Has U.S. Supreme Court ruling criminalized homelessness? Advocates fear it will make their work harder.

Carrie Poser learned last week of a man experiencing homelessness in Eau Claire who had been ticketed 12 times over the course of a month.

His charges? Sleeping, sitting and existing in public.

"Those tickets are $150 to $200 each. Did it make the guy less homeless?" Poser said. "My struggle here is, I know what they're trying to accomplish, but fining them isn't going to fix it."

Poser, the director of the Wisconsin Balance of State Continuum of Care, oversees the housing and homelessness agencies of 69 counties, including Eau Claire. Stories like these are not uncommon in her line of work.

Poser and others who work with the homeless population across Wisconsin are still absorbing the June 28 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Grants Pass, Oregon vs. Johnson case. The Ninth Circuit had determined that Grants Pass's ban on people sleeping in public was effectively targeting homeless people and was, therefore, cruel and unusual punishment, a violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Supreme Court reversed the decision, upholding the ban and, in the minds of people like Poser, criminalizing homelessness.

Advocates across the country say it's the most significant decision impacting homelessness in more than 40 years.

"My initial reaction was 'This is going to make things so much harder,'" Poser said.

What was Grants Pass vs. Johnson?: Sleeping on public property can be a crime if you're homeless, Supreme Court says

Wisconsin is made up of four housing and homeless coalitions, often referred to as continuums of care, in Milwaukee County, Dane County, Racine County and, Poser's jurisdiction, the Balance of State, which comprises the remaining 69 counties.

These coalitions subscribe to the evidence-based ideology Housing First, which says that the first step in rehabilitating people experiencing homelessness is to prioritize housing. Without this crucial first step, other treatment interventions fall apart, the philosophy says.

"Criminalizing people is not the answer to ending homelessness," Poser said. "Saying yes to things like Housing First and yes to finding permanent housing solutions is the answer to ending homelessness."

Michael Basford, director of the Wisconsin Interagency Council on Homelessness, slammed the Supreme Court's decision, writing in a public statement that its opinion "has opened the door for more criminalization of homelessness, which will only make it harder to address systemic cycles that perpetuate housing insecurity, ensure people have access to basic services, and get help to people who need it. "

How does this impact Wisconsin?

Before he was a deputy administrator of Milwaukee County Housing Services, Eric Collins-Dyke conducted street outreach in Milwaukee on a daily basis for nearly eight years. He knew where to find clients and, over time, he was able to help give people living outside the tools they needed to find housing and stability.

Establishing trust and rapport, Collins-Dyke said, is foundational.

Related: Wisconsin's homeless rate edges upward, after nearly a decade of a downward trend

"They trusted the outreach team to walk them through the housing process," Collins-Dyke said. "What our outreach community tries to do is really, really stay with them through the process."

But trust deteriorates quickly if some people are offering housing options and other people are citing them with tickets. People experiencing unsheltered homelessness will be more likely to disperse and hide, Collins-Dyke said.

He worries that decisions like Grants Pass may further perpetuate the misconception that people experiencing homelessness don't want relief from their circumstances. Collins-Dyke hears it all the time from the general public.

"There's this idea that, because people aren't moving toward housing, people don't want housing," Collins-Dyke said. "We always try to push back against that misconception. They categorically do want housing. They all want housing. They want a safe space, they want stability, just like you and me."

Last year, the Republican-controlled Wisconsin Assembly passed a measure that would have sanctioned encampments for people experiencing homelessness. It's a trend being promoted by the Cicero Institute that says states should direct funds away from Housing First initiatives and toward "short-term, policed encampments."

People experiencing homelessness would be moved to a camp on a public land, offered mental health services and substance use evaluations under such recommendations. In public hearings, Wisconsin's housing and homeless coalitions condemned the measure, arguing that it risks further criminalizing people experiencing homelessness and thrusts even more barriers to housing on this vulnerable population.

Although it died in the Senate, both Collins-Dyke and Poser worry that bills like this will become more frequent in the wake of Grants Pass. The precedent it sets, Poser said, is that it's better to arrest than invest.

"I'm fearful that that is going to be the answer that folks are going to grab onto once the dust settles with the (Wisconsin) Senate and Assembly," Poser said. "All of this chaos is going to happen, where local municipalities are going to start making decisions about people being outside. There's going to be this fuel to that fire. That's my biggest concern."

Housing First offers a stronger path forward, but struggles with funding, advocates say

Milwaukee County has come a long way, Collins-Dyke said, from the "antiquated policies and perceptions" in addressing homelessness. Much of that progress was the result of the city adopting its Housing First model in 2015. To continue progress, Collins-Dyke said, the state should look into funding Housing First initiatives instead of putting funding into criminalizing homelessness.

"The general concern from my standpoint is that, instead of putting adequate and increased funding into Housing First, they would put it into the criminalization of homelessness, because enforcement and all that costs money right," Collins-Dyke said. "They're putting money towards something that is not a solution and is also criminalizing someone for an experience that, most of the time, is out of their control."

Emily Kenney, chair of the Wisconsin Housing First Coalition, used to do street outreach and case management in Milwaukee and remembers the positive shift following the rollout of Housing First. People who had endured chronic housing found themselves in stable housing for the first time, which allowed them to take advantage of treatment services, which are also part of the Housing First model.

As often as she can, Kenney underscores the fact that Housing First isn't housing only. It isn't about just setting someone up with an apartment and walking away. It's about working with individuals to help them become more stable and independent, but it begins with taking people out of everyday survival mode.

"It works because we're not trying to expect human behavior to change in a way that it can't when we don't have that stability," Kenney said. "If the core, common issue is not having housing, we're focusing on really fixing that core root cause of homelessness. It's putting those two pieces together."

Of course, housing is an investment, Kenney said, but it's far cheaper — and reparative — than alternatives. According to a government report submitted by Wisconsin Housing First Coalition in 2018, chronic homelessness costs taxpayers anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000, the result of unnecessary hospital emergency room visits and inpatient utilization, detox programs and other behavioral health treatments, the justice system, and shelter use.

The problem, which Housing First mitigates, is that individuals and families cycle in and out of the system without ever finding stability.

By contrast, Kenney and Collins-Dyke said housing costs anywhere from $13,000 to $15,000 per year per person. It sets people up for success and it saves millions in taxpayer dollars, according to the government report. Since 2015, Housing First has reduced Medicaid costs to the state by $2.1 million, reduced mental health costs to Milwaukee County by $715,000 and reduced costs to the legal system by $600,000.

"People's happiness, their willingness to engage and consider what's next in life, immediately following housing, it's a complete 180," Kenney said.

The Housing First model also reduces recidivism. After Milwaukee County implemented Housing First programming, the county saw an 82% decrease in municipal violations, according to the 2019 National Homelessness Law Center report "Housing Not Handcuffs."

Right now, Wisconsin Housing First Coalition spends tens of millions of dollars per year on initiatives to prioritize housing, Kenney said, but it doesn't come close to the dollar amount the state would need to provide housing to Wisconsin's homeless population.

"If the state invested $45 million annually, combined with the funds that we already get from the federal government, we could end homelessness for about 5,000 people, which is about the number of people in Wisconsin who are homeless on any given night," Kenney said.

Basford, from the Wisconsin Interagency Council on Homelessness, said the problems in the state remain, no matter the Grants Pass decision. There are too few housing units that are available and affordable for the most vulnerable human beings, he said.

"I continue to hope that there will be bipartisan support next session for robust investments in the solutions to homelessness," Basford said. "For too many, time is running out."

Natalie Eilbert covers mental health issues for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. She welcomes story tips and feedback. You can reach her at [email protected] or view her Twitter profile at @natalie_eilbert.

This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: U.S. Supreme Court decision on homelessness worries outreach community