More misdirection from Police Chief Mills and Eureka seems to love it.

You got to give credit to Eureka’s Police Chief Andy Mills, he sure is a great politician!

Has Eureka fallen under his spell?

Buried in his latest blog screed are two important items you might miss wading through all the propaganda BS in that “weary” post.

First thing we notice was how Mills is conflating transient with homeless. He reports out crime stats among the homeless and transient populations as if they were one in the same. In fact the chronic homeless in Humboldt are the most likely victims of the Transient criminals.

He claims Seventy-two percent of the EPD’s arrests for “serious violent crimes” were committed by the transient population. Then Mills asserts nearly 90 percent of robbery arrests were committed against transient people.

There is certainly cross over between these two populations but they really are not the same. Many of Humboldt Counties’ homeless have lived here their whole life. The transient population is the very visible one on the rise, as they arrive here from all of the country. Many are attracted here by the legends they heard about our county. ie. Abundant drugs and all the weed you can “smoke, steal & deal”; plus little or no law enforcement!

Mills goes on to brag about his recently announced plan to “condense” Eureka’s homeless population into the Palco Marsh, saying “By “condensing” the population into a fairly large but controllable area it allows the police to treat it as a ‘hot spot.’ “So to minimize and reduce the problem EPD is directing the homeless to move to an area more accessible by police, fire and medics. This area is near the poll shed area along the bay. Many have cooperated but those who refuse will be cited and then arrested. Our analysis showed that people living there want isolation, concealment and freedom from theft and the police. The location was attractive because this area provided all of these traits. We are also strictly enforcing the law elsewhere in the city to prevent displacement.”

As you can see Chief Mills fails to understand he has misidentified his target; transients. Many of them stay in one of wide selection of slum lord “flop houses” and motels in Eureka. That’s their base of operations. Then they go out from there and burgle, shoplift and rob. This transient population generally has a very different makeup than the chronically homeless.

Mills goes on to claim “By condensing the population into a fairly large but controllable area it allows the police to treat it as a “hot spot.” Some research would suggest that as little as 20 minutes of treatment a few times a day will help to control and reduce crime and criminal opportunity in hot spots. EPD officers have been directed to as often as possible patrol the area where people camp and arrest those committing crimes. The outlying areas where people are camping illegally will receive maximum enforcement by officers specifically assigned to carry out this effort. Now the big trick…do this compassionately. After all, weary not in doing good.” This is a bastardized version what many common sense advocates have been calling for the last couple of decades. Designated camping areas with dumpsters, porta-potties, fire pits and water. Mills has to use the unfortunate military sounding “Hot Spot” (zone), but regular foot patrols though the camp is essential.

We think that it’s a good start to have identified a designated camping area. Obviously, the area will need some infrastructure in order to keep the area manage-ably clean, while providing some dignity for the campers. However, Mills is purposely misidentifying all people who live a “transient” lifestyle with the chronically homeless. This mis-identification is a way of demonizing the most vulnerable population in Eureka. For example, a 22 year old meth addict riding his bike through town and stealing from cars is arrested by EPD. When asked his address, he replies “I don’t have one”. The 22 year old is being honest, because he lives in a different hotel room most nights of the week, then stays with friends when he has drugs or is low on cash. The officer marks this person as “transient”. This bike riding “one person crime” spree isn’t chronically homeless, but Mills wants you to think that person is the same as someone who has been picking up cans and living in Cooper’s Gulch for the last 10 years. There’s a big difference between these populations, but in order to justify his war on poverty Mills is purposely misstating the facts about the homeless and transient populations of Eureka.


13 thoughts on “More misdirection from Police Chief Mills and Eureka seems to love it.

  1. What you are missing Mr. Anonymous is that the “chronically homeless” – the ones living “in Cooper Gulch the past ten years” NEED TO GO. They don’t want to be in society. They have proven it over and over. They may not commit crime as often as your example transient pop but they are usually felons or mentally unstable (like Mr. Bare Chest Man who wanders Eureka and asked me for money the other day; before he reached me he was waving his arms and generally acting erratic so I had to be ready to protect myself).
    The real issue is that libs and lefties AND the police refuse to do something permanent. There are no permanent solutions in postmodern, leftist, socialist Amerika. Only victims and the weak and helpless and poor baby addicts.
    It’s time we stop coddling those who REFUSE help, REFUSE to clean up (in more ways than one) and pose a direct threat to the rest of us (see my experience above).
    Putting them in camps doesn’t work. It certainly isn’t a final solution (pun intended).


    • Johannes Mystik no one here is saying cooper gulch is the place for a homeless camp. “in postmodern, leftist, socialist Amerika”……if that were true they would probably have a house

      Liked by 3 people

    • JM says-“What you are missing Mr. Anonymous is that the “chronically homeless” – the ones living “in Cooper Gulch the past ten years” NEED TO GO.”

      I also think the chronically homeless NEED TO GO…….into stable housing.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Welcome to our igloo Mr. Mystik. I’ve been watching your progress for a while now.

      Go WHERE?

      Go out of town?

      Go out of the county?

      Go out of the State?

      Go to Hell?

      You don’t seem to care how people get to be a burden on society… you just want them gone. No coddling the dead weight for you like the liberals want. No Sir.

      Some day if the gods are willing you Mr. Mystik will become old and frail. What are we to do with YOU then?

      Because then you will be become one of those burdensome folks who will be taking up more resources then you are providing.

      Too bad by then Climate Change won’t allow the kind of society you worship to put your hinder on an ice flow and send you out to sea to feed the polar bears.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. You throw around the term “chronic” when it favors your story line. Why not explain the federal definition of the term “chronic” as it pertains to the homeless? Kinda like just makin shit up.


    • “HUD has defined chronichomelessness as an individual or family with a disabling condition who has been continuously homeless for a year or more or has had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years.”

      And your point is?????

      Liked by 2 people

    • HUD:
      Chronic Homelessness
      It is critically important that communities ensure that their outreach and engagement efforts are reaching people who are experiencing chronic homelessness. The definition of “chronically homeless” is contained within the Continuum of Care Program Interim Rule at 24 CFR 578.3, which states that a chronically homeless person is:
      1. An individual who:
      Is homeless and lives in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter;
      Has been homeless and living or residing in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter continuously for at least one year or on at least four separate occasions in the last three years;
      Can be diagnosed with one or more of the following conditions: substance use disorder, serious mental illness, developmental disability (as defined in section 102 of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002)), post-traumatic stress disorder, cognitive impairments resulting from brain injury, or chronic physical illness or disability;
      2. An individual who has been residing in an institutional care facility, including a jail, substance abuse or mental health treatment facility, hospital, or other similar facility, for fewer than 90 days and met all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition [as described in Section I.D.2.(a) of this Notice], before entering that facility; or
      3. A family with an adult head of household (or if there is no adult in the family, a minor head of household) who meets all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition [as described in Section I.D.2.(a) of this Notice, including a family whose composition has fluctuated while the head of household has been homeless.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Chief Mills has blogged again.

    The basic theme concerns style of enforcement that actually sounds sensible to me. However… previous attempts at “swift, certain and fair” have been anything but.

    I wrote the following in Chief Mills blog comment section:

    Well… Okay but you’ve told the homeless of all kinds of consequences in the past year only to back off (the “You got two weeks to git or else” threat made earlier this year comes to mind).

    The EPD has been anything but consistent… causing stress among the homeless you profess to help and frustration for the community at large.

    I honestly don’t believe you give adequate thought before actions. You threaten or promise only to find after making a big public splash that what you want to do is either not practical or not in your power to do in the first place.

    A look at the recent history of EPD homeless enforcement shows your policy has been anything but “clear.”


    Why am I repeating all this here you may be asking? Because I’m not repeating it. It’s still waiting for “moderation” (passing three hours now).

    The last comment I wrote on his blog is still waiting on “moderation” for the past four or five months.

    In fact, I can’t recall his ever having any reader’s response printed in his blog’s comment section. I can’t be the only one to have had something to say about what he writes… assuming he writes this stuff at all (he has plenty of people to do that for him if he wants).

    Why does Chief Mills even bother with a comment section? Isn’t that just a little bit disingenuous? I mean, trying to come off like he cares about what people think about himself and his department, then ignoring what the people then have to say.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s