“The defendant said the victim placed a bike in front of his house.”
– Multnomah County court documents
I hate to say it but I have more bad news to report about dangerous behaviors on our local bike paths. Over the weekend we had another breach of the Springwater Corridor and someone was rushed to the hospital after being attacked while riding on the I-205 path in Gateway Green bike park.
On Saturday, the Portland Police Bureau got a call around 11:30 am that someone had been assaulted on the path near Gateway Green, an off-road cycling park in east Portland. When they arrived they found an adult male with a “serious cut” on his arm and were told it happened while the victim was bicycling with his children in or near the park (I’m still unsure of the exact location). Witnesses said the suspect, who lived in a tent nearby, went southbound on the I-205 bike path (which is adjacent to the park). Upon giving chase they discovered a large, 18-inch machete and ultimately found and arrested 37-year-old Victor Peterson. Peterson has been charged with Unlawful Use of a Weapon and Assault II (felony).
The victim was treated at a local hospital for his wounds.
According to court documents, Peterson admitted to a PPB officer that he attacked the victim with his machete. “The defendant stated that he swung at the victim because he believed the victim was approaching his tent aggressively” and “placed a bike in front of his house,” reads the probable cause affidavit.
Here’s more from the probably cause affidavit (trigger warning: homophobic slur):
“As [the victim] was riding past Peterson’s tent, Peterson began yelling at him and called him a ‘faggot’ at one point. [The victim] noticed there were other children who were riding their bikes in the direction of Peterson’s tent so he circled back to ensure that the children were safe as they went past. When [the victim] came close to Peterson’s tent the second time, Peterson attacked him with a machete without provocation…
Peterson stated [the victim] approached him aggressively so Peterson hit him with his [machete]… Peterson said it took Peterson cutting his arm to get him away. Peterson stated he believed the person was going to get a gun so he packed up his belongings and left.”
Police were not able to say where exactly the altercation happened or share any other details about what might have transpired prior to the assault.
About 24 hours after this machete incident on the I-205 path, the driver of a grey Subaru Forester smashed through the fence that separates the railroad tracks from the Springwater Corridor near the Ross Island Bridge. According to several witnesses who contacted BikePortland, the damaged fence spilled onto the path and the driver nearly hit several runners and bike riders. The driver “seemed very agitated” and went south from Ross Island Bridge, “driving very fast and forcing bikers and runners to flee to the side,” said one witness. The driver then parked the car in the grassy trail area just south of Ross Island Bridge and “wandered down to the river.”
This incident took place just several hours after thousands of people were on the path for the annual Bridge Pedal bike ride.
One witness who contacted BikePortland said the incident was, “beyond dangerous and unbelievable.” We’re lucky that no one was killed. Also, “it was shocking to see amazing indifference by many [path users] after the guy smashed onto the trail then got out in wild haze. We’re now numb to such things in broad daylight sadly.”
Portland Parks & Recreation, the agency that owns and maintains the Springwater, is aware of the issue and BikePortland has sent them a photo of the car and its license plate number.
These unsettling incidents come on the heels of several others in what appears to be an epidemic of reckless, lawless behavior on our local off-street paths. In May, a drunk driver sped onto the Springwater at its northern entrance and drove the entire length to Sellwood Riverfront Park, hitting one bicycle rider and scaring many others before getting caught up on a bollard.
Then in July, we reported on a car driver that used the I-5 bike path near Hayden Island and the disturbing trend of people parking cars and driving on public park grounds.
What’s happening here seems to be a normalization of very dangerous and illegal behavior that likely won’t get better as long as local officials remain silent and path infrastructure makes it possible.
NOTE, 6:47 pm: The victim’s name has been removed from this post by request due to safety fears.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
Boy! 10 or 20 more of these incidents and the city might be compelled to write a strongly worded press release expressing mild displeasure. Of course, the language won’t be too terse as that could be construed as unempathetic or threatening to marginalized people.
I sincerely hope that Bike Portland never has to report a fatality from this clearly illegal activity. It’s long past time to harden the entry points to these MUPs and to put police patrols on them!
Sigh… How about a PSA that says “keep your tents and vehicles off the paths!”
Is that too harsh?
About what percentage of tents or vehicles would that keep off the paths, would you say?
About zero. But irony is lost on most people these days.
How about forming a “neighborhood watch program” like they do for neighborhoods, but for the bike paths instead? I bet you could get city police support and even funding. Parks & Rec often helps fund “Friends of Parks” organizations – why not call your watch group the Portland Friends of Greenways (PORTFROG) and establish yourselves as a 501c3 so you can get grants, city PCEF funding, etc? Then produce cool matching jerseys, form posse patrols, community bike rides, convoys through the rough outlaw territory of the I-205 path, the Esplanade and the Springwater? You can get gun racks for bikes, I’ve seen them, to carry your handy dandy AK-47s to blast away those nasty cars illegally driving on the path. Form unholy alliances with running groups, hikers, and MAGA supporters, take back your pathways! You have nothing to lose but your chains!
My sister is a MAGA republican and she gloats in self satisfaction when she reads back to me news about “failed Portland”. She has plenty of material to work with and I have to admit that her needling stings.
In the last week the Mayor of San Francisco ordered that bus passes be given to any homeless person who could not prove residency in the last year so did not qualify for city services and Gavin Newsome personally helped sweep a homeless camp.
They get it.
Unfortunately they’ll be coming here.
Do I need to guess where San Francisco’s homeless will be bussing to?
No need to guess Grandpa, there is data on this. After California, the next most popular destination for homeless being bussed from San Francisco was Oregon.
All thanks to Mayor Breed. 🙁
https://sfstandard.com/2024/08/06/journey-home-data/
Well, the numbers presented seemed a bit low. 857 plus (maybe, it was a bit vague if the 857 included the new program.) 92 since August 2022 to be sent away from San Francisco. Of those later 92 it seems as if 9 have made it to Oregon. Seems as if Mayor Breed is taking a page from Governor Abbot, although San Fran has been bussing its “unfortunates” up to Humboldt for a long time and I see its still one of the favorite California destinations.
My partner’s home town is Rio Dell immediately adjacent to Scotia which was the last company town in America and up to the 80’s one of the main economic engine of the area. That was before the 1985/86 take over by Hurwiz and Maxaan which then started clear cutting to maximize profits. The town is now barely hanging in there, the SoCal born mayor is trying to make it into a legal weed hub and its simply a travesty to send those people up to a rural area that can’t match the urban areas of the Bay area in funding and facilities. The name of the program is right out of some dystopian YA novel, “Journey Home”. Simply ridiculous!! The problems those people experienced was created in San Francisco and they really should have the decency to take care of it, but they can’t because the solutions are beyond them and so they just send them off to poorer areas of the state to cause suffering elsewhere. It’s a despicable policy, but one that seems tailor made for a cowardly political class.
There’s no better argument than a good example.
This is why we should listen to everyone without labeling or judgment. Its not about winning arguments, its about improving quality of life for everyone, right?
The machete attack at the Gateway Green was very disturbing. I hope the victim heals quickly. We did this to ourselves with the people we have elected. Until Portland voters elect people that realize police are necessary, enforcement of our laws is not unjust and enabling unsanctioned camping is cruel to all and needs to end, the violence in this once livable city will continue.
https://katu.com/news/local/suspect-apprehended-and-machete-seized-following-northeast-portland-assault-gateway-green-path-92nd-avenue-multnomah-county
I’m sorry but this argument gets more exhausting every time I hear it. We still have a police department. Their funding as a % of the city budget has not been meaningfully reduced. They have all the enforcement powers they would theoretically need to intervene in these situations. Exactly how much more of our money do you think they need? 40% of the budget? 80%? And what % reduction in violence would be expected from that increase? Or is the thought to just write a blank check without establishing any concrete expectations or accountability?
While we’re at it, let’s head over to https://www.portland.gov/council/votes and look up how many times our current City Council has voted “No” on something PPB asked for. If I’m searching correctly, it would seem the answer is “zero times”.
Our current elected leaders are disappointing, not for lack of brutality against our unhoused neighbors, but for lack of urgency to work with the County and achieve meaningful action on housing and support systems that have been proven effective in plenty of other places around the world.
Police funding may not have been reduced, but the number of officers we have has been. The reasons are complicated, but the ramifications are that there are not enough cops to answer all the 911 calls they get.
If you are satisfied with having some emergency calls go unanswered, then maybe the current situation is satisfactory for you.
It is not satisfactory for me.
Even in the funding crunch a few years back the PPB had dozens of funded/unfilled sworn officer positions (the sunspecified “dozens” is from their budget request immediately following that year).
The issues facing us require a lot more than simply throwing money at an ineffective organization.
But, I don’t believe we have the capability to do all the heavy lifting required for any of the major problems facing us (locally, nationally or globally).
In the immortal words of Jerry Pournelle: “We have sown the wind, we will reap the whirlwind”.
He was an old school (paleo) conservative and I’m … not. But while we disagreed in principle on many things – he had a keen intellect, a great deal of knowledge and was willing to engage in rational discourse with those he disagreed with.
It’s a quote from the book of Hosea chapter 8 versus 7, from the Hebrew bible: https://biblehub.com/niv/hosea/8.htm
He wrote or co-wrote some of my favorite science fiction when I was younger.
We have the lowest number of Portland officers anytime in recent history. Your argument about police budgets is the one that is exhausting. Does an espresso drink cost the same as 2005? No, of course it cost more. Even to keep funding even one needs to have a larger budget due to inflation. For crying out loud, we have ONE property crime detective for the ENTIRE city of Portland. Let’s be real….this attitude of needing less police and less enforcement of our laws have failed us, especially those in more troubled neighborhoods like East Portland. Just look at who these precincts voted for moderates that support restoring livability to our city….Rene Gonzalez and Nathan Vasquez. Enough said.
https://manhattan.institute/article/portlands-police-staffing-crisis
I don’t think there is strong correlation between police staffing and violence. For example, Baltimore has about 40 officers to 10k people, while Portland has about 14 officers to 10k people. The rate of violent crime is much higher in Baltimore than Portland. So the attitude that more police = less crime doesn’t really seem correct, either. Also, the crime rate dropped in 2023.
I think it comes down to leadership and how we are spending our money/what is actually getting done. I don’t think throwing people in jail for being homeless is a good way to spend police time and is probably the most expensive option for how we could handle the homeless situation here.
Another question – why are the police here having such a hard time hiring officers? Maybe they should look at their practices, reputation, and lawsuits they have lost and try to turn things around instead of just blaming others.
We have a long ways to go, but everyone on all sides of the equation need to take responsibility for their actions and improve – especially those in power. I don’t think posting a right-wing think tank article is really too convincing when those same people support for-profit businesses running our prisons and incentivizing throwing people in jail.
Compare some more statistics from Baltimore to Portland.
I think the more interesting thing to do would be to compare more cities to Portland. There are quite a number of cities with much higher violent crime rates and with many more police. The data that more police = more safety just isn’t there – and I honestly do think we probably should have more police here, but there is soo much more than just that which needs to change.
Do you need more police if your underlying levels of violence are higher?
An important metric for most people is are there enough cops to answer all the 911 calls. If you have more violence, you’ll get more calls, and need more cops.
Your formulation is simplistic; what we do know is that Portland has too few cops by almost any measure.
Right, but it’s not my formulation , it’s the person that I was responding to. And my point (which it seems you may have missed) was exactly what you just said – the equation they put out there is way too simple. More cops = more better. I think my point is just that, what is the “underlying” cause of violence? Let’s try to solve that instead of throwing money at an organization that doesn’t have a great record nor the public’s support.
You mean the post by Mary S a few levels up? I don’t see that formulation in her post either. She said we need more cops than we have (a statement that has widespread agreement), and that the cost of policing is rising along with the cost of everything else.
You are the one that introduced the formulation in your response to that post, a mischaracterization of what she said.
So what is the underlying cause of violence? There are many categories; domestic violence is very different than gang violence, and both are different from predatory criminal behavior. But in all those cases, we benefit from enough cops to respond to 911 calls and, where possible, the arrest of those responsible (so they don’t do it again).
Prevention is something else entirely, and I fully support it. But it is very important to me that someone answers the call when I phone 911.
The only thing she said is that we need more cops/more enforcement. My point was that it wasn’t that simple. The link she cited specifically mentions the police per capita. I mean, you can take what you want from it, but that’s what I was reading. She didn’t offer any other suggestions outside of more policing.
She didn’t actually say that either. She did say that we have fewer cops per capita than at any point in recent history, and that the attitude that we need fewer cops is not helping, especially in areas east of I-205.
I do believe that most Portlanders agree that we need more cops, and the vast majority of council candidates I’ve heard from agree. Politically, this seems a decided issue.
How we get there is an open question.
The rate of crime is generally correlated with poverty rates. Less poverty, less crime. More education, less crime. Higher income, less crime.
This is why Baltimore went through such a rough period, it had astronomically high poverty rates and suffered from white flight. It also isn’t as bad today as it was in the 90s
Please do that comparison, I am sure the people of Portland would love to see that analysis and the underlying conclusions about violence in other places.
You can look up the stats yourself and draw your own conclusions. I know Portland is often painted in a much harsher light than the actual reality of how other cities are doing. I am not going to try to play along with your narrative when the facts don’t support it. Please come back and share your analysis of what you learned when you look up and see the rates of violent crimes in other cities, how much cops get paid, and the police per capita in those cities. It’s funny how paying cops more and having over a certain threshold really don’t seem to solve as many problems as people think they would. Also, I am old enough to remember when Wheeler called PPB’s slow/no response to 911 calls bs. https://www.wweek.com/news/courts/2022/08/31/mayor-calls-rebukes-portland-police-bureaus-claims-of-understaffing-bullshit/
@watts Why do I even both having a conversation with you? Every single time it seems like a complete waste of my time and I learn nothing from it. Do you think she wasn’t implying that she thinks we need more cops and enforcement by rebuking people who thought the opposite? Any other straw men you care to set up?
The behavior you allow is the behavior you will get…
We are where we are due to decades of policy decisions at the Federal, State, County, & City levels. As much as people desire it, there is no single, simple, shining solution to the mess we’ve (allowed to be) created for us.
It will take years (if not, decades) of sincere, dedicated effort to solve these issues.
Sadly, the pendulum power swings too frequently between those who believe we haven’t done enough to make things “better” & those who believe we’ve already done too much & that things were, somehow, better before.
Ugh.
It is absolutely a waste of resources to throw homeless people in jail.
However very, if housing is thrown at a houseless person, they refuse and was my to keep can morning on public or private property, there really isn’t any other records, now is there? Are we going to permanently cede sidewalk space and public parks to these destructive camps?
These camps are really awful places for people to live. The priority should be getting people off the streets, as quickly as possible. The 10 year wait list for housing needs to be shortened to a few weeks, tops.
That article makes some decent points, acknowledging that PPB has been headed for a staffing crisis for years and suggesting a few ideas to mitigate the problem. Unfortunately, it also rehashes the BS story that PPB has suffered from “defunding”, which is so clearly not true that it’s hard to trust the article was even written in good faith.
Your link to right wing propaganda is not effective at presenting Gonzalez and Vasquez as ‘moderates’. It makes them look like reactionary conservatives trying to ride a backlash using fox news talking points. PPB may need increased funding, but the much bigger problem is the lack of public trust in their organization based on decades of terrible behavior.
hmmm…in the 90s I heard nobody expressing trust problems with police.
Right now people in Clackamas and Washington counties don’t express these problems.
Since the 90’s the population of Portland has changed markedly toward young, anti-establishment, left-wing people without ties to the area and without kids.
I wonder if there would ever be a police department that they could trust.
When you hear educated left wing Portlander’s saying that police developed out of slave patrols, my mind boggles at the willful ignorance. Modern Anglosphere police developed over centuries in England without any significant involvement of enslaved populations.
Further, police forces exist in countries everywhere that never had slavery, using traffic stops, arrests, jail and everything else that is used here.
This supposed trust problem is really just in the heads of certain Portlanders.
I’m in India, people don’t like police, absolutely no one questions the need for them.
In this city, Pune, traffic is crazy, motorbikes ride on the sidewalk,in the bikelanes and in the opposite direction of traffic–you rarely notice police.
In Mumbai and Delhi police are everywhere and the traffic largely follows the rules.
Why are Portlanders always grasping at the most ideologically driven, tortured explanations? Its exhausting.
The fact you didn’t hear people expressing trust problems with police doesn’t mean it wasn’t happening in the 90s, and well before. Don’t take my word for it. Take the New York Times’, from 1985:
https://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/05/us/blacks-protest-choke-hold-death-in-oregon.html
If you weren’t aware of people in Portland expressing trust problems with police after those same police were making national headlines for giving people cause to mistrust them, why should I think you’re right about what’s happening in other counties now?
Good lord man, are you for real — or a hallucinating AI? In the ’90s you “heard nobody expressing trust problems with the police” because the Chasse brutality case, which first prompted the federal DOJ crackdown on PPB (which continues in some form to this day), went down in _2006_. “People in Clackamas and Washington counties don’t express these problems” because, for one, _they’re not and never have been in PPB’s jurisdiction_. Likewise, cities in India and England have zero to do with PPB.
Yes, I’m real. Never heard of Chasse case–did that involve you? Are there other large cities whose Police forces you approve of, and where you have lived?
How many Police forces have not had their own brutality cases?
In my experience Clackamas cops are meaner, but Clackamas people seem to support them.
The reason other places are important as comparators is that they can give us perspective to shape our expectations.
India is highly relevant because it shows me that when police are not patrolling the roads–motorized vehicles start using the bike paths–which is what Jonathan’s original blog post is about.
To me these anti-police arguments I hear from middle class white people in Portland all blend together in a mass of emotional anti-police prejudice:
Sometimes its that American policing is derived from slave patrols (false, England is the source); sometimes its that policing in general is inherently flawed, and sometimes its that PPB is just plain bad.
EVERY SINGLE country I’ve visited (40 maybe) has visible police on the streets. If policing is inherently flawed why do so many countries use it?
If PPB is so bad why are police in other cities even worse?
I was in Charleston SC and a cop asked me if i wanted him to go beat up some Middle Easterners that i had got into a disagreement with about my shawarma.
Something that grossly indecent has never happened to me in Portland.
Perhaps you need some perspective.
It’s always great to hear insights from different countries (that aren’t the normal Nordic or European resort destinations). I think it helps people get a better sense of where we are in the PNW if they see more of the outside world that is different and it would be nice if more people would explore like you are doing. Hope you are having a great time!!
Thanks, I am having a great time. India is fascinating.
From this I can conclude that we did not run in the same circles back in the 90’s, because all of my acquaintances and I took it as article of faith that Portland cops were a bunch of dicks. And they have done nothing in the intervening decades to dispel that perception. They used to at least send C.W. Jensen to spew some word salad while Cam Johnson nodded approvingly on the teevee news. Now they don’t even try.
We probably were in different circles. The people I hung out with didn’t think about police at all other than when we were being pulled over
Seeing as I didn’t know any minorities other than Indian Americans in Washington county who never spoke about police either, i cant speak to what Black Portlanders experienced and I believe they may be in posession of some legitimate complaints.
But middle class whites in my experience have created any problems they have with PPB either in terms of politicizing the issue in their mind or fighting with police and generating a brutal response as a result.
From my entire time of living in Portland after moving out of my parent’s house, none of my neighbhors, or friends from high school as we aged, ever spoke about the police whatsoever.
We discussed Portland’s various other qualities like restaurants, city planning, culture etc. Police did not come up.
I have never heard of CW Jensen or Cam Johnson or the Chasse Brutality case that 360Skeptic cites.
Did any of these cases involve you personally?
I personally have never witnessed PPB do anything grossly improper. I was down at the 2020 protests alot.
So perhaps its a question of perspective, which was my original point.
Hi Donel,
The point I was making was that, contrary to your implications above, there was a lot of criticism of the police back in ’90s in Portland. Just because it didn’t impinge on the idyll of your Washington county high school experience doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. The ferment that you react to didn’t just grow out of young, childless left wingers moving here in the 2000’s — many of us moved here earlier! We were fleeing whitebread conservative places where we didn’t fit. And what we found was a vibrant culture of lefty intellectualism among many other identities/subcultures that made and make this city such an interesting and great place to live.
Cam Johnson was a news anchor for one of the local TV stations, and C.W. Jensen was the public affairs guy for the PPB. He would frequently appear on the evening news to spin local current events — he was really good at his job. Their product was broadcast all over the metro area — even to Forest Grove, where I lived for a while, beyond the cricket pitches of Hillsboro. Such local media might be critiqued as part of the structure of White supremacy by the ‘middle class whites’ that you have such disdain for. At the time, there was a growing awareness of racial disparities in policing that gained momentum towards the end of the Reagan era (the Rodney King beating was a notable event that played into the discussion). That you grew up here in that era and claim to never have heard of any of this is surprising to me.
I have not been beaten down by the cops (or had any serious tension with them). The most striking impression PPB has made on me was the obvious and visceral change in demeanor presented to me by the cops when I moved from downtown (where it was clear I was a miscreant troublemaker) to NoPo, where it was clear that I was a nice white kid. Suddenly the cops were waving and smiling at me when they drove by. It became crystal clear to me that your relationship with law enforcement has a lot more to do with who you are perceived to be than what you have actually done.
I did not live here for 2020 shitshow (although the 3%ers in my community did organize armed citizen patrols of my local Walmart to protect against rumored antifa busses coming from Portland!!). Thankfully, antifa didn’t show, and the Walmart was spared.
Here’s a gedanken to pass your time in India: how do the slums in India compare to the homeless camps on the SWC or 205 MUP? Do you think cops here should have the same tolerance for slums as the cops in India?
The Chasse situation was a pretty big deal for quite some time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Chasse
One more reason my bike is collecting dust until the unsanctioned camping ends, addicts are forcibly diverted into treatment, and actual enforcement of traffic laws gets ramped up. How some city council member sleep at night is beyond me.
This is just a side effect of the much bigger issues facing the city. If your solution to homelessness (or that of the leaders you help elect) is tents and tinfoil, this is part of what you are signing the rest of us up for.
People keep telling me that these stories are apocryphal, and that this is all just an economic issue that can be cured by building more market rate housing, but that’s not what my lying eyes are telling me.
Both of these people were behaving dangerously and erratically and are likely deeply troubled. They need real help, not more fake help.
Large amounts of market rate housing should help prevent as many people becoming homeless in the future.
But you are definitely correct in that the long term homeless, and particularly the addicts, won’t be helped by it. They need interventions and supervised living, and mandatory housing provided.
The other day I ran into a homeless person who claimed they had been homeless for over 50 years, since they were a baby. I find that disturbing. Are we looking at thousands of people who are middle aged who have never received an education? They will never participate in the economy, period.
We spend enough on homelessness in Oregon that we could probably pay for an apartment at market rate for every single unhoused person in the state. The problem is that our leadership prefers to funnel all the money in various NGOs, useless initiatives, and non profits which are seemingly incapable of addressing any problems while labeling real solutions as inhumane. A lot of these programs seem to do more harm than good.
Another issue is that a lot of our homeless population isn’t mentally fit to live in an apartment independently or simply aren’t interested in living indoors. I used to volunteer at a soup kitchen regularly and had to stop because of violence. My observation was that 75% of the people who came for meals were either completely insane or actively nodding out/withdrawing. The rest were old people on tiny social security checks or migrant types. I wish that we could address the societal issues which cause so many people to turn out like that, but the cause is so deeply ingrained in America that I doubt we ever can.
I think more blame lies with County officials.
I’ve lived in Portland for almost 20 years and it just dawned on me recently that we have essentially redundant city and county governments. Well – it’s worse than that b/c we pay very high county taxes and the county does almost diddly (cf. the recent story about the county sheriff refusing to imprison people who violate CITY ordinances).
Portlanders showed we have an appetite for making big changes in government. So how about we next get rid of county gov’t and put everything under the city? Multnomah County is essentially the City of Portland.
City, County and Metro are just too many governments crammed into one small geographic area. One or two definitely need to be folded into the other(s). I agree that the political activists need to start thinking outside the government box for solutions.
About 15 years ago there was in fact a serious study by both the city and county to combine the two. There were lots of legal issues to work out – Portland has territory in three different counties, there are several cities besides Portland in Multnomah County, Gresham for example – but ultimately it was found that neither jurisdiction would benefit enough from combined operations to make it all worthwhile, and so they abandoned the project. The City Auditor office likely has the study in their archives.
Thanks for the history, David. But history is not always a guide to the present. Portland is currently so badly broken that what people thought 15 years ago no longer applies to our current reality.
According to court documents, Peterson admitted to a PPB officer that he attacked the victim with his machete. “The defendant stated that he swung at the victim because he believed the victim was approaching his tent aggressively” and “placed a bike in front of his house,” reads the probable cause affidavit.
Well, he knows how to use the proper terminology, at least. I’m sure the “sweeps kill” crowd will approve of this language.
It reminds me of the ways that people will use therapy language to manipulate and gaslight their partners.
I used to bike down off the back of Rocky Butte and through the SE trails there until I had a run in with some aggressive camper dogs that easily could’ve mauled and killed me. Now I stick to the main “road”that runs north through the woods, but have still had to dodge a couple guys attacking trees with machetes and hatchets. They were NOT trying to gather firewood. I just rode by as quickly and quietly as possible, lest they saw me and decided I was their target. Oh, and then there was the other time I had to bunny hop the fire hoses running from the fire trucks on I-205 and through the woods and over the dirt road to the firefighters putting out a series of burning tents.
I always thought Rocky Butte was lawless, but that Gateway Green was fairly safe. Though, it was getting rather rough a year+ ago when the huge camp sprung up just north of GG btw the MUP and I-205. It even had its own muddy exit off of I-205. They finally kicked them out and added concrete barriers. They put in wood posts with large cables strung between them along the MUP and (of course) people have since cut and stolen all the cables.
I liked that the railroad’s approach to people cutting into the area from their property was to stack up old cars and even a couple boats as a wall. They added a bunch of piles of gravel as well. That worked fairly well until someone lit all the cars on fire a couple months ago…
I really just wish I could go for a nice mountain bike ride through the urban forests and parks of this fair city without having to worry about getting injured or killed by some crazed human. Sigh…
That area of Rocky Butte could have so much potential as a more developed park. Build a playground next to Skidmore, bike/ped bridge over 205, develop hiking and biking trails up to the top, include resources for climbers. Maybe even a through-trail connecting to Hancock. Kind of like Iron Mountain in Lake Oswego but bigger and more accessible for more people.
Oh GEEZ, don’t even get me started on the amazing potential back there! Even back in 2007-ish when it had the unofficial “grotto dirt jumps” it was better than what it is now.
It would be lovely back there with a paved path running north/south from Skidmore to Hancock, with hiking and biking trails branching off of that, climbers trails up to belay platforms, and so much more. Having the paved path running the length of it would help increase patrols, which would help with a lot of the current issues. The same paved MUP could tie into the once-proposed Halsey Undercrossing, which would connect nicely to Gateway Green. The bike/ped bridge would be amazing.
Whatever became of the Halsey Undercrossing?
Great question! I need to work on that and find out.
If you’ve ever visited gateway green in the evening, you’ll notice that a lot of people start setting up camp on the trails around the time the sun goes down. Found a body on the 205 trail near the max once.
So the suspects are the “usual suspects”.
I’m just shocked.
Shocked I Say!!
When I first moved to Portland in fall of 1997, I saw lots of bad behavior, smokers on MAX trains, booby-trapped trails in Forest Park, illegal campsites, 20-something slackers hanging out in coffee shops, all part of that Portland Weird vibe. When I left in winter 2015, it was still that usual s**t, but I got older and less tolerant of it, plus I couldn’t afford my addiction to Portland Weird any longer, so I moved on.
If you don’t like it, leave. Move elsewhere. It’s a big world out there and there’s a community out there that matches your tastes, income, and lifestyle.
Not helpful, David. You moved, but we have to live here and deal with the problems here.
But you are not really “dealing with it”, y’all are bitching about it and doing your best to avoid “dealing with it” by blaming others, the homeless, the police, elected officials, everyone but yourselves.
The Portland I knew and worked with was proactive and actually tried to plan ahead, and not be re-active and trying to blame others. If you know your city is going to grow and gentrify, you make a plan for it (as Portland did in fact do – The Portland Plan), then you carry it out. But as usual Portlanders elected a bunch weeny whiny idiots to City Council and failed to raise taxes to pay for it all, and shifted funds they had to pointless pet projects. And now all they do is bitch bitch bitch.
Pot, meet kettle. From 3000 miles away you are one of most prolific posters on this “bitch” blog. Your action plan was to leave, and although a good start, your “daily advice column” falls short of problem solving
I really think this comment section would be better off without comments like this. You moved away from Portland, but you clearly haven’t moved on.
*** Moderator: deleted last line ***
If you hadn’t moved years ago, you’d know that many of the people who were responsible for that proactivity and planning ahead are still here, still being proactive and planning ahead. And they’ve been joined by lots of new (younger or new to Portland) people since you left.
Based on comments and articles I’ve seen here over the years, many BikePortland readers and commenters are in that group.
Your comment is pathetically clueless, arrogant and condescending.
True story: I lived in Portland 1997-2015 and was an East Portland community activist from 2009-2015 and eventually helped (with many other people mind you) get over $400 million in Portland transportation projects funded, mostly in EP, including lots of sidewalks. I lived in Hazelwood and served on their NA and EPAP, plus the city PBOT Bureau Advisory Committee for 7 years.
In 2013 the City gave me an “Independent Spirit of Portland” award, a very nice glass plaque, at a very public award ceremony with all 4 councilors and the mayor (I shook Saltzman’s hand in the photo). The next year, 2014, I was at a meeting to select the 2014 recipients. That’s when I learned that my award is generally referred to by city officials as the “Neighborhood Asshole of the Year Award.” So for 2013, it’s official, even the City of Portland, population 638,000, thinks I’m the sole 2013 “Neighborhood Asshole of the Year”. Perhaps it was an invitation to leave town and plague some other city?
David, several years ago I was invited to the Portland Building for what I can only describe as an intervention. Surrounded by transportation managers, one of them said to me something about me being “the next Marianne Fitzgerald.” Chew on that. Maybe it needs a separate award, “The next Marianne Fitzgerald Award.”
I worked with Marianne of SWNI extensively, as well as Linda Nettikoven of Southeast Uplift and many others. Marianne has a lot of charm, which I clearly lack – my strength is in being detailed-orientated, which is a plus when working with city engineers. To a certain extent any successful Portland advocate has to be an asshole, “pathetically clueless, arrogant and condescending” as qqq correctly remarked, but charm is a definite plus in dealing with elected officials.
Being reasonable and rational is a definite minus in advocacy, because you get discouraged real fast, as many BP readers can attest to.
I work with the city a lot as well, but from the private side.
Anyway, politicians absolutely hate engineers. Engineers are beholden to their codes/standards and math, and get greatly didn’t care about false promises and bloviations in politics.
Please refrain from personal attacks.
“Carrying it out” is almost impossible when our government is captured by corporate interests and deeply influenced by the narcissistic whims of well-off homeowners (e.g. some of the commentators who reacted so strongly to your comment).
I know a lot of people who have left (including some close family), and others who are looking to leave. It’s a good solution for some.
If my better half didn’t have strong ties to our community/neighborhood we’d be gone in as soon as we could. It wouldn’t have to even be far away, as long as we’re out of the Portland city limits I’d be happier.
I agree with you 100%. Hoping to be gone in 4 years but it won’t be easy due to family, employment issues.
David,
Why should we have to move to find a safe, livable city? Why do we have to move to find a city where one feels safe and can ride in bike parks without getting chopped with a machete? Why can’t Portland be a city where people want to be, live their lives to the fullest and maybe even choose to raise kids or grandkids? Why can’t we live in a city that we are proud of?
You live in North Carolina but seem to be telling us to shut up about our concerns about Portland and not try to make it livable again. You gaslighting us about how bad it used to be is not helpful. And guess what….it’s a lot worse since you left in 2015. Sure we could move but that’s not easy for people with roots and other family members in the area. Frankly, I find your comment condescending.
“You gaslighting us about how bad it used to be is not helpful. “
Gaslighting-I don’t think this word means what you think it means.
David isn’t lying or trying to convince you to disbelieve your lying eyes. He’s giving you positive options on how people can improve their lives if they truly feel like Portland is circling the drain. It gets tiresome reading all the complaining followed by no change in path or purpose. If you have the ability to afford Portland (I didn’t) then please do something positive with it and enough with the outrage when you’re presented with realistic options.
Some of us are from here. Pulling up stakes isn’t that simple. 2024 Portland shit isn’t remotely like 1997-?? Portland shit. Like Fred said, your comment isn’t helpful.
Its actually very simple. I had a new job, found a new house and moved from Portland within two weeks (of course that was before the crush of bidenomics). David’s comment attempts to give you power back in your life. You can work to fix the problem by voting in people who will do the work, do the work yourself (become an officer for example), quit complaining or leave and try someplace else.
I was from where I grew up. Outside forces crashed the economy and I left after a circuitous route through college as there was no real legal work. My family had been in that county for generations and now we’re in the ground or somewhere else.
My point is that it is incredibly simple to leave if you actually need or want to. For the vast majority of the well off people that make up this readership there’s not much incentive to actually leave yet as the problems others in lower economic brackets faced for awhile are only now sorta kinda starting to affect you.
My wife and I are 50, +/- a smidge, have a kid here, have aging parents here, own a home here, have careers here, friends of several decades are here. Can we move? Of course! Will it be simple? Hell no, it will not. I’m not 24, waiting tables and making lattes any longer, with virtually no posessions and zero debt and a ramblin’ spirit.
Impossible to move? No, obviously not. Simple? No, obviously not. The stakes of a massively life altering decision like that are just so much higher the older one gets. Come on, I’m sure you know this.
Just to note that leaving was only the most extreme of the four options jakeco969 enumerated. Alternatives include working to fix the problem yourself, voting for people who will, or just sucking it up.
I myself am doing a bit of all three.
Goddamnit, Watts. You have to chime in on every interaction here? Just to note, I was initially replying to David Hampsten.
David Hampsten (who I value as a commenter 99% of the time) said, “If you don’t like it, leave. Move elsewhere. It’s a big world out there and there’s a community out there that matches your tastes, income, and lifestyle”
I said moving isn’t that simple. Plus, I don’t really want to move, even if I’m unsatisfied with Portland right now, some things about Portland anyway, I don’t really want to bail. Not really, not yet.
Jakeco969 said, “Oh to contrary, it’s incredibly simple!”
Then I laid out the reasons, in my estimation, it really is not simple. There are in fact many things to consider!
Why did you feel the need to comment/reply to me?
In this particular context, I responded to your post because while I agree with you that leaving is more difficult for many of us, I wanted to highlight the points in jakeco969’s post that you didn’t respond to, most importantly the idea that those of us who stay have a lot of agency in terms of how we respond to Portland’s problems.
Like you, I have no plans to leave, and I hope all of us will help where we can, and not just give in to a feeling of powerlessness and despair. That’s probably not you, but I think it does reflect the mood of many out there.
I’m sorry you didn’t care for the way I chose to make that point; looking back, my post doesn’t seem particularly inflammatory or accusatory, nor did it in any way “refute” what you wrote (or, really, seem directed at you much at all), so I’m honestly not sure why it sparked such a strong response.
I’m sorry. You’re correct, it wasn’t inflammatory. I get tired of you having a comment for *everything* is all. But hey, I can deal with that. So again, I apologize. I don’t always agree with you here but I appreciate your perspective….even if you sometimes annoy the hell out of me. 😉
I agree, moving is never simple. I stayed in Portland well beyond what I could afford, seeking work and doing advocacy partly because I was good at it, but mostly because I really cared about my community. I still care deeply about Portland. Even after one physically moves, one still cares deeply about loved ones, including cities we’ve lived in. I lived long enough in Portland that I’ll probably never “move on” as one commenter said I should. And I still care about my home town of Grand Forks ND even though I was last there in 2007.
Moving cross country is always a form of trauma – you lose a lot of friends that way, there’s a loss of a lot of comforts (Powell’s Books for example, or Mt. Hood) – but it’s a new adventure, new things and stuff and culture to discover. I like to think of it as a long vacation or even an exile, and that one day I’ll return – it helps to make the move bearable. And news sources like BP make such moves a little easier to bear.
I agree with you entirely about moving. Sorry everyone piled on you. I’m pretty sure most of us do actually appreciate your contributions here.
“leave” is always suggested by people who moved to Portland intentionally, it’s a position of privilege– they got to choose their flavor of progressive lifestyle destination city, after all, doesn’t everyone?
Yet many in the US (and even in Portland) do not enjoy that same opportunity
Many of the “just leave” folks came here at least in part to surround themselves with people who are like them. For all the noise they make about how they’ve “found their people” out here and can finally “thrive”, they sure love threatening to excommunicate anyone who doesn’t fit their mold. They shout you down and tell you to leave knowing that the person who replaces you will likely think, act, vote and even dress just like them.
David, you’ve been gone almost a decade. Please believe us when we tell you that the city has changed in that time.
I’ve been riding the 205 path for 20 years. It didn’t used to be like this.
“If you don’t like it, leave. Move elsewhere. It’s a big world out there and there’s a community out there that matches your tastes, incomes, and lifestyle”
What a ridiculous comment from a person who has not lived in Portland for a decade, daily logs in to a bike blog focused on Portland, and then suggests to Portlanders that have complaints about Portland that there is community out there (other than Portland) that matches your tastes better. Based on your behavior David, you clearly have not found this community in North Carolina, otherwise you would focus more on your better fit community in North Carolina and not be so obsessed with the Portland bike scene.
I really don’t know what to say anymore about all of this, that’s worth anyone’s time and consideration. It just makes me angry & sad.
I think that hardening the entry points & police bike patrols would probably help mitigate some of this very dangerous behavior. However, it seems to me that the social compact is failing. When cultural norms get broken, they’re very difficult to restore.
Lastly, I don’t know how much I’d use a MUP that is hardened w. police patrols. That kinds just kills the enjoyment for me.
I would welcome police patrols. The paths frequently pass through isolated, hard-to-access places, Gateway Green being a great example: in an island between freeways and a railroad.
Over the years I’ve been forced off the path, I’ve had knives and machetes brandished at me, and I’ve feared for my life on a few occasions.
Anyone who’s using the path for something other than its intended purposes is a liability to everyone else. These persons need to be addressed proactively, not after someone is stabbed.
A consistent Police/Street Response beat along our paths would probably be pretty good medicine here. I don’t think this needs to be seen as “hardening with police patrols,” but more just visibility, and maybe even identifying and finding help for folks in crisis before an incident happens. Bonus points if the Gateway Green beat gets dirt jumpers…
The victim is my best friend. He spent a lot of time building at Gateway Green and believes in making these interstitial spaces into “safe” spaces for humans to get away from cars. For better or worse, these spaces may be safer for a whole other population as well. This is a bad streets issue, crashing head on into a housing/mental health/drugs issue, with a man trying to make the world a better place stuck in the middle.
The tone of this chat thread is depressing. BikePortland is usually a font of bubbling optimism and civic boosterism. Here people who ply the streets and joyfully participate in the city agree that the decline of Portland and the dissolution of any social contract among citizens is bad and worsening. I post this obvious summation knowing that Portland’s impotent leadership read this blog and that they might crawl out of their bunkers, show some spine and take prompt, serious and concrete action to address Portland’s problems. With history as a guide, the best we can hope for is that a focus group will recommend a committee be formed to study the issues.
Sigh
Sorry, Granpa, but the reality of mentally unstable people taking over our MUPs and public spaces is a lot more depressing than a conversation about it.
Are you kidding? Most of the conversation here is some shade of how awful biking is in Portland. I’m pretty much the only person here who thinks riding bikes in Portland is great, and only getting better.
As for “showing spine”, we get what we ask for. The last time we had an election, we had a pretty clear choice for county leadership between an enabler (Vega Pederson) and a fixer (Meieran). We chose the enabler.
Will we make the same choice in the upcoming city elections (or the vacant District 1 county seat)?
Probably indicates that you’re reading the opinion or an activist or someone who is activist-adjacent. The narrative is that cyclists are at war with our fellow Portlanders and any attempt to compromise or find middle ground with those outside the echo chamber should be regarded as treason.
This mindset is steeped in doomerism that insists that everything is unfair, the believer is part of a terminally aggrieved group as marginalized as any other in human history, and the world’s ending anyway. Get someone to believe all of those premises and you can justify / inspire just about any toxic behavior.
It also results in much goalpost-moving: note the shift over time from advocating for bike lanes to claiming that the standard bike lane is an inadequate, dangerous, and downright insulting piece of infrastructure. You won’t earn many popularity points by pointing out how good we’ve got it.
Just here to say that I also think riding bikes in Portland is great. Just a hunch, but I’d wager the publisher thinks so too…
“Great” is such a relative term. Great compared to what? – great compared to the 1970s, when bike lanes didn’t exist? Yes, our current Portland bike infra is pretty great when compared to that.
But if it’s possible to hold two ideas in your brain at the same time (looking at you, Watts), you can admit that cycling is great but still be disappointed that our elected leaders can’t make it even better, so that all of those people currently driving cars would choose to bike instead.
If your metric is mass adoption of bikes (or even motorized bikes) as a primary mode of transportation, you’re never going to find an elected leader who can satisfy you.
For me, “great” means I can safely and quickly ride my bike pretty much anywhere I want to, except, ironically, the paths made exclusively for bikes.
False. I for one think the same. Just because people complain about what’s wrong doesn’t mean we think it’s all bad.
I always think this about the people who say they’re now too afraid to bike here or there. It’s hyperbolic. I think it’s performative. Biking is great here, but obviously I want the problems we do have to be fixed. I want safer routes to many places (looking at you, last few miles to Oxbow campground), but there are still many places that are fantastic already.
Just for the record, I think riding bikes in Portland is awesome and I love it and I think it’s always getting better!
But that doesn’t mean I won’t highlight shortcomings and point out other concerns and share criticisms when warranted.
I was confronted by a car travelling north on the Jantzen Beach path last week, while I was biking South – it was a tight squeeze. I have video if anyone is putting together a compendium. It shows the license plate number, but I would guess the car was stolen.
Hi Joe, I’m a reporter from The Oregonian — I’m working on a possible story about cars driving off-road into bike paths. If you’re up for talking a bit about your experience or sharing video, you can reach me at ttodd@oregonian.com
Hope to hear from you!
Tatum
What do people mean by this? Are they expecting bystanders to get involved with the perpetrator to try and calm them down or something? Seems like a job for incident response personnel who are trained to deal with such situations. I don’t blame people for getting out of harms way when something like this is happening, but I would like to understand more of what is implied by this statement.
I think it means that the observer expected people to vocally express more anger and surprise instead of the nonchalance they describe.
I don’t think it necessarily means that they expected folks to spring into action to subdue the driver and disable the car.
But might be wrong about that.
Infrastructure is not going to keep a guy with a machete out.
MUPs are not private campsites but that’s how they’re being treated, and that’s what politicians and activists are trying to normalize. We’ve been living with the collateral damage for years now: huge swaths of path that are no longer safe or welcoming.
We also need to realize that the vast majority of drivers on MUPs are doing so to access illegal camps. Enforce the camping ban effectively and 99% of the intrusion by automobiles goes away.
I just rode by and Portland Parks is fixing the fence this morning.
Coincidentally, there were also people at the derelict, Ross Island Sand and Gravel plant securing their fence to the north by the entrance to the path.
Reading these posts I think a distinction needs to be made between homeless campers and people with psychotic behavior. Over 20+ years I’ve seen it all on the 205 path.
I’ve had dogs come after me, I’ve had to dodge speeding cars and I’ve had a homeless camper block my way brandishing a knife.
I guess it’s lucky I’ve never been injured.
It would not take many resources to verify who’s living in our public spaces.
Violent offenders and people with acute violent mental problems really shouldn’t be out there.
I really miss seeing non-homeless users on the path. I almost never see families using these critical resources anymore and I really can’t blame them.
We used to have the BTA to represent the needs of cyclists on regional paths but I don’t see the Street Trust or Bike Loud wanting to make this an issue.
Totally agree with you here Cory P. I’ve been waiting for a leader to be able to communicate and follow through with a plan that makes it clear that different types of homeless folks would face different consequences and a response that differentiates among the various reasons folks are on the streets. Wheeler promised that once (to rid camps of the “worst offenders” and such) but never really followed through. It feels like we have only 2 sides: Don’t ever touch campers or put them all in jail. We need to fund more social workers to process these areas and get folks to the right place. Some of them can stay, others need to face consequences for illegal shit, others need mental/physical help, and so on. I realize this is complicated, but I don’t see any other option that’s working. OK, I’ll go back to my lane now.
“Some of them can stay”
Thank you for giving away our PUBLIC spaces. I am not sure you have the power to do that?
No one has the right to live in our public spaces. No one.
This isn’t hard, if you want to allow “some of them”, to camp on your Private property, feel free.
Portland and Multnomah County need to do a few things:
The problem is entirely out-of-hand! Local government needs to focus on protecting law abiding citizens along with property and business owners. Afterall, these people pay the taxes and create the communities that make Portland what it is. Should we help the homeless? Absolutely! Let’s do everything in our power to assist those that want our help and stop all of the handwringing and institutional paralysis caused by worrying about those that cannot or do not want to be served. In my opinion, that is where local government fails – letting 80% languish and suffer because they don’t know what to do about the 20% that cause the problems.
Yes. We need sanctioned camping areas and a no tolerance policy for camping outside those areas. It’s crazy to let a few hundred people make our public spaces unusable for the 1 million plus that live in the region.
No politician wants to make this ‘their’ issue. After talking with advocates, politicians, service providers and police for four years all I see is finger-pointing.
We can solve this. No other developed nation has this problem ( as far as I know )
I would love to go back to talking about skateboard transportation!
Keith Wilson has a good platform and he has been setting up shelters on his personal time.
Here’s a third: Get people into a shelter or housing or treatment facility rather than on the street or in jail.
It’s true that we don’t currently have enough space for everyone who needs it, but there’s a lot of money sitting around for this constellation of issues that is not being used, and there’s more room at places like Bybee Lakes.
And for those folks for whom this really is just an economic issue, get them back into housing immediately with a rent voucher and help them find a job if they need one so they’re not taking a bed from people with bigger problems.
In reality, most people support this third “side”, so I don’t know why you would suggest our only options are at the poles.
Hi, You are misinterpreting my comment.
I was saying I feel like the dominant voices are either “lock em up and sweep everyone!” or “sweeps kill”. I was not referring to a list of possible solutions to the problem. Obviously I’m well aware that getting people into shelter is the best outcome!
I don’t really hear many voices at either of those poles (maybe because I’m not on X). A couple on the sweep ’em all, more on “sweeps kill”, but most people want folks off the street, in shelter, and only want jail to be used as a last resort.
I think that’s a strong majoritarian position, both with the public and with politicians.
Deborah Kafoury (and Jessica Vega Pederson) fought tooth and nail against funding the Bybee Lakes shelter. For these types it’s all about ego and ideology rather than getting people off the cruel streets.
It’s also about funneling as much tax money as possible to the construction industry. Construction companies do make sizable campaign contributions.
And yet Bybee Lakes was funded, opened, and amounted to little more than a drop in the bucket.
It’s almost as if the vast majority of people living on the streets aren’t interested in recovery. Shocking, I know.
Those sound like all good ideas. If most people support this third option, it’s really weird how so many comments on every issue even tangentially related want cops and sweeps and lock them up with no mention of this third option. That’s what the pushback is. I vehemently disagree with the law and order, violent enforcement “side”. So when I see it, that’s what I’ll respond to. Then people make a caricature of that pushback as if the only alternative that I could possibly be in favor of is that I must love camping and want to marry it. In reality, nobody I’ve ever seen in these comments or anywhere else is actually in favor of unsanctioned camping on the streets. Nobody wants this.
Your terminology is ambiguous, and your scorekeeping is suspect.
I have said that if people camp where it is prohibited, and refuse to leave, they should be swept. Does that qualify as support for “violent enforcement”? Is there anyway to limit where people camp that isn’t “violent”?
My position statement didn’t mention treatment or shelter, so you could count that among your examples of “enforcement only”, but I also think treatment and shelter are essential components of any plan to get people off the streets.
It may be that when people respond to a comment, they don’t lay out their entire thinking of how to deal with a complex problem. Which is why I think most people actually believe in “the third way” despite what you might glean from posts that don’t fully explore a person’s views.
Absolutely, because the reality we live in today where we don’t have enough shelters for everyone who needs one means a sweep takes away someone’s shelter with no alternative.
We should at the very least be moving them to somewhere that is less offensive for them to camp. Like, if people are camping on a school playground, of course this shouldn’t be allowed (I don’t think it is). I don’t know, I guess it depends what the sweep is actually like. With the ones I’ve seen and read about, they mostly consist of kicking people out with what they can carry and throwing all the stuff that was there into the garbage.
The problem is people who call for sweeps really only talk about the sweep part. They don’t have to lay out a whole plan, but the conclusion that can be reached since it is never mentioned is that they don’t care what happens to the people after they’re swept. The pushback is simply to say there has to be a real alternative. Not that camping should be allowed everywhere all the time.
“the reality we live in today where we don’t have enough shelters for everyone who needs one means a sweep takes away someone’s shelter with no alternative.”
To the best of my knowledge, everyone who is swept is offered a shelter bed, so this situation should never come to pass. Besides, by law you have at least 72 hours after being notified to move before you can be swept, which means you can set up pretty much anywhere for at least 3 days, then move somewhere else and start the cycle anew.
If you can’t remove people, you can’t have places where camping is off limits. If you acknowledge that there are some places where camping is simply unacceptable, like the example you cited, you have to accept involuntary removal of intransigent campers. There is no middle ground.
Hi Watts,
The reasonableness of enforcement of camping bans depends a lot on the availability of legal places to camp, which doesn’t enter your argument. Camping bans are way different when the fraction of places where camping is banned is much less than 1 and approximately 1. If there were lots of low barrier options for people, I would be all for keeping the city tidy. It also wouldn’t be very difficult: even the most addled battle-axe wielding person will choose comfort over discomfort. What sweeps say to street people is that they don’t have any place in our society.
Or on the availability of shelter, which, I’m told, is offered to everyone who is swept. Shelter is imperfect, but it’s the available option, whereas setting up an encampment anywhere you want isn’t.
On a practical level, you can essentially camp anywhere if you move on after a couple of days, or keep a low profile (which many folks do — one example being the guy living in his car on the corner across from my house (in a very residential area) for over a year with no complaints from any of the neighbors).
I recently spoke with someone who has been working with the homeless population in Portland for over 25 years. He said that only 25-30% of the homeless population is actually capable being housed, holding down a job, etc. The vast majority (70-75%) have such serious addiction and mental-health issues that they are incapable of supporting themselves in society.
So when the homeless-industrial complex wants us to think that “It’s just a lack-of-housing issue,” they are clearly wrong. I’m so sorry that a cyclist at Gateway Green was the victim of such blinkered thinking.
The irony is that the perpetrator will likely get help, since he attacked someone. How many other seriously addled people are out there, who will never get treatment?
I missed the part where the ‘homeless-industrial complex’ told us “It’s just a lack-of-housing issue.” I think they are much more likely to say we need comprehensive wrap-around services (which, of course, they will be paid to provide).
I share your sorrow about the Gateway Green attack, and I wish the victim all the best in their recovery. I don’t think it’s helpful to scapegoat folks who are working on a very big social problem, even if you think they are not going about it correctly.
The County and City, the governmental agencies that support the homeless industrial complex with our tax money have for years said it’s all about lack of housing and have made their focus (until a small number of temp housing recently) completely about building houses and apartments.
So yes, we’ve been told that excuse for years to justify what the County/City are doing (and conversely not doing).
This is not a correct statement. There are multiple programs run by local governments that are not permanent housing (Portland street reponse and the homeless services center, which refers people to shelters are two such efforts). You may not be impressed with the efficacy of these programs, but they are not housing. This view also ignores the (evidence based) consensus that housing first approaches tend to be more successful. What I infer from your statements is that you are angry that a harder line is not being taken regarding ‘unsanctioned’ camping. That’s a reasonable (and common) position, but it’s not because anybody thinks the only problem the people that are camping have is no stable housing.
And yet – if we got those 25-30% into housing that would make the job of figuring out what to do for the rest of the folks a *LOT* easier.
It’s a big problem, you go after the low hanging fruit in those situations and reduce the size of the problem.
We just choose (as a society) not to do it.
Those 70% of people cited from a friend of a friend who heard it, need services *in addition to* housing.
But I’ll believe these made up numbers when we actually have enough housing. When we have enough housing for everyone who needs it, and people are still living on the streets, I’ll believe these numbers. But we don’t know because we don’t have it.
We could do felony warrant checks of all camps. Other cities do that but then people here scream it’s cruel to see if people in the camps are wanted felons or not…so we let them live in our community without consequences. And we wonder why people get attacked with machetes….
https://www.cerescourier.com/news/crime/homeless-camp-sweep-nets-arrest-on-felony-warrant/
Can cops go to an apartment complex and rummage around in every unit to find people with warrants? Can they just explore your basement and look for felons without cause?
These people aren’t in apartment buildings, though. They’re trespassing, littering and illegally camping, that’s more than enough to predicate a warrant check.
Mostly they’re not trespassing.
But either way, this is what people are talking about when they say we criminalize being homeless. There is not really a way for a homeless person who can’t find shelter (and they can’t, since we don’t have enough) to feasibly live somewhere without littering. And if that gives cops cause to do a warrant check (does it? Maybe), then they defacto don’t have protection from unlawful search and seizure like everyone else.
I’m sure this guy just needed housing. Think about all of the apartment dwellers he could have been attacking with his machete instead!
Mostly they are trespassing unless camping on private property with permission.
90% of camps are on ODOT property, Railroad owned property, Public right of way etc.including city parks like the Springwater.
You don’t seem to have any qualms that people living in tents may be abusing women, children,, who exactly knows?
This is a completely lawless activity unlike any public or private housing that mostly complies with societal norms or at least have some kind societal supervision.
Tent cities are a cruel and disgusting way of life for any involved.
You state numerous times here that shelters are full but in fact Portlands shelters are rarely over 80% capacity on any given night.
You also state numerous times that there is not enough housing when a simple Zillow or Craigslist search shows Hundreds of apartments for rent including many under $1000 a month.
The question being asked is if cops can just walk up to a group of homeless people and demand to see ID or whatever so they can do warrant checks. I don’t think that they can, not quite that simply. Try to stay on topic.
To answer your comment, I don’t think many people living in tents can afford 1000 a month with first/last months rent and a credit check. So you’re really wasting energy even typing that ludicrous suggestion.
And no. We absolutely do not have enough shelters to house our homeless population.
It’s really weird that millions of low income minimum wage working people are not all living on the streets.
How are they affording rent?
It must be a miracle.
I’m guessing it’s the minimum wage job and likely several roommates they have. Something that likely can’t be said for most of the homeless living on the street.
Of course people who are living on the streets can’t get a minimum wage job and roommates can they?
We need to change the law so it is legal I guess.
Your total condescension of those people is hilarious since the rest of your schtick is all about enabling them.
More making up strawmen, from the master of strawmen, BB.
If they “could” get roommates and a job, they would have those things. Obviously something is preventing them. Probably part of it is once you’re homeless, you lose access to a lot of things we take for granted, like a shower, a way to get to work, a way to store a change of clothes and wash them, a mailing address. And who are you going to make friends with to become roommates? You have buds ready to go in with you? Who’s going to do that? Once you’re there, it’s harder to get out.
There is no condescension or enabling. You’re making stuff up. You’re hiding behind trollish behavior and nonsense like this to pretend like you’re the only person who has correct ideas. You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about and you have zero credibility here. You are simply trolling, name calling, and contributing nothing but fluff and noise. Go. Away.
It’s legal. Why would you protect felons with active warrants living in our community? There is no right to privacy when residing in a public space.
https://www.wibw.com/2023/10/30/14-arrested-after-37-camps-visited-search-homeless-individuals-with-warrants/
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/homeless/portland-police-raid-homeless-camp-northeast-large-arrest-detained/283-02d0ff74-f8f3-4cc4-a0fc-4d5855cf6501
Well, maybe it’s legal. I don’t think cops can, for example, demand ID from someone just for being in public, so there is some right to privacy.
Nobody is trying to protect felons, but I am trying to stand up for the actual civil rights we’re all supposed to enjoy (not just those with a house to live in). And one of those is that cops can’t just do exploratory searches of your house to try and discover things. If you’re in public, much of that isn’t supposed to change. If I’m riding my bike along normally, a cop can’t come up on me and demand I show ID (papers, please). Just like they can’t go look through your car for no reason. They need an excuse, and they’ll come up with the flimsiest of excuses, but they need something. So that’s an answer at least partly, I think, to the suggestion by Angus “We could do felony warrant checks of all camps”. I don’t know that we could.
Plenty of “other places” do stuff that clearly skirts or totally breaks the law, that doesn’t mean we should. But the article Angus shared was of cops doing warrant checks during a sweep. Perhaps that is cause enough, because the sweep implies they have determined the people there are breaking the law or whatever. Although I think more likely, the cops were just “asking questions” and people incriminated themselves. So maybe they could do that here, I don’t know.
The Street Trust no longer represents cyclists or pedestrians, that much is clear.
Futhermore, IMO BikePortland has pivoted away from bike advocacy to largely unrelated social justice and environmental causes.
Feels a bit lonely out there, doesn’t it?
So sorry that this happened, and extra sorry that the victim’s kids had to witness it.
It’s been a decade or so since I last biked on the I-205 path. On that occasion, a man on a bike came at me and forced me off the path. Not sure if he was mentally unstable, on drugs, homeless, or something else. The city has allowed a lawless environment to take over in this area, making this path completely unsuitable for either commuting or recreational riding.
Too bad Maus has spent so much time defending the very same bad actors behind these incidents.
Unlikely that someone would do that with their own Forester they paid for with their own money.
Very likely that someone’s going to get their Forester back in totalled conditions filled with fentanyl foil, syringes and other druggie detritus.
I wouldn’t hold out much hope for the tape deck, though. Or the Creedence.
Simple solution: every time a motor vehicle is illegally driven onto the Springwater or a similar trail, close all streets within a square mile to vehicle traffic for the next month. I bet when all the other drivers who have done nothing wrong have to bear the burden of inconvenience, we might find our city more interested in real solutions to protect the bicyclists, skaters, runners, and pedestrians whose lives are being threatened. But as long as it’s ONLY our lives at stake, it seems the city will not do much to prevent these incidents.
Collective punishment for the win!
Get real. Do you encourage closing off all bike lanes similarly for a month each time a bicycle is caught illegally RIDING on sidewalk and weaving through pedestrian traffic?
All these anti-car relics are getting old.
Any time a motor vehicle is driven in a path, they need to conduct an extensive sweep of all camps in the immediate area and clear everything they find. More vehicles will be found.
Let’s debunk a few assumptions:
if you don’t feel safe somewhere, don’t go there. Go somewhere else. If the place you don’t feel safe in is your only way to get somewhere vital (like school, work or home), then call the police and City Hall and your Congressperson and scream like bloody hell until you get a real response.
Keep breathing. Be kind to each other.
I was out for my ride on the Springwater Trail yesterday afternoon. I came upon firefighters putting out a grass fire by the trail next to the Walmart between SW Pleasant View Dr and SW Highland Dr. About a quarter to half a mile further along there was a blazing fire in the bushes just on the east side of SE Jenne Road. The homeowner was trying futilely to put it out with a garden hose. Another fire crew arrived to deal with that one. Ever since a large homeless encampment that was almost completely blocking the trail opposite the second fire was forced to move by the Gresham Police about two weeks ago, there have been almost ten fires set beside the trail between SW Pleasant View and SE 136th. One of them near SE 158th covered about a quarter acre. There are also numerous burned-out spots between Foster and Johnson Creek Blvd, but I don’t know how recent they are. It’s not being reported anywhere in the local media and the danger of a fire getting out of control is pretty high right now due to how dry everything is.
Also, the police had part of the trail between SE Hogan Rd and SE Regner Rd blocked last Thursday due to a dead homeless guy sprawled across it.