Summit (NJ) could put homeless people in jail if they don't cooperate

It seems so counterintuitive. The people who are being targeted are unhouaed people who have refused any kind of housing options or assistance. My understanding is that many of those folks have significant mental illness. They’re not necessarily capable of rationally accepting assistance. Or they feel more secure sleeping in the open than in a shelter.

So, community service for them? Or a $500 fine? Or incarceration. Gee, I wonder which option will actually happen. 

I don’t know the answer myself. It seems like safe free housing with 24/7 security and psychological/social work staff is the only way to humanely help those unfortunate people. 

Ultimately I think the good people of Summit are just trying to encourage their unhoused population to voluntarily leave for fear of running afoul of the law. I doubt that they care where they go or what is their fate. 

I can see where the residents of Summit are frustrated over the growing number of unhoused in their community. Unfortunately, they are not alone in facing this problem.  Mental illness may be one contributing factor but there are many other root causes that will become even more prevalent as existing support services are further limited or curtailed.  What is needed is a coordinated effort to (1) identify root causes, (2) provide means of addressing those causes, and (3) implement effective communication to connect the unhoused and those in immanent danger of becoming unhoused with these resources.  

Lack of adequate housing is an obvious issue. If there is not enough housing to go around, like in a game of musical chairs, there will be people left without adequate shelter.  Lack of the financial means to afford such housing is another problem that is increasingly becoming an issue contributing to homelessness.  

Homelessness in their community is not a problem that Summit is likely able to resolve on its own but punishing people that society has already punished is not the answer.  it will take a unified, well thought out package of programs on a regional, State, or national level to affect real change.

I think Summit Oaks Hospital, a psychiatric and addiction treatment hospital, is part of Summit's problem.  I think it's a magnet for the troubled and the homeless seeking food a bed etc.

It seems that many do not want to go to shelters because they don't feel safe/comfortable in them. If that is the case (and I could be wrong about that), then it seems like something that could be addressed.

joan_crystal said:

I can see where the residents of Summit are frustrated over the growing number of unhoused in their community. Unfortunately, they are not alone in facing this problem.  Mental illness may be one contributing factor but there are many other root causes that will become even more prevalent as existing support services are further limited or curtailed.  What is needed is a coordinated effort to (1) identify root causes, (2) provide means of addressing those causes, and (3) implement effective communication to connect the unhoused and those in immanent danger of becoming unhoused with these resources.  

Lack of adequate housing is an obvious issue. If there is not enough housing to go around, like in a game of musical chairs, there will be people left without adequate shelter.  Lack of the financial means to afford such housing is another problem that is increasingly becoming an issue contributing to homelessness.  

Homelessness in their community is not a problem that Summit is likely able to resolve on its own but punishing people that society has already punished is not the answer.  it will take a unified, well thought out package of programs on a regional, State, or national level to affect real change.

All good points. 

I was looking at the fact that this statute specifically targets people who repeatedly refuse assistance such as going to a shelter. I’m assuming (yes, I know what happens) that many such people are struggling with mental illness. Maybe I’m off point in that. 

Summit and Trump, a perfect match.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/25/politics/trump-homeless-people-executive-order

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday making it easier for local jurisdictions to remove homeless people from the streets.

The order directs Attorney General Pam Bondi to “reverse judicial precedents and end consent decrees” that limit jurisdictions’ abilities to relocate homeless people. It also redirects federal resources so that affected homeless people are transferred to rehabilitation and substance misuse facilities.

It also directs Bondi to work with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy to fast-track federal funding to states and municipalities that crack down on “open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders.”

Will the fast-tracked funds be dedicated to providing housing, health, human services, and public transportation services for those removed from the streets under this program?  Does this program recognize that not all unhoused individuals have mental health or substance misuse issues?  Will support services such as child care and employment also be included under the program? 

joan_crystal said:

Will the fast-tracked funds be dedicated to providing housing, health, human services, and public transportation services for those removed from the streets under this program?  Does this program recognize that not all unhoused individuals have mental health or substance misuse issues?  Will support services such as child care and employment also be included under the program? 

My guess is no.

Before my husband and I adopted three babies — God soon gave us the fourth via the old-fashioned way — we used to take kids on Sunday outings to ballparks, movies, restaurants etc. 

Most of these children had been dropped off at the orphanage by their mothers or other relatives, as babies, many were not “released” by their kin, and so were not Adoptable and remained housed, fed, and educated until they were in their teens, before they would go back to their birth families.

Important to note that this interaction took place in the late ‘50s to 1962 and the arrival of our adopted son. The orphanage itself is long gone, and I do not know how children are processed in the diocese now.

Some of the children we took out on Sundays told us they would like to go “to our home” rather than going out and about! We got as much back as we gave.

mtierney said:

Before my husband and I adopted three babies — God soon gave us the fourth via the old-fashioned way — we used to take kids on Sunday outings to ballparks, movies, restaurants etc. 

Most of these children had been dropped off at the orphanage by their mothers or other relatives, as babies, many were not “released” by their kin, and so were not Adoptable and remained housed, fed, and educated until they were in their teens, before they would go back to their birth families.

Important to note that this interaction took place in the late ‘50s to 1962 and the arrival of our adopted son. The orphanage itself is long gone, and I do not know how children are processed in the diocese now.

Some of the children we took out on Sundays told us they would like to go “to our home” rather than going out and about! We got as much back as we gave.

So you think people will begin adopting the homeless in Summit? I'm not following. Nice story, though.