There had been a longtime community living in a creek area, mostly hidden under a cover of trees from the housed neighbors surrounding them. Some of them lived together for years, off of meager resources, taking care of each other, and offering some degree of safety and stability to each other. O–, E–, U–, and T– were four people living there that I came to know. Sometimes they didn’t have enough food. O– reached out to a local faith-based charity and received food. As she shared information about the needs in the camp with those who responded to her call, together they began a relationship of ongoing care and support. Local law enforcement knew about the camp, but left it alone so long as things were relatively peaceful there.
That was to come to an end, though. As police in neighboring areas carried out sweeps, pushing people from one place to the next, more and more people sought refuge in the creek camp. As it grew, the camp leaders didn’t have the relationships with the newcomers that were needed to keep the camp peaceful. Drug use grew, and some of the new inhabitants began attracting unwanted attention to the camp. The law enforcement jurisdiction for the camp also changed.
The camp was posted with a two week notice of “abatement,” as sweeps are often legally termed, as though to kill rats or harmful insects. A local nonprofit with housing navigation services came three times before the sweep. They wouldn’t go into the camp but waited at a location near it, expecting the camp residents to sign up for the county’s coordinated entry system. This is a system for matching people with needed services, following an interview that requires people to share personal history about physical and mental health, addiction, abuse, and other life experiences. The sensitive nature of the interview requires trust to be established between the interviewer and the unhoused person. If someone is open to the interview, and if it results in a sufficiently high score due to their risk factors, it still often takes a very long time to receive services. Many are not eligible due to missing paperwork, or not considered a high enough priority to receive help. After the interview, people often don’t hear from their housing navigator or case worker, even if they have the capacity to reach out to them repeatedly. And so, as is common, the ‘help’ offered was not enthusiastically met.
The day of the sweep came and law enforcement shut down a busy section of road, brought in heavy equipment, and spent five days clearing the camp. T– had to leave his wallet, dentures, and medications behind, as he was separate from them at the time the police entered the camp. He was staying on an island, apart from the area posted, however, they forced him to leave immediately and would not allow him to retrieve any belongings, no matter how essential.
The people were turned out to the streets surrounding the creek, with nowhere to go. As the nearby housed neighbors expressed rage at having the newly displaced people walking the sidewalks in front of their homes, O– became vocal, both online and in person, in advocating for her loved ones from the creek camp community, trying to humanize them to the livid neighborhood. I began working with O– at this time, and it was through her that I met the others. E– and U– found another outdoor space close by where they could live near each other for protection and companionship.