San Jose officials on Saturday announced plans for an encampment ban covering a half-mile stretch of downtown’s Guadalupe River, a first-of-its-kind policy that represents the latest push by city leaders to further clamp down on unmanaged homeless sites.
The city used $2 million in state funding last fall to clear roughly 200 people with tents and RVs that cropped up along the river in recent years and transfer its unhoused residents to interim and permanent housing sites — and officials say they don’t want the money to go to waste with people repopulating the area. Homeless advocates blasted the proposal as “cruel,” but some local residents celebrated the move, saying they’ve been unable to use the public trail because of trash or tents blocking the path.
“This is a public trail here along the river that should be accessible to everyone,” Mayor Matt Mahan said at a news conference on Saturday, joined by Councilmembers Omar Torres and Dev Davis. “But people simply didn’t feel safe. It was completely blocked by trash, I even came down here and saw chickens running around.”
The new ordinance would impact the riverfront from Woz Way to Julian Street along Highway 87, an area that includes both Adobe and Zoom’s headquarters with overpasses crisscrossing throughout the waterways. The council’s rules committee will take up the proposal on Jan. 24.
This week’s proposal would be the first time the city considers an outright ban along a specific slice of its waterways — and officials signaled that the policy could become larger in scope at other river sections if it works.
“Creating no-return zones starts here at the Guadalupe River trail,” said Councilmember Davis. “Eventually, I hope it will spread everywhere across the city. We want to eradicate encampments and find places for people to live safely.”
If the ordinance passes, San Jose would become part of a large list of cities that have limited where encampments can be. Oakland, Santa Cruz and Milpitas, and cities outside the Bay Area, including Los Angeles and Sacramento have all passed prohibitions as public opinion about how much power local government should have over homelessness appears to be swinging towards support of stricter rules.
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided to take up a case that could have major consequences for how cities like San Jose can respond to homelessness. The high court will review a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that has mostly barred cities from clearing encampments if they can’t offer individuals shelter.
The latest move is an indication that Mayor Mahan is moving full speed ahead on his stricter stance towards encampments, which has become a key part of his strategy for combatting homelessness along with trying to build up the city’s interim housing stock. It isn’t the only restriction being considered — this month the City Council will also consider a rule prohibiting RVs from parking near schools, a prohibition that previously included encampments but has since been struck from the proposal.
All the while, the mayor and the City Council are pushing for more housing options that offer what they consider a stepping stone towards permanent housing, including tiny-home-style shelters, hotel rooms and safe-parking sites for RVs and other vehicles.
The mayor expressed concerns in December that the effort wasn’t moving fast enough after the city’s housing goal had to be pushed ahead six months in 2023. To meet the benchmark it needs to add roughly 500 more units by the end of June. The wait time for new placement has also risen to about 400 people, according to estimates from the city late last year, pushing Mahan to now consider sanctioned encampments as San Jose’s lowest barrier form of shelter.
The city has cleared encampments along its rivers in the past: Last year, a portion of Coyote Creek was swept for a construction project that aims to prevent flooding in the area, impacting about 200 people. That action, however, was in response to the project’s federal guidelines.
On Saturday, San Jose’s new proposal saw pushback from some of the region’s homelessness advocates.
Tristia Bauman, an attorney for the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, called the effort “cruel and futile.”
In a statement, she wrote, “People are living in encampments because they don’t have better options. People need safe, stable, and dignified places to live, and relentless pursuit of that solution will end encampments. We waste time, money, and opportunity on bans of poor people from public space. That has never and will never work to end homelessness. It only hurts.”
But local resident Loureen Murphy said the new rule is necessary to preserve the city’s trail. She used to walk along the trail with her dog regularly, but in the last several years was discouraged by friends who worried for her safety.
“I was super happy to hear about this renewal effort,” said Murphy, who also serves as the president of the Guadalupe Washington Neighborhood Association. “I’ve heard rumors that salmon have returned to our waterways. Renewal of our natural resources, the great gift nature gave our area. And renewal of this wonderful trail that our city invested so much in and had gone into such a terrible state.”