According to the estimates from the City Council, 200 people in Charlottesville experience homelessness annually. While these estimates often underreport the extent of the unhoused population, the more immediately concerning statistical disparity relates to the number of shelters in Charlottesville. Of four active shelters, the largest shelter provides only 55 beds, and these beds are limited to unhoused individuals screened by a variety of high-barrier assessments. This means that, in the coldest months of the year, there is a dire shortage of available shelter beds for the unhoused population.
In order to solve this deficiency, Charlottesville City Council has proposed the establishment of a low-barrier shelter. This shelter, located in Fifeville, would support over 100 unhoused people. Low-barrier shelters, in contrast with shelters which screen guests, do not require drug tests, identification or other barriers commonplace in Charlottesville’s other shelters. There is already one such low-barrier shelter in Charlottesville, People and Congregations Engaged in Ministry. However, PACEM is only open in the winter months, rendering its usefulness limited. In order to fully address the demand for shelters, Charlottesville must establish this low-barrier shelter, thus demonstrating an admirable and vital commitment to shelter as a human right.
While the high-barrier shelters which currently exist in the City are certainly necessary, their regulations mean that they are only able to provide shelter to a fraction of the unhoused community. Screenings for high-barrier shelters include furnishing proof of employment, a clear drug history or a government ID, depending upon the shelter. These are all requirements which neglect the basic reality of homelessness — many people who experience homelessness are not able to be accepted into high-barrier shelters. One-third of the unhoused population is addicted to drugs, and 54 percent have been incarcerated at one point — barring them from high-barrier shelters. To be clear, these statistics are not and should never be construed as a reason to dehumanize or criminalize the unhoused population. Moreover, these factors certainly should not disqualify any person from being able to safely find shelter. And yet, the reality of high-barrier shelters is that these factors are disqualifying even in months when remaining outside can be life threatening.
Critics of investment into low-barrier shelters will point out that it seems like a dangerous idea to provide relatively unconditional housing to those with compromising backgrounds. These people would say that the safety of those who simply could not find a bed in a high-barrier shelter is threatened by those who were turned away from high-barrier shelters. At this point, it should be noted that this idea of the unhoused population being dangerous results from a concerted political campaign which has consistently criminalized and othered unhoused people. Espousing rhetoric that low-barrier shelters are simply venues of crime and addiction engenders hateful, untruthful rhetoric which dehumanizes those who lack housing.
Nevertheless, safety should be the number one priority for any project funded by taxpayer dollars. However, low-barrier shelters should not be conflated with no-barrier shelters. Rather, in low-barrier shelters, rules do not ban entry but do govern guests’ behavior on the premises. In this way, the safety of guests and surrounding communities is realized in rules which may include bans on weapons and drugs on the premises. Moreover, any sort of shelter reduces crime and drug use in the long run, helping to move people away from the struggles of homelessness. In short, investing in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the unhoused community, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
In the past, Charlottesville has undertaken various initiatives to support unhoused individuals. Its prioritization of housing first programs, for example, provided over 60 units of affordable housing to those seeking shelter and stability. The University, as a major player in Charlottesville, has also worked to support underserved populations including the unhoused community. For example, U.Va. Health recently launched a mobile care unit to solve health inequities, and the University also runs a program which provides opioid-use disorder care in concert with The Haven, a day shelter on the Downtown Mall.
In this way, the University has demonstrated that they are able to work closely with Charlottesville to address the root causes and health implications of homelessness. The University should extend these efforts to support the development of the low-barrier shelter. As a source of vast funding, the University could easily help Charlottesville expand its low-barrier shelter system. But beyond those efforts, the University must continue to actively confront its role in developing the exact shortage of affordable shelter that has exacerbated these divisions.
Winter renders homelessness visible in a way that it rarely is to those who do not care to look. As such, this is a moment for us, as a community, to reflect on the constructed nature of high-barrier shelter rules, and to realize that these rules inhibit human beings from having a roof over their heads. To address this humanitarian violation, the proposed low-barrier shelter must be established to better support Charlottesville’s unhoused population. Housing is essential for survival, and we should start treating it like a basic human right.
The Cavalier Daily Editorial Board is composed of the Executive Editor, the Editor-in-Chief, the two Opinion Editors, the two Senior Associates and an Opinion Columnist. The board can be reached at eb@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
Student Council hears from University Student Legal Services Attorney
By Lauren Seeliger | 22 hours agoStudent Council also discussed the Spring Activities Fair taking place in the Newcomb Hall Ballroom Jan. 27 from 5 - 8 p.m.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 2 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
STUMP: Housing and Residence Life is deaf to students’ need for paper towels
By Ezgi Stump | 2 days agoThe decisions of HRL neither reflect the preferences of residents nor appear to be made of sound reasoning.
