Denver voters will decide in May whether to overturn the city’s “camping ban” and allow people to legally use blankets, tents and other survival gear in public spaces. The effort is known as Initiative 300, or the Right to Survive campaign.
An opposition group, calling itself “Together Denver,” has raised nearly $600,000 against the change, according to new campaign finance reports. In just three months, it has become one of the most expensive political campaigns in the city’s history — and it also received ideological reinforcement this week from the city’s largest charities and nonprofits.
Backers of the opposition include the Downtown Denver Partnership, which has given $100,000. Together Denver also has reported $75,000 from the Associated General Contractors of Colorado, $50,000 from the business group Colorado Concern and numerous large donations from the city’s inner circles.
That money is paying for consultants and for promotional material, including a website with photographs of shopping carts heaped with clothing, tents in parks and men sitting alongside sidewalks. Together Denver warns that “all of Denver would be impacted,” and that people would be allowed to camp indefinitely in all public spaces if I-300 passes.
“Allowing people to sleep outside in public places is not safe, healthy or helpful for the people experiencing homelessness or our community,” the group argues, calling instead for more services and housing.
Some of the city’s largest service providers are criticizing the scale and tone of the opposition, but they ultimately warn of unintended consequences from the Right to Survive initiative.
The camping ban was created in 2012, one of the first major laws under Mayor Michael Hancock. Officers reported about 2,700 “street checks,” or contacts, for unauthorized camping in 2018. Only one person was cited for violating the camping ban that year.
Supporters of Right to Survive question the opposition’s motives, saying that those who control the city’s real estate have aggravated the housing crisis. They argue that Initiative 300 would allow people who aren’t served by the shelter system to sleep in safer areas with better lighting.
“It’s business owners, property owners,” said Terese Howard, a leader of the Right to Survive group. “Those with land and private property are trying to say … ‘We want to control the public space, after we’ve gentrified them out of these communities, after we’ve priced them out of the apartment buildings that we own, and paid them minimum wages.’ ”
Her group has reported about $54,000 in fundraising, along with endorsements from the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, the National Coalition for the Homeless and the local nonprofit Bayaud Enterprises, among others.
Service providers opposed
The question has been murkier for some of the largest nonprofits in the area. The Colorado Coalition for the Homeless issued a long statement Wednesday that criticized the camping ban but stayed neutral on Initiative 300.
The group decried the “criminalization of homelessness” and said the “current system has failed to provide safe and appropriate alternatives to living on the street.”
“We absolutely are opposed to the camping ban and think that it was the wrong direction at the time and think it’s the wrong direction now. We really do think the City Council and the mayor’s office should really look at that law and other laws that criminalize homelessness, because they’re not productive,” said spokesperson Cathy Alderman.
But the group isn’t endorsing the Right to Survive, instead warning of “unintended consequences.” Alderman said those concerns are “about the balance of everyone’s right to use public spaces, and we don’t think that it’s appropriate to say that people should just be left out to survive.”
CCH also laid out suggestions for $50 million a year in funding for homeless services, among other changes.
The leadership of other major service providers have also joined the debate.
In a joint statement as the Homeless Leadership Council, they said they were “disappointed that this costly campaign means that financial resources are being diverted from services, and further stigmatizing people experiencing homelessness.”
They also asked that unspecified I-300 opponents halt “campaigns that demonize and disrespect” people.
But the group ultimately didn’t endorse the Right to Survive. They too warned of “possible unintended consequences,” saying the initiative could “lower the prevailing standard of human welfare” in the city.
The group included the local leaders of Catholic Charities of Denver, Colorado Coalition for the Homeless, The Delores Project, Denver Rescue Mission, The Gathering Place, St. Francis Center, The Salvation Army, Urban Peak and Volunteers of America.
Effect on curfews?
Supporters say I-300 is important because not everyone can use shelters. Some fear unsanitary conditions or violence in the warehouse-type environments, for example, while others don’t want to be separated from a pet or a partner.
The ordinance still leaves room for curfews and other laws that limit use of public space, they claim.
“Parks curfews will still be in place,” Howard said. The proposed ordinance says that people can rest in a “non-obstructive manner” in spaces that are “accessible to the public.”
Together Denver argues that the initiative’s broad language doesn’t allow for those subtleties. It bans the city from enforcing laws or policies that limit people’s right to shelter in those publicly accessible spaces, along with the right to share food in public spaces and sleep in automobiles.
An analysis by city staff also warns that I-300 could affect the city’s health regulations, park permits and rules about showing identification.
“If the measure passes, it will be the first of its kind,” the unsigned city memo states. “It explicitly overrides existing laws and makes it a crime for law enforcement agencies or other entities to violate the rights established by the measure.”
If the law is approved, council could modify it after six months with a two-thirds vote.
“This is not a big scary future, but this is basic human rights that every person deserves,” Howard said. “We have to stop this discriminatory treatment of people who are homeless like trash.”
Reached for comment, the Together Denver campaign defended its approach.
“Of course Together Denver has not had anything to do with setting or enforcing City policy. We are working hard to run a thoughtful, compassionate and honest campaign to talk with Denver voters about the risks of encampments and the flaws of this policy,” wrote spokesperson Alvina Vasquez in an email.
Election Day is May 7.
The ballot language:
Shall the voters of the City and County of Denver adopt a measure that secures and enforces basic rights for all people within the jurisdiction of the City and County of Denver, including the right to rest and shelter oneself from the elements in a non-obstructive manner in outdoor public spaces; to eat, share accept or give free food in any public space where food is not prohibited; to occupy one’s own legally parked motor vehicle, or occupy a legally parked motor vehicle belonging to another, with the owner’s permission; and to have a right and expectation of privacy and safety of or in one’s person and property?
