‘Tent cities’ worth a try, with caveats

Members of the Honolulu City Council are working to find additional approaches to grapple with the homelessness crisis as it manifests in their own districts.

This is a welcome development in general, because on Oahu, despite the focus on Downtown, Kakaako and Waikiki communities, the social and economic problems that land people on the streets is an islandwide phenomenon.

There’s a delicate balance to be achieved, though. What the Council needs is a mix of facilities and services that accommodates the need without being so accommodating that lasting encampments proliferate around the island.

Members also must avoid siphoning away too much funding from other solutions that better support a move to self-sufficiency.

Council Chairman Ernie Martin directed members to find ways to address homelessness in each of the nine districts. He and Councilmen Trevor Ozawa and Joey Manahan all have endorsed the broad concept of “temporary encampments” — a term they prefer to “tent cities,” as they’re often called.

These are places where the homeless can live with some security provisions, as well as sanitation and other basics. Further, they would be sites where social services could be provided on an outreach basis.

The three lawmakers have proposed that they be located near hygiene centers, restroom-shower installations. These are facilities that are greatly needed and would provide a public service, assuming that sufficient funds are allotted for maintenance and upkeep.

The councilmen have pointed to the experience in Seattle, which has had some success with its homeless villages, and which they would like to emulate.

These would be distinct from the “navigation center” the city administration created at Sand Island, a complex of converted shipping containers called Hale Mauliola.

The administration asserts that this facility is focused on helping homeless people who are determined to work their way back to society but need help and direction. The Council has complained, with some justification, that this leaves too many families and individuals on the streets, and has advocated for programs that match the scale of the problem.

There should be room in Honolulu’s homelessness strategy for a pilot project of one or two hygiene-centered encampments, located where they could be most practical, accessible to bus connections.

But establishing them in every district would be a mistake. Experiences in Seattle and many other cities point to these “temporary” camps becoming permanent. The substantial upkeep costs will continue to mount, and there is only so much financing available for it. Federal authorities tend to frown on funding this approach and prefer providing “housing first” support to subsidize more permanent rentals.

The Council is right to add public restrooms and other services in scattered hygiene centers. The challenge will be maintenance, and a source of financing for these amenities must be secured.

One approach would be to encourage the support of these facilities through the “community benefits” packages developers provide in return for land-use permits and generous entitlements. For example, on the 133 Kaiulani project in Waikiki, Ozawa proposed that much of the $1 million package be diverted to fund an urban rest stop.

Some version of that proposal should be implemented. In addition to covering maintenance, the city needs resources to continue enforcing its laws against camping in restrict- ed areas.

What’s been missing from most of the homelessness initiatives has been the element of personal accountability. Directing the homeless toward basic chores at the facilities they use — either for a stipend or in lieu of a penalty for law violations — should be considered.

There are lessons to be learned from other cities using the “tent city” approach. One camp in Portland, dubbed Dignity Village, involves the residents in self-governance and community care, a responsibility for which they take some pride.

That’s been part of its success, and in whatever camps it creates, Honolulu’s government should find a way to emulate such a program. Having the homeless take some measure of personal responsibility is good for all concerned.

Honolulu should lend a helping hand to the truly needy living on the streets, but its programs shouldn’t make it easy to languish there.