Description
At least two white males living in the woods behind a fenced area on the east side of Ascot.
also asked...
Q. Where is the homeless encampment in relation to the address given? EX:Behind the building, up the embankment, etc.
A. on the east side of Ascot- behind a fence with a gate opening
A. on the east side of Ascot- behind a fence with a gate opening
Q. How many individuals are living in the encampment?
A. 2?
A. 2?
Q. How many vehicles/RVs/tents/structures are at the encampment?
A. multiple tents
A. multiple tents
Q. If RV, is the RV leaking (black water) or is body waste present?
A. Unknown
A. Unknown
Q. Is there evidence of open fires?
A. Unknown
A. Unknown
Q. What other City departments have been notified? EX: OPD, OFD, DOT, Oak311, Public Works, etc.
A. Oak311
A. Oak311
Q. What is the report/complaint, as it relates to homelessness? EX:Parking violations, traffic violations, etc.
A. sanitary and fire concerns
A. sanitary and fire concerns
7 Comments
Acknowledged City of Oakland (Verified Official)
LinB (Registered User)
The illegal campsite is in a protected watershed - Sausal Creek. There are risks of pollution from garbage & human waste AND wildfire from the campsite, endangering residential neighborhoods uphill.
Oakland 311 (Verified Official)
Thank you for contacting OAK311 regarding this matter. However, for issues related to Caltrans infrastructure or a Caltrans property, please reach out to Caltrans using one of the following ways:
1. By completing and submitting a Customer Service Request, using the following URL: https://csr.dot.ca.gov/ – There is also a mobile app available at the app and play stores.
2. Emailing: Caltrans_D4@dot.ca.gov
3. By calling: 510 286-6173
Thank you.
Starchild (Registered User)
Just complaining about homeless people being camped at a particular location is not particularly constructive, to say nothing of compassionate.
Being in a watershed does not *automatically* cause pollution, garbage, or fire risks. It depends what people are doing there. Let's not criminalize people just for existing.
Aiding and abeting the criminalization of poverty, making the lives of people who are already struggling to get by even more stressful and difficult, just contributes to more anti-social attitudes and feelings of alienation from society among those experiencing homelessness, while undermining harmony and civil liberties in the community as a whole.
Let's repeal zoning laws, land use restrictions, and other bureaucratic obstacles to the creation of more housing. If these barriers hadn't been in place for decades, we wouldn't have the rampant homelessness that exists now.
G-Dog (Registered User)
Fight the good fight-
Starchild (Registered User)
Well, G-Dog, generations of NIMBYs have proved that it is indeed possible to use government force to keep social ills (or perceived ills) out of their neighborhoods, or push them out if they ever start to gain a foothold, so that people living in other areas are burdened instead.
Of course this contributes to social inequality, since the unpopular people and uses are typically pushed to neighborhood populated by poorer and more marginalized residents, often areas disproportionately comprised of members of racial minority groups.
Many of these NIMBYs probably did not HATE the people they were excluding or forcing to move, or the people living in the places that ended up bearing a disproportionate share of perceived problems.
But to those on the receiving end, the significance of this distinction may well be lost.
G-Dog (Registered User)