Bias in Our Backyard
Having read your piece this morning I feel compelled to say that much of what happens in terms of biased encounters is never reported. I thought I’d checked a neighborhood. It was the north end of La Pine where I bought my last central OR house in 2017. The absence of obvious Trump support didn’t insulate my son and I. He’s biracial. He and his sisters went to Summit in the early 2000’s.
My son had the most bad encounters, almost too many to enumerate. People who wouldn’t allow him to serve them as a bud tender as he was a POC, jobs he felt he couldn’t accept because he got called the n word every time he went to that particular establishment, his sister harassed downtown at an after party, in her wedding gown no less. A cousin who is from the Bay Area and NOT biracial handily suggested the perpetrator back off. The final straw was my son raking pine needles on my acre and having neighbors on a walk pretend to shoot him, fall of 2019. The second time by he went to the fence and said I really don’t like that, to which they replied, “better trigger than n word.” I decided my family history of, at that time, 40 years in Central OR was done. Just done. My son has some mental health issues that cause enough grief. We moved to near the Palm Springs area in CA and he says he never gets a side eye. My ex, his dad, won’t walk down his own street on the east side of Bend without his second, very white, wife because of all the confederate flags. It’s nice that numbers are being kept but this has gone on for decades, I was just ignorant of it. And being from LA and SF realize now how sheltered I’d been.
When we know better, we do better, but as much as I’d like to come back to CO I can’t do it to my kids. They visit the family house on the river and very much keep to themselves. My youngest, who lives in Brussels, wouldn’t bring her two littles to the pet parade in their stroller 3 years ago because she was afraid there might be trouble, and the stroller was unwieldy, so the toddler toddled and the baby was in a front carrier. That my daughter even had to consider her mode of transportation based on possible scenarios at a holiday parade crushes my soul. But that’s the reality. Maybe we need more bias training.
—Kerry L.
[Editors note: We agreed to let Kerry use only the first letter of her last name due to her concerns about repercussions.]
Bend, Beers and Beyond
All local beer aficionados should thank Brian Yaeger for a great beer fest last weekend! Without his initiative and his hard work, this would not have happened. Already looking forward to a repeat that will be bigger and better next year! Thanks Brian!
—Mary B. Robinson
Annual Count Shows 17% Increase in Homelessness
This situation reflects a direct failure of our City Council and the low-barrier housing policies they have aggressively promoted. The city purchased and renovated hotels, an endeavor that was far from inexpensive reportedly using state funds and grants. However, with anticipated shifts in funding under the current administration, there is growing concern about whether the financial burden of these projects will ultimately fall on local taxpayers.
Compounding the issue, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has allowed individuals to live in our forests, creating dangerous conditions for both the environment and surrounding communities. Now that some areas have been closed for restoration and occupants removed, the broader consequences of this decision are becoming increasingly clear. It’s likely that this also contributes to the Point-in-Time (PIT) homeless count, distorting our local data and needs assessments.
Low-barrier housing has proven to be an ineffective and unsustainable solution. Despite significant public investment, it has created a revolving-door system that traps individuals in homelessness without addressing the root causes. These programs fail to provide a true path to recovery or reintegration.
What is urgently needed are high-barrier solutions and comprehensive programs that combine medical care, mental health treatment, and addiction services. Participation should be mandatory, with clear expectations and accountability, so that individuals are empowered to rebuild their lives and contribute meaningfully to the community. This is where our county and city need to work together with their “joint homelessness coalition” but it doesn’t seem to be working. All of these agencies need to work together to solve issues that are not political but true community issues.
Another unintended consequence of the low-barrier model is its tendency to attract unhoused individuals from out of state, drawn by the availability of free services with minimal requirements. This influx increases pressure on already overextended local resources and undermines our ability to serve the needs of our own residents.
Furthermore, while there is much discussion around the need for affordable housing, our city has failed to hold developers accountable for including deed-restricted affordable units on both sides of town. This must become a clear and enforceable priority. We cannot continue allowing development especially on the west side to cater solely to high-income buyers. A $1.2 million townhouse is not affordable. Instead, such developments foster inequity and accelerate gentrification, leaving lower-income residents behind. It also has created this East Side / West side divide. Our workforce including teachers, mail carriers, refuse industry workers, and service industry personal should be able to work and afford in the neighborhoods they work in.
It is time to re-evaluate our approach. We must prioritize structured, results-driven, and accountable services that address the complex challenges facing our unhoused population, while also promoting fairness and true affordability in our housing policies.
—Nicole Perullo
Letter of
the week:
Thanks Nicole for your comments. For letter of the week, you can stop by our office for a gift card to Palate.
—Nic Moye
This article appears in Source Weekly June 5, 2025.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
The housing – homeless situation is untenable. With an apparent 17% increase we need to understand what caused the increase. Organic newly homeless? Influx to the region? Counting issues?
With regard to a west vs. east side issue, there has and will always be a variation in pricing and demand for homes. Just look at New York, or any other large city – even Portland. Smaller mountain towns have the same issues as well, like Truckee. The difference, in Truckee at least, is it hasn’t become a magnet for homeless, perhaps the weather is a factor, or there are fewer incentives. Solving the homes vs. people problem is nothing new, very difficult, and certainly not unique to Bend.
We need leadership, an understanding of the why and where, incentives and disincentives, to manage, and make Bend a safe and desirable place.
Homeless (mostly drug addicts and people with mental issues) flock to communities that allow and/or support living on public land. Period. We have more than one tax payer funded place for truly homeless people (people working or trying to work) that sit with vacancies.