Photo by PHILIP B. POSTON/Sentinel Colorado
AURORA | Mayor Mike Coffman is defending his proposed camping ban against criticism that it would criminalize Aurora’s homeless residents, despite questions about his claim that no arrests have been made of campers who refused to move during a sweep.
Aurora’s Police Department and city staffers say the number of arrests made and citations written near homeless camps are not tracked by any city department.
“There’s no particular data he would have gotten, either from APD or Housing and Community Services, because neither of them keep that active data,” city spokesman Michael Brannen said. “We’d have to do some heavy lifting to discover if arrests have occurred at sites and how many have occurred.”
Coffman wrote in a Jan. 21 social media post that, even under current rules, “there has never been an arrest made because someone in an encampment failed to move after having been ordered to do so, because no one has ever failed to move after being ordered to.”
An Aurora Police Department spokesman initially said they’d need time to confirm Coffman’s statement. Later, Brannen said the city doesn’t track whether arrests happen specifically during sweeps, which at least recently have been limited to situations where city and health officials identify a health or safety threat.
Assistant city attorney Tim Joyce told the City Council in August that no one had resisted or been arrested in past sweeps. Brannen clarified Tuesday that, while Joyce and other assistant city attorneys “are tasked with aiding councilmembers in legal reviews of proposed ordinances,” Joyce does not work in the Criminal Justice Division of the City Attorney’s Office and would not be involved in enforcing the ban.
The ban would require campers to disperse after being given 72 hours’ notice, which is consistent with current policy and the version of the ban that the City Council rejected on a tie vote in August.
Coffman said Jan. 21 that campers would be given a week to clear out, but he announced Tuesday that he was reverting to his original position on notice. Campers who don’t leave an unauthorized encampment could be arrested or fined, under the measure.
Coffman and Brannen did say city staffers can’t remember an instance where a camper was arrested for refusing to leave a campsite.
“I have been involved in many conversations with city staff from multiple city departments — the City Attorney’s Office, Police, Fire, Housing and Community Services, among others — regarding encampment abatements as I prepared this proposal,” the mayor said in a statement. “They all cannot recall an instance of an arrest occurring at an encampment abatement.”
“Whether or not arrests have occurred does not deter (me) from my intentions to seek passage of this ordinance,” Coffman added.
Council members Juan Marcano, Ruben Medina and Crystal Murillo discussed the enforceability of the proposed ban with Joyce as well as Lana Dalton and Jessica Prosser of Aurora’s Department of Housing and Community Services in a policy committee meeting Thursday.
Marcano and Murillo both voted down Coffman’s proposal in August — this week, they questioned the value of a camping ban if the city was already breaking up encampments.
“I’m a little lost as to why we need an ordinance to enforce this if it’s something we’ve been doing for years,” Murillo said.
Joyce said the city has been disbanding campsites without a camping ban under rules that prohibit unauthorized camping specifically in city parks as well as regulations concerning hazards such as open fires and human waste.
He said the ban would not change most of the parameters of camp abatements, though it would allow the city to specifically prosecute camping on private property, rather than charge it as trespassing.
In August, Coffman’s proposal stipulated that camps would only be disbanded if there is available shelter space. That’s consistent with the city’s current policy but could present a challenge if abatements increase, as there are already believed to be hundreds more homeless Aurorans than there are shelter beds.
“It is enforceable for now, it’s just a matter of if we’re going to step it up,” Dalton said.
Joyce also said case law only requires that a shelter bed be available and the city offer it to a person before forcing them to abandon their campsite — the person could be removed even if they don’t accept the offer.
Dalton told the committee that the city had undertaken 79 camp abatements in 2021. Prosser also mentioned that that the City of Denver estimates it spends “millions of dollars” on abatements every year.
Since the measure has not been approved, it’s unclear whether and how the city would distinguish between large encampment sweeps, and ticketing or possible arrest of individual campers.
Cathy Alderman, chief communications and public policy officer for the Colorado Coalition for the Homeless, warned Wednesday that bans like the one proposed by Coffman can trap people in a cycle of run-ins with the law.
In the Denver area, when campers fail to leave a campsite and are arrested, Alderman said the charges they face may be directly related to camping, such as trespassing, or unrelated, including misdemeanor drug possession.
“It’s very common that an individual gets cited for something they would have otherwise not been cited for,” Alderman said. “Beyond arrests, the problem is citations are written, citations come with fines, fines come with court dates, unmet court dates come with warrants, and before you know it, that person is in a cycle where it becomes so much more difficult to access housing.”
Coffman posted Tuesday that he will also be introducing a companion resolution to the camping ban ordinance “that will require the City Manager to come up with the designated area(s) that will provide a shelter option available for those who are required to move from the camps that will range everywhere from using their own tents to being given a motel voucher.”
“The designated area(s) will provide sanitation, water, and food for those experiencing homelessness who were displaced from their encampment,” Coffman wrote.
The mayor has argued that a ban is a “humane” way of addressing the public safety problems associated with homelessness.
Council members are expected to review the proposed ban at a study session Feb. 7.
If you would like to hear more about Coffman’s camping ban, you can tune to Channel 8 on Monday,
Feb. 7th at 6:30 p.m to see the Council in study session. You can’t comment on study sessions, but
the next Monday meeting with be a regular Council
session, and you will be able to comment then.
But won’t do any good at this point.
no, he’s determined to grandstand this camping band
Can we forego arguing over this? Whatever the Mayor proposes is a done deal now that republicans have total control over the City. It’s what they worked so diligently to accomplish. The best we, the citizens can do is elect a Democrat next time around.
Better still, how about some radically pragmatic Independents not beholden to the special interests or either ideologically extreme base?
The two-party duopoly serves the wealthy donors, the special interests and the political industry that is split firmly left and right. Performing well for the people by delivering actual solutions is no longer necessary.
I truly don’t believe there is any such thing as an independent. Just people who don’t want others to know what their true leanings are.
Arrest them, don’t arrest them.
Harass them, don’t harass them
Find them tents, don’t find them tents.
Designate safe areas, don’t designate.
Find them housing, don’t…well maybe that’s their personal job.
Just move them on. More of them will be coming as Denver gets tougher. Make our City safer. Isn’t it true if we had no homeless in Aurora, we would have, by definition, a safer and cleaner, City?
I think the real issue is being missed. Arrest or not, force to move, right to camp where ever you want or not. The real issue here is homelessness. I know there are a certain percentage that some just have no desire to try to live anywhere that is causing them to work and pay. However the vast majority I think would bear out that the cost of housing is out of reach. A one bedroom apartment runs around 1350 a month and perhaps other costs to go with it… so $20,000 a year. To meet the cost you need t make around $40,000 a year. I know as a senior with a $600 social security check and a small retirement of around $700 that my total income would not meet an apartment.cost. The student, or those that are forced to work less hours that 40 because of companies avoiding benefits… at best it is difficult to meet the higher cost of living. At the same time the city in this case is reluctant to allow more units per building lots so the ability to buy or rent will only continue to go up. The few alternatives are not meeting the need- and in my attempts to contact them they are un responsive. So the choice is clear- they have to live as best they can and beg… and litter in many cases. I wont even address sanitation issues.
“There’s no particular data he would have gotten, either from APD or Housing and Community Services, because neither of them keep that active data”
This article proves very informative to the reason for missing police reports, when you file with APD to get reports. Unfortunately, nobody in the police dept records seems to have gotten the message. Because of the RV’s and other various vehicles that have now been showing up on the streets setting up shop sometimes caravan fashion many with no plates, no temps no nothing. The Park Aurora, parking enforcement, rather than deal with it, turns it over to the police to deal with. When the officer or officers come out to move the caravan, they bring tow trucks. The funny part of this bigger picture, is when you ask APD for a report, none exist, as the officers don’t report it. Now that’s great, the caravan moves along, and repeats the same routine. But now, my earlier presumption of reputable record keeping was wrong. Now, I know why I can’t get these reports that I paid seven bucks for. And now all the waisted time on the phone, here’s the answer. Who high-up in APD, or the city attorney’s office decided this is a thoughtful social policy? In reality, this is an effort to avoid disclosure, a way of non-transparency from this particular hot button public issue. Alright, Mayor, time to roll up your sleeves, here is one spot to start looking for your data.
Yeah, we get it. “Mayor” Mike hates the homeless and any marginalized people.
I normally wouldn’t trust Coffman as far as I could throw him, but I doubt that he hates the homeless. Like most people, he simply wants them gone and where they go isn’t relevant. Filthy bums living on the sidewalk are bad for business. Hard to move your service or product over the stink of human waste.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/investigations/homeless-crisis-denver-airport/73-096826a3-658f-4036-a3d3-83bba7fda134
For whatever reason the city of Aurora has decided to not be bothered to keep records, Denver and DPD does bother. This DIA story by 9 news is at Aurora’s front door. There is no excuse for APD not having data, or so far no one of all these city mouthpieces the city employs have produced an answer.
HOMES (for example, “Housing First” model) would be a “humane” solution to the problems associated with the homelessness issue. It would seem that shelter would be classified as a “basic human right”, along with food, water, and health care. We need a better imagination, and actual means and political will, to recognize that people without housing need someplace to put themselves along with a few basic belongings. Camping is probably not the solution most needed, but until we as a city and society provide for this basic necessity criminalizing the unhoused for their circumstances solves nothing whatsoever–except to add more expenses to sending personnel to enforce the “legal fiction” of wrong-doing.