General Phoenix Metro Discussion Thread

[N830MH]

Geez! You guys talking about D-Backs? Let me tell you something. I am very good D-Backs fans for over decade and half. I know all of those players, coaching, and manager, as well as other D-Backs fans. I actually know all players, coaching and manager, as well. We moved to Arizona in 2003. We still lived in Arizona for almost 15 years. I always to go to the game for every one time a month, not all the times.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by N830MH

Geez! You guys talking about D-Backs? Let me tell you something. I am very good D-Backs fans for over decade and half. I know all of those players, coaching, and manager, as well as other D-Backs fans. I actually know all players, coaching and manager, as well. We moved to Arizona in 2003. We still lived in Arizona for almost 15 years. I always to go to the game for every one time a month, not all the times.

So, what does this have to do with the current stadium situation? Knowing the players and fans have nothing to do with the current stadium debacle. Nobody here has a problem with the players themselves. Just the state of ownership and the constant threat of "Give us this or we're going somewhere else" demands.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Yesterday, I had a really bad issue with homeless during my walk around Downtown after work and witnessed some really bad behavior last night and also this morning.

After work, I decided to go on a longer than normal walk (thanks to everyone bringing donuts into work for Employee Appreciation Day, lol). About midway through my walk, I was wanting to take a few pics of 'Her Secret is Patience' and headed towards Civic Space along the 1st Ave side. When I got there (about 7:30'ish), there were more homeless in the park and walking along the sidewalk on 1st Ave than I could count...dozens congregating in groups, sleeping on the lawn, asking me for change and cat-calling a few women that were walking through on their way towards ASU. One guy was walking in front of me and started talking to me asking why the power was out. I had no idea what he was even talking about since there was no power issues. With all this, I moved on without taking any pics. I was feeling way uncomfortable.

So, I walked on up towards Stewart up to Willa to go see the cats that were left behind from the house demo, something I occasionally do. After checking on the cats, I noticed some cactus blooms in the Cancer Survivor Park that were incredible looking and I started taking pics of them. While taking pics, 2 homeless individuals stepped out of the dark that I didn't notice were there and started threatening me for taking pics of the flowers. They were implying I was on their property and I better move on before something bad happened. I took them seriously and decided to hastily walk on. They continued their threats while I was walking away and they were lazily following me for a few minutes. I came across a nice big wooden pole and picked it up just in case. They eventually veered off. I was thinking about calling 911 and reporting them. But I didn't see where they walked off to and by the time the police would have arrived, they would have been long gone. So, I saved myself the hassle.

Now onto this morning. Riding the LTR to work, I was sitting in the seat closest to the door when a homeless individual came in with his 2 bikes. He parked his bikes up against the door and laid down right in the middle of the floor to sleep! The train was packed and he did not care how much space he was taking up and that people had to step around him. At one point, I moved my legs and bumped he's feet for which he mumbled something rude to me and started staring at me until he fell asleep again. When the train stopped and the door opened, some riders tried to get on and he gave them a hard time before finally moving his bikes. After the door closed, up against the door his bikes went and he laid down again to sleep. I got off at my stop and there happened to be some transit security there and I had to point him out to them. They went in as the train was leaving...hopefully to kick this butt off the train.

I have never seen it this bad before and I have never been threatened before to the point I felt like something could go down. With all the apartments getting built up adjacent to these areas, this is going to be a strong deterrent for residents if they end up having to deal with this stuff. I am definitely staying away from Civic Space and the area around Willa on my walks for the time being. What an 'effing shame. As far as the light rail, I felt like I was slapped. Here everyone is paying to ride, our taxes are maintaining the LTR and the individual just takes over his own space like he owns the train. This is some ridiculous stuff and the city needs to step up and start taking care of this problem. It is getting worse and is only going to get worse if nothing is done.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

. With all the apartments getting built up adjacent to these areas, this is going to be a strong deterrent for residents if they end up having to deal with this stuff. I am definitely staying away from Civic Space and the area around Willa on my walks for the time being. What an 'effing shame. As far as the light rail, I felt like I was slapped. Here everyone is paying to ride, our taxes are maintaining the LTR and the individual just takes over his own space like he owns the train. This is some ridiculous stuff and the city needs to step up and start taking care of this problem. It is getting worse and is only going to get worse if nothing is done.

On the other hand, having more residents in the area may make it less of a magnet for the homeless. Street homeless often congregate in areas that are underutilized and have more or less been turned over to them. Hance Park has been neglected since its creation, so parts of it have turned into a skid row. The same is true with the Downtown Civic Space. The Shadow Play structure at Third Ave & Roosevelt, which became a major homeless camp a few months ago, is now back to being deserted, but only because of the strongly worded signs about no sleeping or camping.

If nearby apartments create more non-homeless foot traffic, my hope is that some of the homeless will relocate to other places they can claim as their own. Those that will remain will stand out less and seem less threatening because the ratio of homeless to non-homeless will have changed and because there will be more witnesses to any potential criminal activity. The scary situation you encountered at the Cancer Survivors Park might be less likely to occur if that part of First Street had more residents nearby.

As for light rail, I've definitely noticed more of a security presence in recent months. I hope they made it clear that the two-bike sleeper was taking up more space than he was entitled to. It's not just the homeless that take up too much room, though. I once watched a friend get justifiably reprimanded for taking up three seats on a MARTA train with all the luggage he had brought on our flight from Phoenix to Atlanta.

[azsunsurfer]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

Yesterday, I had a really bad issue with homeless during my walk around Downtown after work and witnessed some really bad behavior last night and also this morning.

After work, I decided to go on a longer than normal walk (thanks to everyone bringing donuts into work for Employee Appreciation Day, lol). About midway through my walk, I was wanting to take a few pics of 'Her Secret is Patience' and headed towards Civic Space along the 1st Ave side. When I got there (about 7:30'ish), there were more homeless in the park and walking along the sidewalk on 1st Ave than I could count...dozens congregating in groups, sleeping on the lawn, asking me for change and cat-calling a few women that were walking through on their way towards ASU. One guy was walking in front of me and started talking to me asking why the power was out. I had no idea what he was even talking about since there was no power issues. With all this, I moved on without taking any pics. I was feeling way uncomfortable.

So, I walked on up towards Stewart up to Willa to go see the cats that were left behind from the house demo, something I occasionally do. After checking on the cats, I noticed some cactus blooms in the Cancer Survivor Park that were incredible looking and I started taking pics of them. While taking pics, 2 homeless individuals stepped out of the dark that I didn't notice were there and started threatening me for taking pics of the flowers. They were implying I was on their property and I better move on before something bad happened. I took them seriously and decided to hastily walk on. They continued their threats while I was walking away and they were lazily following me for a few minutes. I came across a nice big wooden pole and picked it up just in case. They eventually veered off. I was thinking about calling 911 and reporting them. But I didn't see where they walked off to and by the time the police would have arrived, they would have been long gone. So, I saved myself the hassle.

Now onto this morning. Riding the LTR to work, I was sitting in the seat closest to the door when a homeless individual came in with his 2 bikes. He parked his bikes up against the door and laid down right in the middle of the floor to sleep! The train was packed and he did not care how much space he was taking up and that people had to step around him. At one point, I moved my legs and bumped he's feet for which he mumbled something rude to me and started staring at me until he fell asleep again. When the train stopped and the door opened, some riders tried to get on and he gave them a hard time before finally moving his bikes. After the door closed, up against the door his bikes went and he laid down again to sleep. I got off at my stop and there happened to be some transit security there and I had to point him out to them. They went in as the train was leaving...hopefully to kick this butt off the train.

I have never seen it this bad before and I have never been threatened before to the point I felt like something could go down. With all the apartments getting built up adjacent to these areas, this is going to be a strong deterrent for residents if they end up having to deal with this stuff. I am definitely staying away from Civic Space and the area around Willa on my walks for the time being. What an 'effing shame. As far as the light rail, I felt like I was slapped. Here everyone is paying to ride, our taxes are maintaining the LTR and the individual just takes over his own space like he owns the train. This is some ridiculous stuff and the city needs to step up and start taking care of this problem. It is getting worse and is only going to get worse if nothing is done.

This is interesting you say that. There are implications for the suburbs too. I am considering buying a beautifully restored mid-century modern home in Mesa near the new Gilbert light rail stop. I thought originally that maybe the light rail will be catalyst for further investment since it's so close to the station. Now I am having second thoughts especially after hearing about all the problems that people near the north rail extension are having now that light rail has come to their neighborhood. I am not anti-light rail but I do think the homeless problem needs some serious thought (maybe we pay a temp tax increase to ship them to Orange County?? jk) I am starting to see the criticism that folks have had about the inverse effects of light rail.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by azsunsurfer

Now I am having second thoughts especially after hearing about all the problems that people near the north rail extension are having now that light rail has come to their neighborhood. I am not anti-light rail but I do think the homeless problem needs some serious thought (maybe we pay a temp tax increase to ship them to Orange County?? jk) I am starting to see the criticism that folks have had about the inverse effects of light rail.

I am skeptical of the attribution of crime and transience on 19th Ave to light rail. That area was sketchy even before the train arrived. Light rail may just be a convenient scapegoat for a problem that was already there and has gotten worse due to opioid addiction and other factors not related to transportation. In addition, with light rail comes more scrutiny and more law enforcement and security presence, so more crimes are being reported than before.

I've also heard residents of central Phoenix historic districts complain that recent extensions of light rail have brought more homeless into their neighborhoods. If what those folks and the people near 19th Avenue claim is true, then we have the implausible scenario of the train serving as a sort of homeless exchange program, with north Phoenix trading homeless with central Phoenix. That seems unlikely.

[CrestedSaguaro]

Originally Posted by azsunsurfer

This is interesting you say that. There are implications for the suburbs too. I am considering buying a beautifully restored mid-century modern home in Mesa near the new Gilbert light rail stop. I thought originally that maybe the light rail will be catalyst for further investment since it's so close to the station. Now I am having second thoughts especially after hearing about all the problems that people near the north rail extension are having now that light rail has come to their neighborhood. I am not anti-light rail but I do think the homeless problem needs some serious thought (maybe we pay a temp tax increase to ship them to Orange County?? jk) I am starting to see the criticism that folks have had about the inverse effects of light rail.

The Dunlop Station is where I park and ride to work. I can confirm the area is getting over-run with homeless. I used to go to the new QT on Dunlap/19th, but I was getting asked so much for change, I don't shop there any longer.

When it comes to the increased security presence, I have only seen them get on at the Camelback/Central station to check tickets. Occasionally, I see them at a stop here and there, but I don't notice any more security than what there was a year ago.

[ASU Diablo]

Yeah that's unfortunate Ronnie. My recommendation would be to log any of this type of stuff at the PHX CARES website.

https://www.phoenix.gov/formssite/fo...ncampment.aspx

Although it wasn't reported to 911, I would still report a complaint including the location and issue. Those homeless peeps may/may not be there still but at least it gets logged and used for reporting/metrics to City Council. An increase of logged activity hopefully means throwing additional dollars or increasing police presence at areas of concern. I've had seen some success with it when I kept reporting a homeless camp at that abandoned historic home on 362 N 2nd Ave (next to O'Neil Printing). After a couple of complaints and days passed by, the owner put some fencing around the lot.

In the latest Roosevelt Neighborhood newsletter, PPD just received funding for an additional 8 police officers (on bikes, undercover, uniformed) in downtown by end of May and will support that same CARES program. Plan is for another 4 shortly after. "Downtown should see an increase in proactive police presence in the parks and around downtown." Let's hope this helps...

[DesertRay]

I live on Central, just down the street from the (now demolished) cat house. I walk around the neighborhood nearly every day, and often more than once a day. There definitely is an uptick in both the homelessness numbers, and some of the aggressive behavior. Although there is an attraction to the light rail because it is so easy to get on and off (and because of the air conditioning), I think that the homelessness problem has much more do to with macro things--opioids/heroin, housing crisis, lack of mental health, etc. I have had little problem walking around the homeless folks around the library since it closed for repairs, and I suspect it will get better when the apartments begin to open. That is what happened on 3rd and Roosevelt, and I suspect it will happen north of Hance. Hance is set to begin the changes soon, so I think that will act as a bit of a deterrent, but this is a long-term problem. We'll see it more visibly on the light rail, but these folks are walking through a lot of neighborhoods not on light rail as well.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by RonnieFoos

About midway through my walk, I was wanting to take a few pics of 'Her Secret is Patience' and headed towards Civic Space along the 1st Ave side. When I got there (about 7:30'ish), there were more homeless in the park and walking along the sidewalk on 1st Ave than I could count...dozens congregating in groups, sleeping on the lawn,

Given the relatively small but well-executed space there, that is one place the City should definitely reclaim.

I believe it's been about two years since a 'camping' ban was adopted in another city; 'no drug use' signs were also posted at a couple of parks for added emphasis. Enforcement included 'sweeps' and added patrolling. From what I gather this has worked well.

It's not about (illegally) discriminating but rather having rules or 'boundaries' such that all who would like to, can feel comfortable using the park space. It's about managing and mitigating the homeless issue, not necessarily eliminating, but it can make a yuge difference

Unsurprisingly, a city's 1st instinct is to ignore the problem. Unfortunately that usually just make things worse.

Originally Posted by exit2lef

On the other hand, having more residents in the area may make it less of a magnet for the homeless. Street homeless often congregate in areas that are underutilized and have more or less been turned over to them.

More residents help a lot; it's also beneficial to activate areas with bike and pedestrian friendly investments. The last part of your statement is not to "turn over to them" public space that should be for all to enjoy and not just one demographic.

[nickw252]

Originally Posted by azsunsurfer

This is interesting you say that. There are implications for the suburbs too. I am considering buying a beautifully restored mid-century modern home in Mesa near the new Gilbert light rail stop.

I live in Mesa off Gilbert Road north of the light rail. I love the area, move on out here!

[phoenixheadphones]

Originally Posted by exit2lef

I am skeptical of the attribution of crime and transience on 19th Ave to light rail. That area was sketchy even before the train arrived. Light rail may just be a convenient scapegoat for a problem that was already there and has gotten worse due to opioid addiction and other factors not related to transportation. In addition, with light rail comes more scrutiny and more law enforcement and security presence, so more crimes are being reported than before.

I've also heard residents of central Phoenix historic districts complain that recent extensions of light rail have brought more homeless into their neighborhoods. If what those folks and the people near 19th Avenue claim is true, then we have the implausible scenario of the train serving as a sort of homeless exchange program, with north Phoenix trading homeless with central Phoenix. That seems unlikely.

My parents live in that area and it's always been really bad. I personally think it's gotten better with the lightrail, the streets look better and the infrastructure for pedestrians is certainly improved. What's hurting that neighborhood is the methadone clinic near 23rd and Northern, directly across the street from a huge abandoned golf course.

People blaming the lightrail is pretty silly. I ride everyday, and there are some homeless folks on there, but it's not the majority of riders. Homelessness downtown is getting rough, but I think it's more to do with the library closing and the other issues mentioned here.

[combusean]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Given the relatively small but well-executed space there, that is one place the City should definitely reclaim.

I believe it's been about two years since a 'camping' ban was adopted in another city; 'no drug use' signs were also posted at a couple of parks for added emphasis. Enforcement included 'sweeps' and added patrolling. From what I gather this has worked well.

It's not about (illegally) discriminating but rather having rules or 'boundaries' such that all who would like to, can feel comfortable using the park space. It's about managing and mitigating the homeless issue, not necessarily eliminating, but it can make a yuge difference

Unsurprisingly, a city's 1st instinct is to ignore the problem. Unfortunately that usually just make things worse.

More residents help a lot; it's also beneficial to activate areas with bike and pedestrian friendly investments. The last part of your statement is not to "turn over to them" public space that should be for all to enjoy and not just one demographic.

A no drug use sign isn't going to deter anything. This seems incredibly naive.

Phoenix will find sooner or later that sweeps and enforcement doesn't do anything and is a colossal waste of money, and homelessness is the last thing you can arrest people out of. The Ninth Circuit, of which Arizona is a part, enjoined LA from enforcing anti-camping ordinances because there aren't enough shelter beds.

If you want to have the police do anything, they're going to need a place to take those they round up.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by combusean

A no drug use sign isn't going to deter anything. This seems incredibly naive.

Phoenix will find sooner or later that sweeps and enforcement doesn't do anything and is a colossal waste of money, and homelessness is the last thing you can arrest people out of. The Ninth Circuit, of which Arizona is a part, enjoined LA from enforcing anti-camping ordinances because there aren't enough shelter beds.

If you want to have the police do anything, they're going to need a place to take those they round up.

"Incredibly naive" or not it seems to have had the desired impact. The point was to give police a reason to move people out of the park and in some cases to issue a temporary 'ban.' I can't say precisely how well it's worked but the primary purpose is to prevent 'entitlement' or taking over a park. For those upscale residents that live along Commons Park (for example) the improvement have been much appreciated and I'll assume they don't think it's a waste of resources. Has it eliminated homeless people? Ofc not, that wasn't the objective.

Wasn't aware of the 9th circuit's decision. Oftentimes the homeless aren't interested but I'd agree that having ample 'transitional' housing is important. There is a case that's been brought in Denver but having ample alternatives shouldn't be a problem in defending the ordinance. Creating additional 'transitional' housing in Phoenix is a good idea assuming it's needed. I do think the homeless population's needs should be addressed.

EDIT: I was able to find the court case you referenced which goes back to 2006. There are various specific bans in other cities - it mentioned Portland, Seattle and I saw a reference to Boise that may not be as all-encompassing as the L.A. ordinance was. Certainly having alternative housing was a key factor in that case. Since 2006 was a long time ago I'd be curious how that decision has impacted other ordinances. While Denver wouldn't be in the 9th circuit I'd have to believe they tried to avoid the same pitfalls of that case.

More edit: I really enjoy learning and I also enjoy legal stuff. Denver Post reported 3/26/2018 that the class-action lawsuit against sweeps will be allowed to proceed. Interestingly the primary complaint is the confiscation of possessions presumably the difference between garbage and belongings has not be properly done. It will be interesting to see what all comes of this although such court cases can be tedious and painfully slow.

[combusean]

The sign didn't do anything by itself. Likely the cops were specifically dicks about the Triangle for whatever reason, probably because of the nearby apartments and civic interests.

It invariably comes down to a self-interest approach, if law enforcement really doesn't want the homeless there, they'll go elsewhere so they don't have their stuff thrown away, get jailed without drugs, etc.

But ultimately, Phoenix can't enforce anti-camping if the homeless have nowhere to go. From every legal and practical and ethical perspective, the current approach doesn't make sense. The court decision in LA was from 2006, but it is still *very* much in force. Orange County just tried to pull off the same thing LA did 10 years ago and the story comes back the same.

Legally, it comes down to who will advocate for the homeless in Phoenix to raise the same Constitutional issue in a federal court: nobody, for now at least. So Phoenix Police, et al, will get away with it until someone comes around and raises issue.

But even without the federal courts saying no, Phoenix needs to get past using the police as a hammer because everything looks like a nail and instead make the shelter space available. To do otherwise is a colossal waste of time and resources and avoiding what's right. It is mind-bogglingly expensive but without the needed and due support from the federal government and no immediate solution to opioids, there's no choice in the matter.

[exit2lef]

Originally Posted by combusean

The sign didn't do anything by itself. Likely the cops were specifically dicks about the Triangle for whatever reason, probably because of the nearby apartments and civic interests.

When it comes to the Shadow Play triangle at Third Street & Roosevelt, the police weren't doing much prior to the addition of the signs because they claimed, correctly, they had no basis to remove the campers. Once the city obtained a legal opinion from its staff counsel and put up the "no camping" signs, the police then had sufficient backup to tell campers they had to leave. Since then, there has been no camping in the triangle (and unfortunately no other use either). In this case, it's not about the police being "dicks," it's about what posted rules they're empowered to enforce. In this case, just the promise of enforcement seems enough to have stopped the camping, but in the longer term there's got to be a way to activate that dead space. It was a bad outcome to have it functioning as a homeless camp, but it's also a bad outcome to have it deserted.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by combusean

The court decision in LA was from 2006, but it is still *very* much in force. Orange County just tried to pull off the same thing LA did 10 years ago and the story comes back the same.

Understandable in that this judge is required to follow precedent established by JONES v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES in the 9th circuit unless circumstances could be deemed substantially different which they weren't.

Checking with my BFF it turns out the 9th circuit is not alone. From May 2017: http://sparechangenews.net/2017/05/c...ceeding-court/

Cases that end up in court challenging discriminatory ordinances and laws against homelessness are proving to be successful, the National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty stated in a recent report.

More than half of the cases that have challenged camping bans and sleeping restrictions in court have been successful, the report finds, and all cases challenging panhandling and solicitation bans have been successful on the grounds of the First Amendment since 2014.

Evictions of homeless encampments resulting in the loss or destruction of property have also been successfully fought in court 75 percent of the time since 2014, the report found.

It's obviously a very thorny problem for cities to deal with.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by combusean

But ultimately, Phoenix can't enforce anti-camping if the homeless have nowhere to go.
----
But even without the federal courts saying no, Phoenix needs to get past using the police as a hammer because everything looks like a nail and instead make the shelter space available. To do otherwise is a colossal waste of time and resources and avoiding what's right.

Nicely stated.

It's obviously a complicated and indeed expensive problem regardless of what strategy one employs.

My emphasis went to how best to manage the issue in specific spaces that's important to be available for all to comfortably enjoy like Civic Space Park. But it's clear that the homeless have more blanket rights than I appreciated.

I suspect the City could and presumably should do a lot more to provide alternative housing and/or space. I would think there's ample potential to acquire existing housing for that purpose.

It will be interesting to see how conservative (but not as conservative as it once was) Orange County handles this. Most jurisdictions would be prefer the problem just go away, like literally to somewhere else. It will be interesting to see if the issue ever gets to SCOTUS.

[Phxguy]

https://azbigmedia.com/arizona-will-...23-super-bowl/

And we got the ‘23 Bowl. Mannnnnn...downtown Phx and Tempe, assuming this pace of development holds its steady course, will look incredible!

[muertecaza]

Originally Posted by Phxguy

https://azbigmedia.com/arizona-will-...23-super-bowl/

And we got the ‘23 Bowl. Mannnnnn...downtown Phx and Tempe, assuming this pace of development holds its steady course, will look incredible!

Excellent. I could definitely get used to hosting every 7-8 years.