Star Tribune
Experts working to end homelessness in Minnesota say Supreme Court ruling on Grants Pass v. Johnson will make their jobs harder
Organizations working to end homelessness in Minnesota warn that it’s going to get harder to move people living on the streets into permanent housing, after a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.
The high court ruled Friday that fining or jailing people for breaking anti-camping ordinances when there is no shelter available does not violate the Constitution. The decision gives local governments across the country the green light to cite and possibly arrest people living in homeless encampments or other public spaces.
“We know that this population in particular, with higher rates of significant mental health conditions, higher rates of substance use disorders, are facing a lot of barriers already,” said Stephanie Nelson-Dusek, a research scientist behind the Wilder Foundation’s triennial Minnesota Homeless Study. “Piling on more barriers is not a solution to ending homelessness.”
The Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s ruling on City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, which the National Homelessness Law Center called the most significant case on homelessness to be reviewed by the Supreme Court in 40 years. When advocates for the poor in Grants Pass, Ore., accused the city of using anti-camping laws to effectively banish its homeless population into other communities, Grants Pass petitioned the Supreme Court to defend its ability to close encampments and issue citations of nearly $300 that could escalate to larger fines of $1,250, a month in jail and a ban from city property if not paid on time.
“From 30 years of research, we know that people who are sleeping outside … have some of the most complex health needs of our homeless population, which can really limit the ability to get housing, especially in a competitive rental market,” Nelson-Dusek said. “The decision glosses over the bigger picture, which is that we do not have enough safe and stable housing. We don’t have enough shelter beds, or at least beds that are needed at the moment they’re needed, in areas throughout our state.”
Last October the study found that one-third of homeless adults in Minnesota had been turned away from a shelter in the previous three months, with two-thirds sleeping in a car, vacant building or on public transit as a result. Nearly half of homeless adults were on a waiting list for public housing, and another 10% couldn’t get on the waiting list because it was closed to new applicants.
The state of Minnesota filed a brief opposing the city of Grants Pass, asking the court to uphold homeless people’s right to sleep in public in lieu of shelter. Attorney General Keith Ellison’s office argued that was a “narrow” protection given that local governments would still be able to limit the size and location of encampments, and punish criminal conduct related to encampments such as littering, public drug use and defecation.
“There is overwhelming evidence, meanwhile, that criminalizing involuntary homelessness makes already difficult situations even worse,” the Attorney General’s brief said. “People who have been incarcerated are ten times more likely to be homeless than the general population. This statistic is unsurprising, given the many barriers between people with criminal records and the resources they need to obtain housing and employment. In addition, efforts to clear encampments often destroy the identification papers, cellphones, laptops, and other items that people would use to find employment or housing.”
The city of Grants Pass argued that it was practically barred from enforcing anti-camping laws against anyone because police officers couldn’t tell who wanted shelter but couldn’t get it, who refused shelter because it was not “adequate,” and what adequate shelter meant. Grants Pass has one shelter based in a Christian church that requires homeless people attend daily religious services in return for a place to sleep.
“Given the difficulties of administering a shelter-based approach, district courts applying [prior court rulings] have hamstrung cities in enforcing public-camping laws against anyone unless and until they have enough ‘secular shelter space’ for everyone — a near-impossible task, especially because the number of homeless people surpasses the shelter available in every major western city and continues to climb,” the city wrote in its petition.
In a 6-3 ruling Friday, the Supreme Court sided with the Oregon city, overturning a 2018 decision out of Idaho that limited western cities’ ability to sweep camps in lieu of providing adequate shelter. Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch opined that fines and jail time were not “cruel and unusual” methods of punishment, regardless of the conduct being punished. For the minority, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote that the court had abdicated its role safeguarding the most vulnerable Americans.
Hennepin County is working with a national organization, Community Solutions, to achieve functional zero chronic homelessness — the state in which more people are helped into housing than losing it — by 2025. The goal is complicated by cities’ need to close encampments when they become too large and problematic for neighborhoods and demand for shelter beds outpacing supply.
Regardless of the many practical difficulties, fining and arresting people for trespassing on public land makes those challenges worse, Communities Solutions’ Chief Program Officer Beth Sandor said.
“There’s nowhere in America where arresting and fining people for sleeping on the street has led to reductions in unsheltered homelessness or an overall homelessness,” Sandor said. “Fees and fines make it harder for people to access employment, housing and social services … And so we hope the focus will really be on solutions rather than expensive ways to not solve homelessness.”
Hundreds of Minneapolis park workers went on strike on Thursday — the first strike by workers in the park system’s 140-year history.
After seven months of contract negotiations, about 100 union workers and supporters rallied and marched Thursday in northeast Minneapolis, kicking off what could be a week-long strike.
The Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board gave its “last, best and final offer” Monday before the workers’ contract expired Tuesday.
The Laborers’ International Union of North America (LIUNA) Local 363 said they haven’t reached tentative agreements on a single one of their proposals, including improvements to health care, safety procedures and pay raises.
“These are not unreasonable demands. These are basic rights that every working person deserves,” said AJ Lange, an arborist who is now the business manager of Local 363, which represents more than 200 employees and more than 100 seasonal workers.
The last offer from the Park Board was a 10.25% wage increase over three years, plus two market adjustments for 13 positions.
“That would barely get us caught up,” Lange said, adding that workers’ pay has slipped by 10% in the last three years due to rising inflation. “We’re not asking to be rich. We’re just trying to get by. We’re asking for a fair share in the work we do so we can afford to live in the city we take care of.”
He added that the Park Board had proposed concessions, like overtime restrictions, that would harm workers.
In a statement, Park Board spokeswoman Robin Smothers said Park Board leaders believe their proposals were reasonable and comparable to eight other Park Board employee union contracts. The Park Board “leadership believes it is vitally important that employee wages and benefits are fair and competitive throughout the organization,” she added.
The Park Board has previously said that its funding is limited, especially with decreasing property tax collections. If employees choose not to report to work during the strike, they must remain on strike for the duration of the strike, until the agreement is ratified, Smothers said.
She added that the Park Board has plans to adjust maintenance services to minimize the strike’s impacts on park visitors. No park closures are anticipated.
The union plans to picket at parks each day through Wednesday and during the July 4th long holiday weekend — one of the busiest times of the year for park visitors.
“We are the heart of our parks,” said Anthony Smith, an arborist. “We are struggling … we are on strike because we deserve better.”
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, a Democrat who represents Minneapolis, joined city and legislative leaders at Thursday’s rally to show their support.
“We know they magically do not become No. 1,” Omar said of Minneapolis parks often topping national lists. “There is a lot of effort, there is a lot of maintenance and work, sweat and tears that goes into it. And you all are the reason for that.”
Star Tribune
Minnesota says tobacco companies owe $58 million in underpayments from landmark settlement
Minnesota is seeking $58 million from tobacco companies Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., alleging that they underpaid what they owe the state in a landmark 1998 lawsuit settlement over the costs and dangers of tobacco use.
Attorney General Keith Ellison filed a motion this week in Ramsey County District Court to enforce the settlement agreement, alleging that when the federal corporate tax rate changed in 2018, the companies recalculated their 1997 profits using the new and lower tax rate, leading the manufacturers to underpay Minnesota by nearly $10 million a year.
“After lying to the American people about the dangers of their products, it is unfortunately not surprising that the largest tobacco manufacturers have also tried to avoid the commitments they made when settling with Minnesota,” Ellison said in a statement.
His office is asking Ramsey County District Judge Mark Ireland to order the tobacco companies to pay the state $58 million plus interest and legal fees. A hearing is scheduled for Aug. 8.
Messages with Philip Morris USA’s parent company, Altria Group, Inc., and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company weren’t immediately returned Wednesday.
According to court documents, the tobacco manufacturers have argued that they get to re-calculate their 1997 profits with modern tax rates. Ellison’s office argued in court filings that the settlement specifically required using 1997 tax rates when calculating 1997 after-tax profits.
In 1994, Minnesota was one of the first states in the nation to sue tobacco companies. Attorney General Hubert Humphrey III sued tobacco companies and advertisers for violating antitrust and consumer protection statutes, arguing they misrepresented or concealed the dangers of tobacco.
In the settlement agreement with the state and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota, manufacturers agreed to make annual payments to the state in perpetuity, with the amounts tied in part to their tobacco sales. It was considered payment to the state for what the government spent or would spend on the health repercussions of tobacco on smokers, such as increased Medicaid payments.
In 2023, the three remaining tobacco companies in the settlement — Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds and ITG Brands, LLC — paid Minnesota about $160 million, according to court documents.
Tobacco manufacturers owe more if their post-tax profits are higher than they were in 1997 despite lower tobacco product sales. When the federal corporate tax rate was cut in 2019 from 35% to 21%, Philip Morris had its payment administrator PricewaterhouseCoopers recalculate its 1997 post-tax profits with the 2018 tax rate, which Ellison’s office said misrepresented the settlement, according to the court documents.
The state of Mississippi sought similar legal action to Minnesota’s recent filing in 2019 over tobacco companies not paying fully, and a court agreed with the state in 2022 that tobacco companies owed what was agreed upon in the original settlement. The manufacturers have appealed that case. Then, in 2023, Texas took action against manufacturers over the same tax rate issue and a Texas court sided with the state.
Minnesota sued R.J. Reynolds and ITG Brands in 2018 to recoup payments that hadn’t been made since 2015. The companies agreed in 2021 to make $81 million in back payments to the state.
When a “WolfQuest” player takes control of a young wolf and roams the hills of Yellowstone National Park, it’s easy to see why the Minnesota-made educational video game has stayed relevant 17 years after its initial release.
Later this year, a new version of the wolf-simulator game will be released with an aim of keeping it relevant for new players into the future. The game’s producer, who said the original has been downloaded about 5 million times, is adding improved graphics and game play for players who assume the role of a wolf, raising families of pups and chasing down prey in the wild.
“I just thought, ‘This is the most successful project I’ve ever done, it would be crazy just to let it fade away,'” producer Dave Schaller said in an interview Monday from his home in St. Paul.
Schaller and his wife Susan Nagel’s educational video game company Eduweb released the original “WolfQuest” in 2007 along with the Minnesota Zoo, which partnered with the game company and assisted with its creation. Players control a 2-year-old wolf as it learns to hunt, find and court a mate, and raise a pack of pups that must be defended from predators including coyotes, cougars and rival wolves.
Eduweb programmed the game, but Minnesota Zoo assisted by providing wolf experts who informed Schaller’s team on how the animals would act in real life. The goal was to accurately depict the animals of Yellowstone and teach kids about wolves in a fun way outside of a classroom setting or a zoo. This meant adding all aspects of wolf behavior, including how parents will sometimes regurgitate prey for their pups’ consumption.
“We would have meetings where it was like, ‘OK. Hunting elk. How does it really work? And how is this going to work when we distill it down into a game?'” Schaller said.
The game was initially free, thanks to a $500,000 grant from the National Science Foundation, and the original version is still available for purchase online along with a free demo. When the partnership with the zoo ended roughly a decade ago, Eduweb kept updating the game, and began developing “WolfQuest: Anniversary Edition” in 2017.
An early version of the anniversary edition was released in 2019 and is available for purchase through the online game distribution platform Steam for $20, but the complete updated game is not expected to be released until later this year. Unlike the original, the anniversary edition allows players to continue growing their wolf pack past the one-year mark. The new game also increases the size of the environments and gives players 7- by 7-kilometer sections of Yellowstone to explore.
Though the game was intended for middle schoolers, many adults have become devoted fans. Fan videos posted on YouTube, often just footage of the game being played, have racked up hundreds of thousands of views. Some players add backstories for the wolves and narrate the animals’ lives in dubbed-over audio, making up their own lore as they go.
A collaborator on the original game was Grant Spickelmier, the former assistant educational director for Minnesota Zoo. Now the executive director of the International Wolf Center in Minnesota, Spickelmier helped write the initial grant for the first game. The game’s release in 2007 coincided with a rise in popularity around online forums where young players could bond over fascination with wolves and wildlife.
“We discovered there was a huge demand for people who wanted to live their lives as animals and who were interested in them,” Spickelmier said.
With the early version of the game already out and the full edition on the way, Schaller said he’s hopeful the game can continue to attract new players and teach kids about wolves and how they act.
“The biggest idea of the game was [combating] the misconceptions about wolves as these ferocious, dangerous animals,” Schaller said. “It’s like, ‘No, they’re family animals, mate for life depending on how things go, and they care about their kids.'”
