The Stanislaus County’s Civil Grand Jury Report on homelessness could serve as a report card for the entire State of California. Noting that homeless numbers continue to rise despite vast expenditures of money, the Grand Jury concluded that lack of coordination and focus among myriad public and private entities has led to wasted dollars, a lack of accountability, and public distrust in government efforts to reduce homelessness.
There are many reasons behind the failure to curb rising homeless numbers. Several amount to specious distractions, beginning with caused-based arguments.
Cause-based Arguments
Proponents of caused-based arguments, whether they attribute homelessness to bad parenting, bad choices, or wealth inequality, spend all their energy and resources in the deep weeds of distraction, arguing that homelessness won’t go away until we eliminate its “root causes.’
When the house is burning down, the first priority is containing the fire. Wasting time and resources arguing about what caused the fire allows it to grow and spread.
When our economy is shedding jobs, when we have a severe housing shortage, when we lack services and shelter for the mentally ill, the disabled, the traumatized and the destitute, our first order of business should be triage. Triage for fellow humans in dire need should begin with the minimum stability provided by safe ground, toilets, running water, and rudimentary protection from the elements and predatory criminals.
People who want to waste time arguing about causes should be encouraged to attend meetings, write proposals, and sponsor studies, using their own time and resources.
Misleading Narratives
The rehab narrative, perhaps the single most dominant impediment to mitigating the multiple harms of homelessness, assumes that all destitute people need is a short stay in a congregate shelter where they can “get back on their feet” and get a job. The most commonly cited key element is redemptive transformation in the form of finding religion. “I was lost but now I’m found” stories are heart-warming and hopeful; unfortunately, they offer a tiny and unrepresentative sample of the hard realities of homelessness.
Some people have been in Stanislaus County’s congregate shelter since it opened, over three years ago. They haven’t moved on because there’s nowhere for them to go. They can’t work because they’re too old, too disabled, or too sick to work.
In fact, growing numbers of homeless people already have jobs and religion. Their problem is that the jobs and religion don’t provide enough income to afford housing, in large part because there is a huge housing shortfall throughout the state.
The reality is we don’t have enough shelter, we don’t have enough services, and we don’t have enough housing, even for people with jobs and income. Denying the fact of California’s acute housing shortage has led to interminable delays in getting people off the streets, out of the parks and alleyways and onto safe ground where they can access rudimentary “services” like toilets, running water, and whatever social services are available during a time of severe shortages of social workers, doctors, psychologists and psychiatrists.
The “Hitting Bottom” Fallacy
The “hitting bottom” fallacy insists that one can escape homelessness only after suffering enough agony and discomfort that “going straight” becomes the only option. The hitting bottom fallacy is behind the belief that helping people with food and shelter only “enables” dependencies; hence, a great many otherwise intelligent people insist on leaving homeless people in the dirt until they have finally suffered enough.
All it takes to refute this fallacy is a short drive around any town or city. It should be clear then that punishing the sick, the disabled, the elderly, the traumatized and the destitute not only doesn’t reduce homelessness, it is also cruel and barbaric.
The “Housing First” Mirage
Several years ago, homeless advocates argued that the first priority for reducing homelessness should be “housing first.” They were right in principle.
In fact, however, we don’t have enough housing, we won’t have enough housing for years, and for many homeless people, traditional housing options not only aren’t feasible, they represent a cruel sentence to more years in the dirt, without even a safe place to sleep.
Rule-based Inefficiencies
Most impediments to reducing homelessness involve faulty thinking, but rule-based inefficiencies present real obstacles to providing immediate, cost-effective and humane measures to reduce homelessness. Whether it’s a huge metropolis like Los Angeles, or a small San Joaquin Valley town like Turlock, cities and counties are unable to spend money earmarked for housing and shelter because of onerous rules imposed by government agencies, especially the nation’s Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
In the 5-year period between 2015 and 2020, Greater Los Angeles returned 150 million dollars of housing assistance money to the federal government. In 2021, HUD offered the Stanislaus Regional Housing Authority emergency housing vouchers worth 3.17 million dollars for homeless people in dire need of housing. Today, most of the money remains unspent because there isn’t enough housing, even when there’s enough money.
Every elected official at every level throughout California should be pushing hard to eliminate rule-based inefficiencies that place razor wire around funding for homelessness.
What to Do Now
The single biggest mistake we’ve made about homelessness is our failure to recognize it as a humanitarian crisis. Almost no one today will dispute the clear fact that a large segment of the homeless population is mentally ill. Nonetheless, narratives about “bad choices” and not wanting help still dominate many views about the plight of homeless people. Mentally ill people, by definition, aren’t capable of rational choices.
Another large and growing segment of the homeless population consists of the physically and mentally disabled. Disability compensation for such people often tops out at around $1,000 per month. That’s not enough for a single room unit anywhere, even if one were available. We need to accept the reality that we don’t have enough housing and services for people in need and we won’t have enough for years.
Instead of prolonging the costs and cruelties of leaving people on the streets, we need to perform triage now. Governor Newsom should declare a humanitarian crisis and work to provide funding for safe ground encampments that provide homeless people with the rudimentary necessities of minimal shelter, including tents and tarps.
The governor and California’s Senators and Congressmembers should lobby for unrestricted HUD funding that provides transitional shelter options now rather than wait for housing that is years away. Authorities at the city and county level should commit staff and resources to address the cogent emergencies of homelessness now, not years from now.
Safe ground encampments should include toilets and running water. Instead of spending more money on congregate shelters, we should be directing funding to more immediate shelter options, including emergency transitional housing such as Pallet Shelters and Conestoga Huts. Service providers and law enforcement can access permitted campsites far easier than they can chase homeless people around town.
The failure to recognize homelessness as a humanitarian crisis has crippled our ability to act pragmatically and compassionately to a growing emergency. We will do better only when we recover our capacity for quick and effective action during a rising crisis.
Freak yes!!!!! THANK YOU for speaking up!!! We have to be their voice and help scream for them because some people won’t listen to them. THANK YOU!!!
Valley Citizen:
You are certainly correct in your analysis.
You write, “The failure to recognize homelessness as a humanitarian crisis has crippled our ability to act pragmatically and compassionately to a growing emergency.”
Certainly, in a culture as rich as we are, there is enough money to fund emergency shelters of Pallet Shelters, Conestoga Huts and the like.
But I have so often seen the success of the NIMBY Party defeat action so often. NO! to workforce housing in the 50-acre Municipal golf course land. NO! to a senior housing project in Riverbank. NO! to anyplace for a Low Barrier Shelter, anywhere it was proposed.
Ah, but wait, we GOT our Low Barrier Shelter, didn’t we? Yes but where? Inside the northern part of the Salvation Army warehouse on 9th St. (Bless the Salvation Army!) No neighborhood opposition to that one, because there is no residential neighborhood.
NIMBYans have a stiff “I’ve got mine, you don’t get yours” lack of community spirit, compassion, and wisdom to see that cooperation is essential for all of us.
Amazingly, three Tuolumne County supervisors are working to set up Pallet Housing West of Jamestown. They may have found a solution to their NIMBYism: Put the pallets on the shoulder of the old Harvard gold mine. No one’s a neighbor to that.
Unfortunately, https://www.uniondemocrat.com/news/article_9c1e44c8-f720-11ec-b216-479988a18551.html shows even that site is being blocked.
Is there a remedy? Maybe can help build a Yes, In My Back Yard humane cooperation: http://cayimby.org/
I love all the passion and compassion revealed in Eric’s post comments. Thank you, one and all.
Richard, I clicked on your links offered us, Valley Citizens. I learned about Jamestown and YIMBY.
Thank you for the added reading material.
The links at the bottom of Eric’s, Jim’s and Frank’s more current posts, and everyone’s comments, I find myself eager to read as well.
It all adds to news we must remain conscious of and, conscientious about.
“When the house is burning down, the first priority is containing the fire.”
The first priority should be to separate the homeless from their drugs.
There, I said it. You can hate me for saying it but chronic homelessness won’t be solved until that’s done.
I am sad that even after reading Mr. Caine’s article that you still believe that drugs cause chronic homelessness. I hope you read the article today in the Modesto Bee about Mr. Rippee of Vallejo, who was blind, severely mentally ill, and homeless. He died on Tuesday at age 59. He had a life altering accident at age 24 that resulted in blindness and brain injury. He was not homeless BECAUSE OF DRUGS!
You give one example and I am sure there are more. However, talking to the police who interact with the homeless on a daily basis, with the county Behavior Health personnel who are tasked to deal with them daily and with former homeless individuals and they ALL say that the majority if not vast majority of the homeless have addiction problems. Your one example does not invalidate this truth. What Jerry Miller stated has a lot of truth to it and your unwillingness to acknowledge that only makes the situation worse for the homeless
Jerry. Granted that many homeless are addicted to drugs and alcohol. But what if they don’t stop taking drugs? Should we then just punish them by leaving them on the streets? Obviously, up to now they have chosen homelessness over sobriety, despite the down side. Addiction is a powerful force.
David Froba: It would be very difficult to show that “choosing” homelessness or drugs is an option for homeless people. Quitting drugs isn’t what they need to escape homelessness. What they need is money. When homeless people quit drugs, they’re still going to be homeless.
Eric- There are many reasons for homelessness. Jerry is right, at least to the extent that at least SOME are homeless because of drugs. I have heard of some young addicts whose parents would take them back in if they got clean. My point to Jerry is that even in those few cases (and Jerry seems to think that there are lots of cases) the addict should not be punished by homelessness for failing to get clean. That’s bad for the homeless person and society.
David Froba: Thank you for clarifying. Agree.
It is not just Jerry who believes that drug addiction is a major factor. Those of the CARE team who work with the homeless every single day and former homeless all state that the MAJORITY, if not vast majority, of the homeless have drug addiction issues. This is NOT to say that there are those who are disabled, etc. This is not an either/or situation but “ignoring” the problem of the majority, and the issues that this causes in the local community, is not helping either.
Ron Bridegroom: Are you saying drug addiction is a major factor in the CAUSE of homelessness or that drug use and homelessness are strongly associated? There’s a difference here, and the vast, vast majority of drug users in the United States live in traditional housing. Then there are the case like those of Rush Limbaugh, Ray Charles and William Burroughs, who did very well despite addcition.
Does it matter what came first, addiction or homelessness?
Granted, there are high-functioning addicts in society. Just because they aren’t homeless doesn’t mean their addiction isn’t detrimental to quality of their lives.
However, chronic homelessness won’t be solved until addiction is solved first.
Jerry: You need to provide support for the claim that houses will sprout like mushrooms once homeless people quit using drugs. That’s the driving assumption of you argument and it is not only impossible to prove, it is wrong. When homeless people quit using, they are still homeless.
Exactly. Thank you for your comment.
Great article Eric. I wanted to reply in some way and after some thought, here it is.
As you know I’ve been working with homeless people for roughly 12 years now and have seen a lot, but nothing like what I’ve seen in the last 6 months or so. Things have gotten much worse in terms of increased numbers, severity of issues is greater, and declining services are common.
We got by for many years with a fairly small and informal data system that was good enough to meet HUD requirements to obtain fairly minimal annual funding. Note that no real integrated business nor information system was ever designed to provide critical data regarding homelessness.
Today, each separate agency gets its own funding and meets funders’ requirements. When the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) came along, integration of data was forced by HUD; if your agency got HUD funding then you had to enter data into HMIS. This for the most part was data HUD needed and not what we need to manage homelessness locally.
I could go on, but the point is that in 2022 we still do not have an integrated anything. We have at least 20 non-profits and government agencies all doing their own thing and feeding data to a mandated HMIS. We need an integrated system with rich data so we can at least have the data we need to manage locally.
If we can get this capability right, then we can look at optimizing management of the homeless population. Right now, we aren’t managing anything. What we are trying and failing to do is treat broken people who are visible because they have no home. There are many, many more broken people in our communities, but they aren’t visible so they aren’t a public problem, or as many say, a public nuisance!
Collectively, we have learned over the years that the best place to interact and repair (when possible) broken people is when they are in a safe and stable place, thus the idea of Housing First. As Eric points out, it’s fine in principle but fails miserably when there is not enough housing and/or the level of care needed.
People are broken in lots of different ways. Let’s assume we categorize them into discreet groups and provide the appropriate services for each group. We already do this with folks who have mental health issues, so we know how to do it.
Once we have the categories and approximate population for each group, we can then do some realistic planning for services and shelter needs.
Shelter units are a key piece of the system. This will be the most difficult part, but if we take advantage of some of the new CA legislation like SB 9 & 10, add federal and state funding opportunities, and join it all with progressive community planning, we can manage our homeless population humanely and cost-effectively. Note that In March 2021, the Biden Administration released the American Jobs Plan, earmarking $213B for “quality” and “affordable” housing! Cost wise we should look to factory-built transitional housing options to keep the costs low and response time fast.
An operational model of self-sufficiency could be based upon capable folks working at a level to pay enough rent/mortgage to maintain the community. An opportunity could exist for many able folks to work in environmental restoration and green endeavors. At least 20% will not be able to work in any capacity, and we’ll have to subsidize anything beyond what they may get from government assistance.
Now what do we do that we have a potential framework to develop an optimized system?
I’d recommend that a business systems oriented facilitated workshop be held over 2-3 days to hammer out a homeless action plan. The plan would include an estimate of resources needed to execute it and requests to appropriate approval bodies would be expected within 30 days of plan submission. There would be required attendance by key electees and staff for each jurisdiction that had 25 or more homeless in the last Point in Time Count.
Frank 12/2/2022
I agree that the 1st priority is putting out the fire if the house is burning. However along with that is to prepare that house so it is not as susceptible to burring in the first place. Why do we not have a program that people can access for help if they feel that they are falling into homelessness. Where do you go if you can’t pay the rent, where do you go if you can’t feed yourself. Where is the program that can work with landlords and employers to help get people on their feet before they are homeless. I realize it will not help with the mental illness but although a lot of homeless people surfier from mental illness not all of them do. Some have lost their job, some loose their homes, some lose everything and find themselves on the street. All the money spent getting people back on their feet would be better spent keeping people on their feet to began with.
I think homelessness causes mental illness in those that were previously mentally well, but harsh circumstances forced them onto the streets. Job loss, catastrophic illness, divorce, death of a spouse etc is enough to push many onto the streets once their finances are drained from coping with these disasters. And those that work but simply can’t find an affordable place anywhere.
Imagine finding yourself out on the street and trying to find a safe place to sleep, a place to shower, regular and nutritious food and reliable transportation. Imagine living that way for a week with very little sleep, intermittent food and your clothes and body getting dirtier and dirtier by the day, and see how mentally stable you would be at the end of that week. Chronic exhaustion and hunger will cause mental illness where there was none before. Now add many weeks and months onto that and a once stable person is now one of the chronically mentally ill of the homeless population.
Exactly right, Mary, and there is ample scientific evidence that shows the stresses of extreme poverty and homelessness cause measurable, organic brain damage.
Eric, Thank you for continuing to write about this. You are fighting a long standing belief — JK Galbraith wrote, “one of the most influential social voices of the late nineteenth century … held … that the economic system rightly rewarded the rich for their contribution to the general well-being and wisely punished the poor for their inadequacy.” (A Journey Through Economic Time, p. 40) This idea is evidently behind the disrupting of any homeless group and throwing away whatever belongings they had given to them.
President Reagan closed all of the mental hospitals, and as I remember it, didn’t even suggest any alternative remedy for those patients.
I recently had a neighbor, a youngish woman who lived with two older women — ?helping them? They both had strokes and their sons vacated the apartment. Now she had no job and no money, so even tho she tried to find something, ended up on the streets. One time I saw her she told me she had never dreamed she’d end up like that. How many of the others think the same?
Caroline Mitton: You are correct that there is a long history of trying to correlate wealth with virtue and poverty with vice, whether through social Darwinism or the Prosperity Gospel. Both offer excuses to punish the poor.
When the mental institutions were closed, they were supposed to be replaced with community centers that would provide help and refuge for the mentally ill. The community centers never materialized.
You might want to read this article about the “closing of the mental hospitals”. https://www.kqed.org/news/11209729/did-the-emptying-of-mental-hospitals-contribute-to-homelessness-here
WHY? Do we remain silent and inactive when WHAT is supposed to happen, DOES NOT happen.
Are we that GULLIBLE, to accept people for their word(s) THEN stand IDLY by WHEN they, NOT ONLY, DO NOT produce, BUT, DO NOT even mention ANY follow up?
THEN, we VOTE for the LIARs, AGAIN!?!
OVER, 50 years, the MENTALLY ILL have adapted to going WITHOUT. And, we let POLITITIANS, bang the GAVEL on ANYTHING but.
We allow those very same POLITICIANs to PROPAGANDIZE us, to the POINT that we ADJUST ourselves to the SAME OLD, SAME OLD.
THIS, all the while, WHILE the mentally ill get BLAMED for NOT behaving AS we would, UNDER the SAME conditions.
THAT kind of SMUG attitude REVEALS our own LACK of mental STABILITY. We CAN NOT claim CIVILITY, or any thing REMOTELY akin to WELLNESS as THIS atrocity goes on for MULTIPLE years INSIDE our own COMMUNITY.
WHAT other CA counties and cities are NOT doing for their HOUSELESS is SIGNIFICANT, yet, NOT excuse for us, HERE, in this VALLEY. We ARE responsible for WHAT we are NOT practicing for OUR unhoused. There is NO way to THINK around THE FACTs staring us right in our FACES. We ALL SHARE in the plight, many more than others. It should NOT be that SOME live lives of QUIET DESPERATION.
QUIET because the VOICE of MANY has been STIFLED by many of us. Those WITHOUT homes are NOT a THROW AWAY group of individuals or a CORPORATE body of INVISIBLES. They stand out to us as their CRY IN THE WILDERNESS. They will NOT hide to ease the consciences of those DERELICT of DUTY to EASE their SUFFERING.
As for SWEEPS, they are ILLEGAL, just as THROWING AWAY personal items during SWEEPS is ILLEGAL. STANISLAUS county and ALL of it’s CITIES/TOWNS, such as MODESTO is RIPE for being SUED.
BEWARE!
You stated: “As for SWEEPS, they are ILLEGAL, just as THROWING AWAY personal items during SWEEPS is ILLEGAL.” I have to disagree with this statement at least concerning Turlock. What you called “sweeps” is done only in compliance with the law and from what I have seen only on private property at the request of the property owner. CalTrans will do it on their “property” as will the Railroad companies. Private property owners have the right to control their own property. In terms of “throwing away personal property” that is not done by TPD, they follow the law and store the property for the, I believe it is, required 90 days and leave information about how the person can retrieve said property.
I have no idea of what other cities are doing but your “blanket” statement is incorrect.
I do agree with your statement” “THEN, we VOTE for the LIARs, AGAIN!?!” I have asked before why the author of this article cheers the re-election of what you so correctly called “Liars”? They have shown over the course of the decades where they have had absolute control in Sacramento that they care nothing at all for any of us let alone the homeless. All they care about is gaining more power and wealth and they will use anyone no matter the hard done to achieve what they “lust” after .
Take care
One of the contributing factors to the housing shortage is the influx of “refugees” that have been dumped on Stanislaus County. Turlock alone has had almost 1,000 refugees placed here and the IRC is funded to find them housing while American citizens get no help in finding housing and/or are left “in the dirt”. All thanks to the policies of this Administration and the elected officials who support that whom you cheer their re-election.