The Oakland City Council voted to approve a new policy this week that makes it easier for officials to remove homeless encampments from public spaces.
With a 5-1 vote, the council approved Councilmember Ken Houston’s “Encampment Abatement Policy” aimed at reducing threats to public safety, sanitation and environmental health.
“This encampment abatement policy is not going to fix everything. It’s not,” Houston said before the vote Tuesday. “But the encampment management policy did not work. It worked for that time. It’s not working right now.”
The city’s previous policy was adopted in 2020 and critics argued that it didn’t do enough to clean up or remove homeless encampments, partly because the law required people to be offered available shelter spaces before being kicked out of camps, which often wasn’t possible.
Then, in 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that penalties established for camping in public spaces aren’t considered cruel and unusual punishment and authorities were no longer required to provide shelter beds prior to dismantling an encampment.
Since that ruling, local governments throughout the country, including in the Bay Area, have adopted stricter ordinances in the face of growing frustration over the number and size of encampments in public areas.
In Oakland, the frustration has been particularly acute given the size of its homeless population, which was estimated at 5,485 people in 2024, a roughly 8.5% increase from 2022, according to Alameda County’s point-in-time homelessness count.
Also, nearly 60% of the county’s homeless population lives in the city, with many spread out between some 1,700 encampments, primarily in East and West Oakland.
“For us to consistently be the region’s social safety net is just not fair and it’s not sustainable,” Councilmember Charlene Wang said prior to voting in favor of the proposal. “This is about providing relief for the neighborhoods that have had encampments in their back yard.”
In an effort to help provide that relief, the new policy divides the city into “high-sensitivity” and “low-sensitively” areas for the purposes of prioritizing enforcement.
High-sensitivity areas include places that are within 150 feet of an elementary, middle, pre-school or childcare center and 100 feet from a high school, within 25 feet of BART or Union Pacific tracks, and within 50 feet of homes and retail businesses, among other things.
Encampments that are determined to be an imminent threat to “life, health, safety or infrastructure” can be closed immediately, while those that pose a less urgent threat can be closed after providing a notice one to three days in advance.
In “non-urgent” and “non-emergency” situations where the encampment is scheduled for “deep cleaning” or a camp is being removed after having been previously ousted, the city is directed to give least a 72-hour notice prior to taking action.
If the city wants to remove an encampment that isn’t posing an emergency or urgent public health and safety problem, it will provide at least a seven-day notice.
The ordinance also makes it easier to tow vehicles from encampments, whether occupied or not, although city workers are directed to avoid towing vehicles in which children are living and to help owners find a shelter and services if they’re using a vehicle as a home.
“This is giving our enforcement staff the ability to make folks move along,” said Wang. “Those living in vehicles and cars will be subject to a notice. It doesn’t happen without warning.”
The policy also directs city staff to identify city-owned properties that could be used for shelter, classified as low-sensitivity areas or used for safe parking.
Sharp divide over new policy
During the three-plus-hour special meeting Tuesday, roughly 100 people lined up to speak for and against the proposal during the public comment period, with some supporters saying it will help fight open-air drug use and other types of crime, and would clean garbage and human waste from the city’s streets.
Houston said allowing people to live in unsanitary encampment conditions is inhumane and that the city has tolerated those conditions for far too long.
Opponents said it criminalizes homelessness and will just result in moving people from one place to another because they can’t afford homes and there aren’t enough shelter beds for everyone.
Councilmember Carroll Fife, who abstained from the vote, called the new policy racist and said the city’s previous policy wasn’t effective “because the answer to homelessness are homes.”
“The majority of the people dying on the streets are Black people, and that is not by accident, this is the history and legacy of a racist country,” Fife said. “I can’t support legislation that’s going to perpetuate racist policies that impact my people more than anybody.”
Councilmember Zac Unger said the policy is just a first step, that it doesn’t criminalize homelessness, and that its effectiveness will be largely constrained by the city’s lack of money and resources.
“Passing this policy is going to be less impactful than people hope and/or fear,” Unger said.
Councilmember Noel Gallo was the sole “no” vote and Councilmember Janani Ramachandran was excused.
The post Oakland council approves new policy making it easier to clear homeless encampment appeared first on Local News Matters.