Judge blocks removal of Oakland tent camp, stalling solutions

California has long faced a homelessness epidemic nightmare, with plentiful encampments putting lives at risk in and outside of SJ; yet a federal judge has just prohibited Newsom’s planned removal of Oakland’s “tent city,” suggesting an anterior need for a resettlement plan. Debra J. Saunders analyzes in the American Spectator why enforcing existing homeless encampment laws will cultivate safer communities.

There were 195 fires in homeless encampments in Oakland, California, over two years that ended in March. In April, someone died in a fire sparked by the toxic-stew squalor in the area known as Wood Street.

There are frequent fires under freeways, where an interchange near the Bay Bridge once had to be closed for more than four hours because of a two-alarm blaze. There are two high-purity oxygen plants 215 feet from the combustible encampments.

Yet a federal judge prohibited California Gov. Gavin Newsom from removing the tent city until a “comprehensive resettlement plan” is in place….

Even without a catastrophic event, the encampments generate hazardous waste and dirty storm-water runoff and prevent Caltrans workers from inspecting Interstate 880, Caltrans has argued.

Inhabitants tap into Caltrans electrical boxes for power. Propane tanks used in the encampments have exploded. Anything can go wrong, and often does.

“When does common sense kick in?” Marbut asked. “Whether it’s the safety of the individual, safety of the environment, safety of the community,” there ought to be legitimate reasons why state or local officials can remove encampments that endanger public safety.

This article originally appeared in the American Spectator. Read the whole thing here.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity