Homelessness in Seattle, as most would agree, has reached a crisis level.

There are vari-

ous programs set up in an attempt to help individuals experiencing homelessness, or individuals

living in low-income housing; it is with this group of people that I have spent my internship this

quarter. Since July I have been working with the Urban Rest Stop (hereafter to be known as

URS), providing various services and encountering issues well outside our jurisdiction as an or-

ganization that continue to impact the work that we do. Incarceration of homeless individuals

causes problems that impact their lives in huge ways, from employment to their very status as a

homeless individual; but their incarceration often stems from an illegal action that, in any other

circumstances, would not be illegal. For the purpose of this paper I will be using the term inter-

action with illegality (a term I haveto the best of my knowledgecreated and am using for

this paper only) to refer to an action, interaction, or other event that casts a homeless individual

onto the spectrum of illegality. I use this definition because, as will be demonstrated later in the

paper, the criminalization of homelessness has created many illegal actions that turn homeless

individuals into criminals, when a non-homeless person may not be viewed as a criminal for

performing the same action. It is not the action, therefore, that is illegal, but the identity of the

individual as homeless that casts them into the land of the criminal. First, however, I will provide

a background into the organization with I have been privileged to serve with for the past five

months.

The URS is a local organization whose primary purpose is to provide a clean, safe and

welcoming facility where individuals and families experiencing homelessness can come and use

restrooms, laundry facilities and shower (Urban Rest Stop). Hygiene products are also pro-

vided for our patrons to take with them, such as deodorant, tooth brushes and tooth paste, femi-
nine hygiene products, and some basic first aid items. It also, as donations enable it to do so, dis-

tributes clothing. While working there, I as well as my fellow staff members also served as re-

source referrals for individuals who came in searching for a different program, such as Roots, the

needle exchange, and various other services being offered in the area. The URS is a program put

on by the Low Income Housing Institute (LIHI), which works locally in Seattle and:

develops, owns and operates housing for the benefit of low-income, homeless and formerly

homeless people in Washington State; advocates for just housing policies at the local and nation-

al levels; and administers a range of supportive service programs to assist those we serve in

maintaining stable housing and increasing their self-sufficiency

(Low Income Housing Institute)

In terms of where the URS fits into LIHIs organizational umbrella, it is a program designed to

help support self-sufficiency among its patrons by allowing them to have access to the basic hy-

giene items that they need in order to live. Our organization aims at serving any homeless or

low-income individual in the Seattle area; however, based on my observations from my time

there, while the age and gender of our patrons does vary greatly, the vast majority of our clients

were men between the ages of 30 and 50. Many of our clients (about 50% from my observations)

are also employed.

The URS works in unofficial collaboration with the organizations nearby. At the location

where I was working, we share a building space with Roots young adult shelter, and were next

door to a building that held a variety of different services, from thrift stores to meals, as well as

other more fun activities such as a talent show. While not officially affiliated with these pro-

grams, we still worked alongside the people who hosted them and referred our patrons to their
services, as they referred their clients to ours. We worked together to help provide our clients

with the most services that we could offer them. Additionally, the URS had an unofficial rule

seemingly akin to the Dont Ask, Dont Tell of the military (though not in the discriminatory

sense). While many of our patrons abused certain substances such as heroin, meth, and other

hard drugs, and many participated in less-than-legal activities (as was admitted to me by pa-

trons several times over the course of my working there), members of the police force (despite

knowing, of course, exactly where we were located) did not ever enter the space unless called to

do so by someone reporting a physical threat to their or someone elses safety. Nor were our pa-

trons less-than-legal activities ever reported to anyone within the criminal justice or another le-

gal system (for obvious confidentiality reasons; also, if our patrons felt threatened by coming to

use our services they would not then return to make use of our services). Thus, we operate slight-

ly similarly to Dont Ask, Dont Tell, in that we neither asked about nor reported on any illegal

activities that our patrons may have been participating in outside of our premises.

As my supervisor, Dan Lewis, noted on one of my first days working with him: people

always forget about this stuff (Lewis); he was referring to the hygiene products that we have

and pass out to our patrons. Donators will generally give clothes and food, but certain basic hy-

giene items are often forgotten in lieu of what is viewed as more important. While food and

clothing are, of course, important donations, a former supervisor of mine, Mary-Pauline Diaz,

once remarked to me that sharing basic hygiene products and allowing people to be clean, to

feel like a normal person taking a shower (Diaz), helps maintain some of their human digni-

ty (Diaz). It reminds them that they are not any less worthy of being clean than anyone else, and

reminds them that they are not left alone to sit in the mud. In addition to helping them maintain a
sense of basic human dignity, however, basic hygiene products serve a very real purpose. Many

of the patrons that I spoke to were in the process of seeking employment, if they were not al-

ready employed somewhere. In order to either find or maintain a job, it is important that they

maintain a certain level of personal hygiene, as employers dont want to hire someone who

stinks (John).

Despite the best intentions of those involved, sometimes the goals of the URS are not

met. One of our most popular and in-demand services is our laundry service, but (at least for the

time that I have served with them since this past July) it is unfortunately rarely offered to our pa-

trons due to the fact that our washing machines are almost always broken. Repair work takes

weeks at a minimum, sometimes over a month, and the machine consistently breaks within days

of having it returned to us. Even when a semi-new machine was delivered to us, it still broke

within days of its delivery. Thus, one service that our patrons demand and depend on is not of-

fered on a regular basis. While the URS also has locations in Ballard and in Downtown Seattle,

patrons are inconvenienced by the distance and often cant make it to the other locations with

enough time to sign up for their laundry slots, making it excessively difficult for them to take

advantage of the service, even at other locations.

In addition to the issues of broken equipment in the laundry facility, the URS faces other

problems within our specific location. Our water heater, while functional, does not always per-

form to the best of its capabilities, resulting in cold showers for patrons who come in to use our

shower services. This is unfair to them, and also, if we decide to turn off the shower because its

simply too old to be used, takes away an available shower from those waiting in line, increasing

the chance that we will have to close for the night without getting through everyone in line. Fur-
thermore, while most of our basic products (such as shampoo for the showers) are kept well-

stocked by our organization, sometimes we run low, not only on donated items, but on items that

we are supposed to be stocked with at all times. We have had to hand out skimpy amounts of

soap on multiple occasions because our soap supply simply had not been re-stocked. The thing

that most obviously prevents greater success of the URS (and less occasions of broken machines

and out of stock products) is funding. Our organization, while a decent amount of funding, can

always use more, but to receive that funding we would first need more public support. With the

stereotypes surrounding homelessness (that homeless individuals are lazy, inherently criminal,

and other such harmful false ideas), public support is minimal at best.

The URS also deals with other issues, if not directly, then at least indirect through our

patrons. Many of our clients, for one reason or another, have had an interaction with illegality

which has resulted in some negative consequences for them; generally speaking, many (not most,

but still a significant proportion) of our patrons have experienced incarceration for one reason or

another. Their incarceration, among other factors, contributes in turning them into long-term

clients, and reduces their ability to find self-sufficiency. (Regarding the names of those whom I

interviewed at the URS, I will be using the names that they gave me, which I know, in many cas-

es, are not their legal nor their full names. As these are the names they wanted to share with me,

these are the names I will be using when quoting them in this paper. Their legal names are stored

in organizational documentation when they first come in to sign up for services, but they are not

required to give their legal name at any subsequent visit, and I do not have access to that docu-

mentation.)
 There is an exceptionally high rate of incarceration among homeless individuals as com-

pared to the general population. Historically speaking, jails have always been de facto institu-

tions for homeless individuals (Metraux, 9-3). This trend continues today, with one article esti-

mating that anywhere between 25-50% of the homeless population has been incarcerated at some

point (Incarceration & Homelessness: A Revolving Door of Risk , 1). This statistic holds true

against my observations during my time at the URS; from general observations of conversations

between patrons to conversations that I have held with them myself, approximately a quarter to

half of the individuals frequenting our location have been incarcerated, most of them rather re-

cently. I frequently heard the phrase uttered, for example, by one young woman explaining why

her friend had not been to our location in several weeks: Oh, hes back in jail for a couple

weeks (Susan). I also held conversations with individuals who admitted to having recently been

released from jail; one man, for example, who gave his name as Sam Adams, admitted that he

had recently been released after his time in jail due to an assault charge (which he states was

merely a bar fight that got out of control [Adams, Sam]). Additionally, incarceration is likely,

for a large proportion of homeless individuals, to occur more than once. In Michigan, for exam-

ple, the recidivism rate for homeless individuals is estimated at 40% (Working to Reduce the

Recidivism of Homeless in Michigan). Many of the URS patrons remark casually about their

peers time in jail, some even betting on how long a particular individual can last on the outside

before they are incarcerated once again. This demonstrates the nonchalant attitude with which

many of the URS patrons regarded incarceration.

Unfortunately, incarceration for homeless individuals happens frequently for a number of

reasons, ranging from what I would describe as large-scale criminal incidents (assault and other
aggressive actions, which) to incidents that I would classify as rather trivial (loitering, sleeping in

a public place, and other such actions). However, the number of people incarcerated due to these

small scale interactions with illegality are entirely too high. The criminalization of homelessness

in on the rise, as is demonstrated in one study that found that approximately 30% of homeless

individuals had been arrested for sleeping in public places, 26% had been arrested for loitering,

and 25% had been arrested for sitting or lying down in public (No Safe Place, 17). I discovered

similar numbers of individuals at the URS who had been either ticketed or incarcerated for simi-

lar reasons. Many of our patrons told me in conversation that they had friends who had spent the

night in jail due to public loitering or sleeping. As one man put it, we cant do anything without

getting arrested (Esquire).

Even sleeping in their own car can often land an individual with a ticket that they cannot

afford to pay. In Paolo Alto, California, sleeping in ones car is punishable by a fine, or up to 6

months in jail (No Safe Place, 23). One man, John, told me that while he has never been tick-

eted specifically for sleeping in his van, he has faced many other problems associated with using

a car as a temporary form of housing (John). He states that he often get tickets for not moving it

for long periods of time, and is asked often by the police to move along and find another place

to park his van (John). Additionally, the price of gas is a problem (as was noted in No Safe

Place, 24). John also admits to issues paying for gas for his van, stating that that is why he does

not move it very often, and why he cannot afford to move it to different places around the city, or

even use it to get out of the city. Luckily for him, he says that the police he has encountered are

normally very understanding and try to give him as many chances as possible before giving him
a ticket on his parked car (John). However, not all police members are so compassionate, and the

consequences for others may be much more strict.

Receiving a ticket for not moving your car, violating the ban on sleeping in public, or for

any other interactions with illegality, places an additional burden on homeless individuals. As

John and others complained, they simply do not have the money to pay the ticket (John). Other

evidence shows this, as in the No Safe Place article where a woman, Sandy, says in an inter-

view that she once received a $400 ticket when she could not even afford $80 worth of other

things (20), such as food, clothes, and other necessities. Failing to pay tickets and citations will

only increase the fees showered upon them, putting them even further into a debt which they

cannot pay.

Such interactions with illegality have serious consequences, beyond merely being incar-

cerated. Many homeless individuals, having being incarcerated, find it difficult to get back on

their feet and find their self-sufficiency again to the point where they are stable enough to be able

to afford housing. As the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR) states, a prison record

greatly lowers ones chance of finding work (Barber). While this article comes at the issue most-

ly from the perspective of economic loss (claiming that prison record-holders, without their jobs,

cause billions of dollars worth of loss to the U.S. economy every year [Barber), the issue of

finding work remains the same. Many patrons at the URS complained of the same problem.

An article by Anna Blasco says: 74 percent of those surveyed who reported experiencing home-

lessness before their incarceration reported that stable housing would have prevented their incar-

ceration. Many of the clients that I spoke with at URS held similar opinions. While a large pro-

portion of the individuals that I spoke with had some sort of marketable skill (some were chefs,
some were mechanics, some could code, and others simply had the charisma that would make

them a natural businessman), those who had been incarcerated (especially for violent offenses)

faced severe difficulties in getting hired once they were released from the jail or prison system.

As Sam Adams complained, no-one wants to hire you if youve got a record (Adams).

Even if employers are willing to hire them, however, they often arent for well-paying

jobs. John noted that even if he was hired, it was often for a minimum-wage job doing some-

thing like washing dishes (John). While there is nothing inherently wrong in washing dishes,

such low pay for a job that lacks reward is not enough for an individual who needs to be able to

afford housing and food. This low pay mark also continues the cycle within which they are al-

ready trapped. Unable to make enough money, they cannot afford a house, apartment or other

housing alternative, forcing them to seek shelter in the streets, their car, or other relatively public

places. Once on the streets, the cycle is further perpetuated by the criminalization of their very

lives. They receive tickets and can even be arrested merely for attempting to sleep in public,

when they have nowhere else to go. This further criminalization of their identity makes it even

more difficult for them to live, and, trapped in a cycle, will likely eventually be incarcerated once

again (No Safe Place, 34). The following cartoon was drawn in order to demonstrate the terri-

ble cycle that is so difficult to escape.

!
!
!
!
!
 (Heil and Bloomberg)

While dealing with incarceration is not something that the URS does directly, incarcera-

tion of our clients has a huge impact on our organization; primarily in that as individuals are in-

carcerated and therefore less able to break out of the cycle shown above, they are also less able

to be self-sufficient due to the barriers placed around them when it comes to employment. Un-

able to find a job, they remain homeless or residents of low-income housing; and therefore re-

main patrons of the URS. While we enjoy getting to know our patrons, we always hope that a

patrons use of our services is a short one.

Interactions with illegality often, unfortunately, lead to the incarceration of homeless in-

dividuals due to the increasing criminalization of homelessness. As more and more people are

unable to break out of the cycle of recidivism, more strain is placed on organizations such as the

URS, which, try as they might, are not currently equipped to handle the number of people that

require their services. My own observations at the URS confirmed what I read in the articles pre-

sented within this paper; namely that incarceration, even for short periods of time, is, in reality, a
long-term consequence for members of the homeless community who are unduly burdened with

these punishments.

!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Works Cited

Adams, Sam. Personal Interview. 2 December 2016.

Barber, Alan. Growth of theEx-Offender Population in United States Is a Dramatic Drag on
Economy. Center for Economic and Policy Research, 2010. http://cepr.net/press-cen-
ter/press-releases//growth-of-ex-offender-population-in-united-states-is-a-dramatic-
drag-on-economy
Blasco, Anna. Incarceration and Homelessness. National Alliance to End Homelessness.
http://www.endhomelessness.org/blog/entry/incarceration-and-
homelessness#.WE1DJ2QrLfZ
Diaz, Mary-Pauline. Personal Interview. 12 May 2015.
Esquire, Don Pedro III. Personal Interview. 14 October 2016.
Heil, Zachary and Bloomberg, Thomas. Your local political cartoon. Coloradoan. http://
www.coloradoan.com/story/opinion/2015/09/27/sept-local-political-cartoon/
72767564/
Incarceration & Homelessness: A Revolving Door of Risk. National HCH Council. Volume 2,
Issue 2. November 2013. http://www.nhchc.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/info-
cus_incarceration_nov2013.pdf
John. Personal Interview. 30 September 2016.
Lewis, Dan. Personal Interview. 29 July 2016.
Low Income Housing Institute. https://lihi.org/about/
Metraux, Stephen; Roman, Caterina G.; Cho, Richard S. Incarceration and Homelessness.
2007 National Symposium on Homeless Research. https://www.huduser.gov/publica-
tions/pdf/p9.pdf
No Safe Place: The Criminalization of Homelessness in U.S. Cities. National Law center on
Homelessness & Poverty. https://www.nlchp.org/documents/No_Safe_Place
Working to Reduce the Recidivism of Homelessness in Michigan. Community Tool
Box. http://ctb.ku.edu/en/south-oakland-shelter-homelessness
Rojo. Personal Interview. 11 November 2016.
Urban Rest Stop. https://urbanreststop.org/
W., Susan. Personal Interview. 21 October 2016.