and to follow through with the expressed intent of this agreement.”

   According to the ACLU of Colorado, Carbondale’s response to a document request revealed that three Roaring Fork SROs were cross-designated for the purpose of collaborating with ICE. One has left the state, and the other two are current SROs in Glenwood Springs. “We hope and expect that this agreement will be sufficient to deter the Roaring Fork Valley police departments from continuing to assign their SROs to any immigration-related work and to remove these officers from ICE task forces,” says Ms. Wallace. “We will certainly continue to monitor the situation to see that our expectations are met.”

   Additionally, the United States Department of Homeland Security Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties has recently opened an investigation into potential civil rights abuses arising from Roaring Fork SROs’ collaboration with ICE.

On Monday, the 2012 Martin Luther King Day Holiday, the ACLU Race To Justice Coalition called on Denver City Council to demand a start to the process of bringing a new Independent Monitor to the city..

In a letter on behalf of the Coalition, ACLU of Colorado Public Policy Director Denise Maes wrote: "In Denver, high-profile police brutality – and high-dollar police brutality lawsuit settlements – have become, sadly, all too common. ... On Friday to the astonishment of many, the civil service commission reinstated two fired police officers with back pay to 2009, causing flashbacks for the victims of police brutality with whom we work and raising widespread questions from the public, activists and the media.

"It is for all these reasons that the Race to Justice coalition, a group of faith leaders, civil rights organizations and those directly affected by police violence and misconduct, write to ask you to call on Mayor Michael Hancock to move decisively to start the process to fill the position of the Independent Monitor," Maes continued.

As we await a response from the U.S. Department of Justice regarding our call for an independent investigation of police brutality and unsafe police practices in Denver, read the letter and call your Council member so that Mayor Hancock will fill the position of Independent Monitor now.

Update:

On Tuesday, May 15, 2012, the Denver Post published an important guest commentary by Race 2 Justice activist Mark Cohen. Read it here.