In the 1970s, the city passed a sit/lie law intended for so-called selective enforcement against hippies who were sitting on sidewalks in the Haight. As is almost always the case, the San Francisco Police Department also used it against another group �" mostly gay men who were sitting on the sidewalk in the Castro, usually outside of bars. In 1974, SFPD officers beat up a young gay man outside of a bar in the Castro, and arrested 18 others for "obstructing" the sidewalk. Ultimately, 14 people were charged, and were dubbed the "Castro 14." The gay community, led by Harvey Milk, rallied to their cause and against police harassment. One year subsequent to Harvey Milk's death, the sit/lie law was found to be unconstitutional.
Forty years later, the SFPD has again openly admitted that it will "selectively enforce" the most current version of a sit/lie law that could mean jail time of up to 30 days for an un-housed youth who is unable to pay the fine, for the non-violent act of sitting on a sidewalk. Some residents of the Haight initially proposed the law. But, at the hearing at City Hall last month, there was more testimony against it by Haight residents than for it, and, subsequent to the hearing, significant community opposition has emerged. The proposal seems to be losing momentum, but those that support it claim that they will "take it to the ballot anyway, regardless of any outcome in City Hall," and, unfortunately, seem unwilling to sit down and discuss sustainable community-based solutions. Some in the Haight neighborhood are arguing that those who wish to take it to the ballot aren't interested in solving the problem, but, rather, hope to create a "wedge" issue that can be used against progressive candidates, ironically in other neighborhoods. Apparently those that would finance this effort are downtown interests who wish to influence the outcome in November.
As a longtime Haight resident, I'm aware that the challenge of young people living on the street is not new. Many of the youth on our street are from broken homes, or, as is so often the case with LGBTQ youth, forced out of their homes. They come from all over the country, and many of my neighbors argue that the youth have no desire to be part of the larger community, to be responsive to the neighborhood, or their concerns. While others and I may disagree with this analysis, the answer isn't to shuffle young people along to somewhere else, or to send them to jail. What we need is a community-based solution that creates connection between the young people and our streets, and our neighborhood.
That community connection and community responsibility goes both ways though. Not only must it create a sense of responsibility of the youth to the neighborhood, but we in the neighborhood need to take responsibility for the youth as well. And that doesn't mean that we simply support services and affordable housing for the youth, services that were slashed as part of last year's budget process. What it would mean is that residents of the Haight invite real, sustainable engagement with the un-housed youth in our neighborhood.
Last fall, I was part of a training on Restorative Circles, a process based in restorative justice that has been used in the favelas (or shantytowns) of Rio de Janeiro, where drug gangs are the main employers of youth and homicide is the most common cause of death for people under the age of 25. Used by the Brazilian Ministry of Justice, this process, unlike incarceration, results in reduced recidivism and high rates of satisfaction by all parties. When I initially approached a long-term neighborhood activist about it, his initial reaction was skepticism. He thought it sounded like a new age, woo-woo idea. I had to laugh. However, this concept has been wildly successful in dealing with youth crime in Brazil, and people across the political spectrum in Brazil have ultimately embraced it as an effective strategy.
Restorative Circles brings together the three parties involved in crimes or other painful acts: those who committed the act, those most directly impacted, and the community of those indirectly impacted. After each party has a pre-circle meeting with a facilitator, they all come together using a dialogue process intended for each to speak and be heard about the impact that the conflict is having on them and about what motivated them to choose the actions they chose. With the new understanding established, all are invited to collaborate in devising specific actions, with doable timeframes, involving accessible resources, in an attempt to repair the harm done and restore the sense of dignity, security, and justice of all present, and the wider community. Later, all parties come back together for a post-circle meeting to evaluate whether these new actions have increased well-being and to make new plans, if necessary.
Most experts recognize that the criminal justice system for youth has failed, that putting people in jail for a non-violent crime doesn't make a lot of sense, and certainly most recognize that our homeless policies are a mess. Isn't it time for something new?
Robert "Gabriel" Haaland is a 15-year resident of the Haight-Ashbury neighborhood, a former president of the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club, and serves on the Democratic County Central Committee. This proposal was reviewed by Becky Sutton, community outreach coordinator for Restorative Circles, North America. For more information, go to http://www.restorativecircles.org.