In my former hometown, San Francisco, every few years after a public outcry the Mayor would appoint a new "Homeless Czar" to address the issue immediately. Press releases would be sent out with rosy outlooks. Then the hubbub would die down and it was business as usual.
I'll make an incendiary proposal: fire all Government officials at the State and local levels in charge, in any way, of handling services to the homeless folk. Maybe even study and decertify non profits who don't pull their weight ans start over again.
The mayor of LA took baby steps in handing over a closed government building to house homeless vets. I bet if we added up all the government buildings and empty land in the Bay area there would not only be enough to build enough housing for the homeless but also address the perennial housing shortage. However I have no idea how to fix the rampant Nimbyism...
3
Gavin Newsom has had a front row seat to this epidemic. He was Meyor when the streets were overrun by homeless and petty crime disguised as the Occupy movement. He was Lt. Governor and now Governor and has sat idly while a surge of homelessness and petty crime has plagued the state. He should be writing his proposed plan not calling for someone else to fix the problem he is largely responsible for.
1
California’s homeless population increases while the rest of the country sees a decline. Hmmmmmm, wonder how the two are connected??? If you take a survey of homeless people in CA you will find the many come from elsewhere. This is a federal issue that has landed in the lap of CA not a failure on the part of CA.
6
“...resemble some of the world’s most destitute refugee camps.” Boy, that says it in a nutshell. Living in Oakland, a city with one of the highest numbers of homeless but also some of the area’s richest, is a nightmare.
I give Newsom some credit for at least bringing up the necessity of a serious mental illness component, an essential element of any comprehensive plan. There must be a place to send them for help, and there must be a way for them to be committed for the care they need. In my youth there were California state operated mental institutions with long-term care. Now there are none and nowhere for long-term care for the mentally ill.
The biggest issue going is the call for more housing to be built. Grow, grow, grow! There are over 18,000 new units of housing being constructed now in Oakland alone, few if any are “affordable” and none at the rental price these folks can afford. In the meantime, developers and politicians never talk about crumbling roads/infrastructure, and a lack of basics like food shopping and miserable mass transit. And they never talk about how many real homeless their units will serve. This is not a solution to the homeless problem, this is apples and oranges. I know developers will get rich and investors will be happy, but what about really solving this problem?
1
@mltrueblood ... And there you have it. When the poor have nothing left to eat, they will eat the rich. And both live closely side by side with no end to the problem in sight. How's that for a million dollar house investment?
• How curious must we be about the gulf between rent and income? Rent (economic), is not proportional to income, or are two readily or available diverging factors that are not consistent with another. More especially so about the mismatch, to instead put it this way, that of a person laboring at a fast food establishment, of McDonald's type, for example. Numerous are the men and women, whose incomes are “de minimus,” when compared to those in the other income groupings: lower-middle, upper-middle, and high, based on GNI per capita (in U.S. dollars, converted from local currency using the Atlas method, according to datahelpdesk.worldbanl.org. Because of this especially great or intense reason and some others, unequally important they may prove to be in this particular context, the author of this book is predicting the unwanted, that is the housing market, as supply of unaffordable units far surpasses demand, aided by the fast increasing, newly available number of high-end condominiums on the market, will crash in approximately three years’ time.
High density housing near transit centers seems like a good idea. However, the bill that failed (twice now) removed local control on building if there is a bus within a half-mile every 30 minutes during rush hour. This is not useful transit options for many people. Funny how the tech billionaires live in communities that for decades fought any transit in their tony towns (Atherton and Los Altos Hills are two examples). So they are unaffected by this STATE - wide law that the SF mayor is flogging. Meanwhile the tech titans will often not hire local people choosing instead to bring in more people. Google is the worst offender. We already have a two-tier economy; those in tech and those not. This is a serious situation and the homeless encampment are a disgrace. But bulldozing my neighborhood to put up high rises when there is empty government-owned land is insane. This “urban renewal” tactic was used in the 60s and 70s and did not go well. Go ahead politicians, take money from developers while pretending to be doing something and being a truly caring progressive. Ignore the fact that BART is near a breaking point and local sewage systems are at or or above capacity. You don’t fool all of us. Call my a NIMBY - i don’t care.
3
All big cities need low income workers. Here are some San Diego salaries:
Starbucks barista salary – starts at $20,000.00/year.
Preschool teacher salary – starts at $20,000.00/year.
Fire Fighter salary – starts at $26,000.00/year.
Security guard – starts at $22,000.00/year.
The average apartment rent in San Diego is $2,223.00! That is $26,676.00 a year!
It makes no sense to say that only millionaires should live in California. Who is going to make their lattes, teach their kids, fight their wildfires or guard their mansions?
Many of our homeless have an income! It’s simply too small of an income for them to get a place to stay.
If San Diego had housing that started at $600.00/month, we’d get a lot of people off our streets.
6
Foreign money from China has destroyed California's housing market just like it did in Vancouver.
2
Newsom is right. The homeless situation is a disgrace. So are a bunch of the people who are part of homeless ranks. Why should municipal money bail out the drug users and bums who are part of this crowd?Why should CA help the border jumpers from other States? If CA starts housing these people without selectivity, they will have a collection of property from the coffers of the State getting trashed by the users. Be smart CA. Some will only deserve tents. Others can assume responsibility for better housing. One size does not fit all.
4
• What more to think of the luxury condominium market, in particular? The crash, though not anticipated to be as severe as it was during the Great Recession, in 2008, will, this time, more be sectoral and consequential, rather affecting this particular segment of the real estate market or the outlier of so. Today, in Boston’s South End Ink Block development, for example, monthly economic rent for a 590-square-foot studio is $6,719. The least price at which the studio of the same is offered for sale is $645,000. This is not say that median listing prices will not be affected, too – spillover effects. It is not such an anticipated dramatic decline in the amount of money expected, required, or given in payment for prices across the housing market itself that will be cause for a significantly large number of small homeowners, those with no real estate equity or equity of the same that is convinced to be sufficient to avoid finding themselves in “underwater territory,” rather permitting them or being able to contract new debts, with better terms, or restructuring their current ones, also with terms that prove to be better, but the whole of their newly, unwanted precarious or aggravating financial situation.
Set a time limit on using public parks as trailer parks for the homeless. Where will the non-homeless families go camping in the outdoors? There's only so many National Parks in California, and they are pretty expensive to access.
The only answer is to increase housing stock at all price points immediately. Scarcity drives up prices, abundance will drive them down. At some point, the working poor will be able to afford housing.
Yes, house the homeless immediately in state parks and re-open the state mental hospitals. Buy local hotels to create low-priced SRO housing for the working poor and start building massive housing complexes of SROs in the deserts with bus service to newly created local manufacturing centers.
Make urban camping (vagrancy), whether caused by mental illness or finances, a public health offense, not a criminal offense. The mentally ill homeless shouldn't be "treated" in prisons (as they currently are) anyway.
Create a Public Health Court system to place these "offenders". If homeless from other states move to California streets to take advantage, turn them away with transportation back to their home state. Fund social workers to create personal plans for families and individuals to escape the "system" of state facilities. Create a commission of (appointed) volunteers to oversee and direct this system, with special attention to those sent to mental hospitals.
It will be cheaper to create a new bureaucracy than to fund piecemeal solutions.
1
It has been said that one of the ways a society is judged is by how it treats its people who are at the most risk. Governor Newsom is right to call the homelessness crisis a disgrace. But it is a national disgrace and it has been going unaddressed for far too long. I work in the Chicago Loop and can tell you the homelessness situation I see on a daily basis is the absolute worst I have seen in over 30 years. At times people are just laying on the sidewalk or in a doorway, as if they don't exist. I do not know what the actual solution to this problem will be but it must include a group of federal, state, city and private initiatives to work together, in force, to begin to make a dent in this crisis and actually start moving forward to make real progress. And the individuals who run our governments and businesses must give this matter more than lip service and not use it as a convenient sound bite only when its suits their purposes.
2
Why aren’t decommissioned military bases being repurposed to house the homeless, where they may be provided with safe housing, food, healthcare, mental health services, job training, etc....
From north to south, squalid homeless encampments are degrading California’s cities and towns. Alternatively, move these unfortunate people off the streets and into supervised facilities where the necessities of life are provided. It’s so obvious. Why is this not being done?
1
As a California resident, it is about time the Govenor achknoledged this problem California has been facing for so long and finally owning it. I always thought that no matter who is sitting in the Govenor's office that they should be embarrassed and ashamed of themselves for letting so many people stay homeless in our state for as long as they have been. Recently the Sacramento Bee came out with a story about how there were so many homeless families sleeping in their cars out on the streets of Sacramento, CA every night. It is just so awful.
After this ranting of Newsom's about our homeless problem, I'm hoping that action will finally be taken, but I'm not holding my breath. I will believe it when I finally see it and our Govenor would be wise to tackle the homeless issue in the city he resides in being Sacramento, CA first as well as in all other cities and towns affected by homelessness in California. Let's finally see some action, please.
1
If our elected officials cannot get the job done, then vote them out of office. Here is San Francisco, we have a useless do-nothing ultra-left wing Board of Supervisors who seem to be happy with the filthy streets and huge numbers of mentally ill and substance abusing homeless, creating a dangerous and threatening environment. In addition, we have a police force that does nothing but gives tickets to cars not stopping fully at signs ( a good thing generally) and hanging out at Starbucks. You never see police on the street unless there is a gay pride parade. Finally, it now appears we have another corrupt mayor who took bribes from one of her Public Works officials ( now fired). It's time to clean house in San Francisco.
1
Mayor of San Francisco (2003-2009)
Lt Governor (2010-2018)
Governor (2009- )
Now we have a crisis?
4
Newsom is all talk, no action. He talked about homelessness was his passion project when he was a mayor of San Francisco, and look around, things could not been worse here in San Francisco.
He is going to do the same con job to California. He has no clue how to solve our problems.
6
Homelessness is a problem that is larger than California can solve but it must be solved. I think we can start by urging industrial leaders in an overcrowded area to invest in low population density geographic areas by building new towns designed to meet the family formation needs of their workers. These new towns don't have to be near the old expensive, densely populated area but could be located in area that have the potential to flourish because of natural resources like water and proximity to agricultural production factors, like good soils, etc.
To fire up the imagination of people, I like to tell people about the Cone family who founded textile mill towns in North Carolina. The company built schools, water treatment and water distribution infrastructure, power plants, and electric power distribution systems, streets and sidewalks and hundreds of family homes that were close to community centers, churches (also built by the company). There where kindergartens, elementary, middle and high schools, plenty of playing fields and a Y.M.C.A for swimming, basketball and a variety of sports, including gymnasiums.
Importantly, as the "settlers" who moved from the farms in the region to join with the textile experts in producing a huge variety of cotton products, there was a culture formed over time from the families that grew in the towns.
I can promise you that it was a great place to grow up and go to school. It may not fit some companies but it could be a solution.
Just drove through a low-income, centrally-located and historically protected neighborhood of modest 1920s bungalows here in Los Angeles the other day. I was thinking that if the SB 50 (the state mandate to kill off zoning and historic preservation) would have passed, that neighborhood would be a goner. Small houses would be purchased from families that would cash in (but then be stuck in terms of where to go) and would be replaced by 4-story market-rate apartments filled with what used to be called yuppies. How does that address homelessness?
3
Aside from lack of affordable housing, mental health and substance abuse issues need to be addressed. I think these issues are contributing factors to the homeless crisis. There needs to be more long term care facilities where people can get the help they need.
The homelessness problem is multi-faceted. Building more affordable housing might help a little bit, but it won’t fix the problem. We have some citizens who are disabled. They can’t work a standard job, because they have mental and/or physical problems. They need help. California really needs to address mental illness and seek long-term solutions for those who are unable to afford a place to live as a result of their disability.
2
@Mark I live in Seattle and our homelessness situation is also at crisis levels. And despite the argument people keep trying to make that mental illness is a huge factor in this problem the real issue here and definitely in California is that it is too expensive. There isn't near enough affordable housing. The average rent for a 1 bedroom apartment in Seattle is over $1800 dollars a month.
Trump raves about the economy but I'm almost 60 years old and I have never seen the homelessness problem this bad. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
3
California's population growth rate has finally slowed a bit, to *only* 141,000 over a recent 1 year period. That's the slowest rate of growth in 80 years. But still, hundreds of thousands of people have been coming here every year for quite a while. Is it really any wonder that there are 150,000 homeless here? I wouldn't call it a disgrace, I'd say it's amazing there aren't far more.
Overpopulation is at the root of every major problem the world faces today, yet daring to even mention it (let alone doing anything about it) seems to be the third rail of politics.
Get all those people coming here to STAY HOME and give up the idea that the population and the economy must always grow, and the problem will largely disappear. A population and an economy that changes and adapts while remaining at a consistent and predictable size is the only answer. But since that's practically anti-capitalist, it can't be discussed.
Endless growth and poor & homeless people and illegal immigrants are a necessary part of modern capitalism. As the expression goes, it's a feature, not a bug.
7
@SB there's plenty of housing, there are too many people
2
What about Tiny Houses on vacant state government properties, with medical clinics, veteran advocates, and social workers on hand to help these under-funded Californians get back on their feet?
2
Just a thought, from someone who is an advocate for the homeless. In Denver, where the referendum for giving basic civil rights to the homeless garnered 17% of the vote. And we're a metro area where roughly 240 homeless people die on the streets every year.
Homeless shelters, at least here, are rife with bedbugs. They are scary places to stay in and it's likely that your stuff is going to get stolen there.
Why, then, are we surprised that campsites exist despite the illegality?
Wow!!
12% of US population but 60% of the unsheltered.
Something is really off here.
Sad to say the least. Not sustainable as a civilized entity - the state.
I imagine the initial drive in this regard was to get the homeless to leave the state. But clearly, this - HAS NOT WORKED!!
Blaming the poor and powerless for being homeless is not going to solve California's housing crisis, which is caused by systemic forces. My two cents:
1. The Federal Reserve has to put the brakes on money creation. Cheap money fuels higher home prices and the practice of "flipping."
2. The Federal government has to stop incentivizing speculation in the housing market. Get rid of the $250k capital gains tax exemption and impose residency requirements for homeownership. In many countries, you can't own a home without being a citizen. Prohibit hedge funds from manipulating home prices.
3. For every person admitted into this country through immigration, a Federal construction permit should override local NIMBY zoning laws. If 1000 immigrants move to San Francisco, SF should be required to create 1000 new units of affordable, immigrant housing, paid for by the Federal government.
4. California should end the practice of subsidizing new businesses through tax breaks (i.e., Amazon). It should also require businesses to create new housing for employees relocated to its headquarters. San Francisco recently gave Twitter millions of dollars in tax breaks to move its offices here. The increase in housing demand benefited homeowners at the expense of renters, but the subsidy was paid by all through taxes.
If India can house its poor, why can't California?
5
I'll share my idea for a solution to the homeless problem knowing the response I will get (ps. I'm a liberal democrat).
1st: re-open hospitals for the mentally ill for long term treatment/housing and involuntarily commit them.
2nd: Re-open orphanages and reserve foster homes for only the very young ie. infants through 4. All children whose parents can't take care of them whether due to drugs, poverty, mental illness, or just indifference, should be placed in orphanages until they are 18. Let's call them boarding schools
3rd: Those who are addicted to drugs/alcohol have a choice, in-patient treatment or a shelter where they get drug tested and must be engaged in work or education. If they refuse they will be incarcerated until they agree to treatment. Basically forced treatment and criminalizing living on the streets.
4th: For those who are homeless because they can't afford the rents and/or don't have a job, shelters where they must work for their support. Work and training programs can be provided to teach people a skill. If they have a skill and the ability to work but just can't afford CA rents- they will have to relocate to an area where they can afford to live. Support can be provided to help the person relocate.
5th: Build more housing with state incentives for below market rents.
5
Same thing is going on in NYC (and probably other major cities).
We treat dogs better in NYC than homeless people.
If a stray dog is found in the street, which is rare, they are put in a shelter.
If a homeless person is left out in the cold, they are left there to freeze to death.
It is the sign of a society in deep trouble.
2
California continues to ignore or not ask why most of these people are homeless...
Building more housing won’t fix the root causes of homelessness.
Stop tiptoeing around the real issue.
Hint.... it’s not the economy.
2
I lived in California for about 50 years, in a nice suburb of a middle size city.
I watched several things happen.
First of all, there was lots of immigration from Latin America. Many of the immigrants were farm workers. Hoovervilles developed along Highway 101 between LA and SF.
The state budget shifted priorities as time went on. In 1965, tuition at the University of California was free, and scholarships were plentiful.
But the immigrants had lots of children. And the State shifting funds from support of the university to K12. Now the university costs a small fortune.
In recent years, I noticed laws directed against campers. The shopping center had a sign saying no overnight camping. I had bought a camper myself and learned that local regulations prevented camping on most of the streets in my city.
I moved to Washington and now see the growth of homeless camps here. When I drive into town, I see tents in some of the public places. I wonder what it is like living in a tent in the rain.
Folks, this is a consequence of too much population growth.
I know. You have theories. Simply confiscate the wealth of the wealthy and poverty will disappear.
But the devil is in the details. And people, meaning voters like you and me, don't know how to carry it off.
Except by using birth control.
Now planet earth is pushing back. Will we start using birth control when the glaciers of Greenland melt?
Or will Democrats say the glaciers are melting because of racism?
5
This whole issue has got me completely baffled. How can there be this many people with:
1) No relatives willing to take them in.
2) No friends willing to take them in.
3) No shelters willing to take them in.
4) No mental health or addiction facilities willing to take them in.
5) Nowhere to move to that they can afford.
Something is deeply wrong. I'd really like someone to do some research, talk to a whole bunch of these people, and figure out what is really going on. I've been dissatisfied with every explanation I've heard.
1
So, Trump haters, which is worse, the GOP plan of separating families at our border, or the Democratic controlled plan of California that has resulted in tens of thousands of homeless Americans?
3
Give them homes.
A studio apartment on the edge of town costs a fraction of what emergency services spends on each homeless person per year.
We are literally paying billions of dollars to punish them and thus prove a point — the point is the "You're Not Worthy." and "It's God's Will." Well it is if you believe John Calvin's 16th century interpretation of God. This still appeals greatly to the Christians here — predetermination — question not the hand of the lord in dispensing fate.
Trouble is we're a secular republic with a constitution. Both political parties have known for years that homelessness serves as a cautionary tale that keeps people working for any wage, in any situation of duress or exploitation — It's part and parcel of the Reagan Era trickle down "Pro Business" Agenda.
Again the evidence that it's been intentionally maintained by the status quo despite the fact that it's more expensive than giving away housing to maintain such a large homeless population.
Give them homes.
It's been tried in Utah and worked. It's a Republican state with a fraction of California's money. I don't groove on the Mormon's History but they got that right.
Profit over shelter use of housing is a major issue.
AirBnb is a major "disrupter" of residential real estate.
Also, the for profit real estate lobby.
Second largest contributor to Trump is in real estate:
GH Palmer Associates
https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race/contributors?id=N00023864
How about
1. Coming down hard on illegal immigration
2. Funding mental asylums, and making them really asylums from the world.
3. Funding public housing.
These are all things that dont require a change in the law. Just a change in emphasis. They have been around for a hundred years or more. They work. Just do it.
5
“Let’s call it what it is: It’s a disgrace that the richest state in the richest nation, succeeding across so many sectors, is falling so far behind to properly house, heal and humanely treat so many of its own people,”
Had Trump said something like this, he would have been roundly assaulted by the very same people who are saying this now, and who are actually spearheading this crisis.
CA has forever been the liberal bastion as well as the place with the rampant illegal immigration, indescribable gap between those with money and those without, and with apparently untenable living conditions for many years.
Which all means nothing to the wealthy liberals; they have their high-tec monopolistic money, Teslas, lofty ideals, favorite pets. Lesser people count for nothing in their lives.
5
1. "150,000 Californians without homes"
2. "compounds that resemble some of the world’s most destitute refugee camps"
3. "tens of thousands of hypodermic needles and the human waste picked up from sidewalks"
4. "The state has one of the highest poverty rates in the country"
Newsom's brilliant conclusion: "California is the rocket fuel powering America’s resurgence"
Perhaps it's time for California to finally secede.
I don't think the other 49 states share Newsom's vision for "America's resurgence".
1
If you’re going to the ‘sanctuary city’ of San Francisco, forgo the flowers in your hair and wear a hazmat suit...because you’ll be dodging garbage-strewn homeless encampments, human waste, and used needles in the city by the bay. Thanks to ‘progressives’...otherwise known as Democrats...who advocate for the rights of the homeless and ‘undocumented’ to do as they please, wherever they please...
Be sure your bank account is flush, because you’ll be paying exorbitant hotel and restaurant costs, taxes, and parking fees if you have a car (which is an absolute necessity but also frustrating, because you’ll get stuck in traffic going in any direction no matter the time of day, and parking spaces are rare as hen’s teeth).
If/when you ever leave the bay area, you might very well miss the wonderful food and restaurant scene...but very likely you will not be leaving your heart in San Francisco.
5
Trump already said this was a disgrace.. But when he said it, the NYT chastised him for it...Next perhaps a Democrat will say that Baltimore's slums are a disgrace too. As long as these type of comments are made by Democrats it's OK, I guess.?
5
The liberal hypocrites of calif talk woke, just don't touch their lifestyle.
6
I'd rather be homeless in Venice Beach, CA than downtown Minneapolis. Weed is legal, the sun's out most of the time, and it's got that gorgeously warm Pacific breeze gently blowing.
DUH.
7
Newsom can't/won't solve the homeless crisis, but that's not the point. The point is: He Cares. And caring - caring hard, caring to the point of tears/disgust - that's what matters in California. That's what keeps the donkey party in power.
3
https://californiaglobe.com/section-2/the-only-plan-to-end-homelessness/
Article above by Dr Drew Pinsky is the first intelligent solution I've read to actually end homelessness by addressing the mental health and drug addiction problems rather than building affordable housing that will be useless to those in need of medical treatment as Newsom is advocating. (Would the solution for a homeless cancer patient be to give them an apartment?) If you live in LA County District 4, Susan Collins is a write-in candidate against incumbent David Ryu and she's the only candidate running in support of the policies outlined in this article below. Let's actual start local and fix this problem, yes?
https://www.facebook.com/SusanCollinsLA/
https://www.susancollinsla.com/working-together-to-tackle-homeless
https://www.susancollinsla.com/
1
Lots of talk about “solving” the homelessness crisis, but the solutions are not addressing the underlying problems.
The bill before the legislature would upend local zoning so “affordable” housing can be built. Affordable means that the person living in it will still be paying way too much per square foot, while degrading the building standards.
One of the drivers of housing costs is the scarcity of houses on the market versus demand. Another is that new buyers pay the highest property taxes per home value, thanks to Prop 13’s unfair scheme. A new buyer of a $250K home may easily pay more property taxes than somewhere with a $2.5M house that has been held since the 1980’s.
If Newsom and other politicians want to address housing costs, not just stuff people into smaller and worse housing, they will address the fact that new, young buyers are paying the taxes for rich old farts who own their multimillion dollar mansions who are being subsidized in their public services.
1
“Doctors should be able to write prescriptions for housing the same way they do for insulin and antibiotics,” he said.
Sure. That would work. Docs can't get diagnostics or treatments for patients because they have lost control of the system to Wall st. Thanks to archaic laws against docs organizing/unionizing, the non-medical corporations control the docs while using their financial might to spread the "greedy doctor" myth. These corps engage in the corporate practice of medicine with work-arounds designed to extract as much profit as possible from the system while laughing behind closed doors at the foolish public.
People need to think a little. The government should provide the most basic of services to all its citizens. Vaccines, preventative care, blood pressure medicine, etc. Shrink the size of the health care pie eaten for corporate profit. Use the savings to build some basic shelters with clean water and clean toilets. Stock it with a few social workers to help keep citizens in the system. If they are getting some minimal income paid to maintain the facilities they sleep and drink and poop at, they will be somewhat vested. Unless the government plans to euthanize the homeless, they will be picking up the bill one way or the other. So grow up and provide at least a bare minimum. Otherwise government is paying for the cop to dump the homeless @ the ER and paying the nurse to give them a shower.
Anyone who thinks our society is not greedy has not been paying attention.
The startling appearance of so many homeless here in L.A. is due, in part. to the Boise case in which a federal judge created a constitutional "right" to squat on public property. This ruling, combined with our mild climate, removed an incentive to seek traditional housing. The "stunning" rise in the homeless population exactly coincide with the Boise decision.
Parks and sidewalks have been effectively taken from the public and abandoned to a population that more often than not is enmeshed in substance abuse or dazed with mental illness.
Both the homeless and the public have lost because of the court.
10
My California city has two large scale ( multi-story, multi-unit) affordable housing buildings under construction right now. They are within easy walking distance of shops and transportation. It's the second such project in my city in the past 5 years. But I live in a very diverse, working class city, not a majority white, upper middle class city where the residents refuse to do anything to address homelessness. Too many NIMBY's, not enough affordable housing in California.
2
Shelter is an essential human need—like water, food, and clothing. But now that shelter is not only an investment, but a highly lucrative investment, the sole incentive is to keep shelter scarce so that it remains valuable.
No one who owns a priceless painting or a piece of rare gold jewelry wants the value of that item to decline. Why would any person who can afford to build housing want to build it if the building of lots of new low-cost housing will bring down the value of the existing housing?
We have painted ourselves into a very nasty corner. Millions of units of old, affordable buildings (single occupancy hotels, Huffman “six-pack” apartments, boarding houses, etc.) have been torn down and nothing comparable has been put in their places. Instead, the new housing is “fine art” housing that is mean to be a valuable investment for a private owner, bank or hedge fund.
If this trend continues, in the not-so-distant future, only banks and hedge funds will own real estate. People with lots of money will compete to rent the high-end properties from those big financial institutions—and everyone else will live on the street like a wild animal.
So. What else can be done but to create housing that exists outside the world of high-end investment? Yes, that means government-subsidized or other non-profit forms of housing. I can’t see what else to do because our current Wall Street housing system has created a nightmare.
11
@Heather There's plenty of shelter in other parts of the country. There's no human right to live in SF or NYC or Seattle or any other nice expensive city.
6
@Heather
The real issue is too many people want to live in the same place so of course the prices goes up. It also means that you may need to go somewhere else. Southern California is nice, but having a job and house somewhere else might make more sense.
5
@KM
But every city needs low income workers. If a city only has millionaires, who will drive the trash truck, flip the burgers or teach the kids? Every city needs a range of rents and home prices because it has a range of incomes!
Wouldn't that 'action' being pleaded for be opening closed military bases?
1
Not only has it happened under Democratic rule in CA but also Illinois, New York, and New Jersey. I wish our politicians would stop the us against them nonsense and start helping people. Both parties for decades have claimed to have our best interests in mind but obviously they do not.
You can spare me the evil GOP versus the compassionate DNC argument as it does not hold water.
17
After eight years of Jerry Brown, the immensity of the problem is no surprise. Listen to any interview with him that asks about housing. He fundamentally did not think housing was an issue for the State Government to solve. Additionally, any idea that zoning changes and neoliberal incentives are sufficient to solve this issue are just a fantasy. There is only one thing that has worked around the developed world. If you want affordable housing, the government has to make affordable housing. Just because the racist segregated "towers in parks" projects of the past failed, is no reason not to build modern public housing now.
3
Taxes don't have to go up. Costs have to come down. Manufactured housing is a quarter the cost of site built. FEMA trailers and bus lines can be put in overnight so people can live and get to jobs. Don't like the look of a trailer park? It's better than a homeless camp. More people can be allowed in an apartment or trailer. People can be allowed to use their SSN for identification again and not required to have a permanent address. Long term care for the mentally ill will have to be tax funded, as it once was.
6
Local control will be the death of efforts to truly address homelessness, housing affordability, climate change, and other issues tied to housing. Local leaders are incented to respond to local voters. A large percentage of those local voters are home owners. They have no incentive to approve, much less advocate for, more housing and higher density housing. Local homeowners are the "haves" in the equation, and can hide behind open space, local control of the look of development, and other infrastructure arguments to block the development of more housing. The homeless and the under-housed have very little effective voice at the local government level. To truly address the need to massively build more housing, we need to take control away from those who have a vested interest in preserving the status quo, and give it to leaders who are better able to see the bigger picture. We have a duty to make sure that we are providing housing to our fellow Californians.
4
I'm so relieved to see Gavin Newsom addressing this issue and with vigor. When I drive by a homeless encampment - my urge it to do something but don't know where to begin. Then I beat myself up for driving a newish car and eating lavishly and having things when others are in crisis. How can anyone feel content to "have" when their neighbors suffer. THIS must be treated as an emergency.
3
@Kirstie Dunbar-Kari .... So what's your problem? Go buy some small denomination gift cards from CVS or McDonalds or anywhere($5.00at most) and walk amongst them and hand them out. I do it all the time. You'd be surprised at how much better you'll feel about yourself and get a real appreciation of what they are going thru.
Congratulations California residents, your taxes are about to go up again. Will it make a difference this time? Based on history, I'd say no. Most of the street homeless need involuntary commitment for drugs or mental illness, and the rest should move someplace where they can afford the rent. But instead the government will hire a bunch of new social workers, and set up free facilities for the homeless, which will encourage more to come.
20
California lacks sufficient public housing systems for those who can’t afford standard rents. In the past, large cities like Chicago and New York City had “the projects” for individuals and families that couldn’t afford a place to live. Municipalities in California don’t want such public housing systems in their cities, so it’s resulted in a large homeless population. Building more half million dollar and up homes won’t fix the problem, because the homeless can’t afford them.
2
No one is rooting more for California to get its house, or tent, in order than Texas. The broad exodus of Californians to its less sophisticated neighbor is tilting the deck to the left and the natives are more than restless. Hopefully, climate change will ironically save the day as urban temperatures make it intolerable for the tarnished Guilded Age to take hold.
2
I am happy he addressed this issue. We need a movement to combat homelessness. The Poor Peoples Campaign lead by Reverend Barber has valuable solutions to grapple with housing issues. Our whole country needs to understand that most citizens are one or two paychecks away from homelessness. It is not due to lack of hard work. It is due to greedy policies created by politicians. Most people want to work and contribute but when you are at the end of your rope....you just don't care.
5
It's not that Newsom is "vulnerable to the charge," its a fact.
3
Drunks, drug addicts, and the mentally ill aren't going to do much better with a roof over their heads, no matter what the rent is, or, isn't. They'll just keep on keeping on until they're booted back out - as happened with their friends, families, spouses, etc. to get them "out there." Runaways and criminals? Again, their problems are more than just a place to sleep or to lock up some food. Spend some time with these people - it's what's in their heads and hearts that get them and keeps them on "the outs." Housing? I was a poor student and found room-mate situations for years... Living in cars? Is that a problem? I've traveled this country from one side to another with everything I had... Working for gas money, feeding quarters into laundromats, cooking by the side of the road... Of course, I wasn't addicted to anything, wasn't mentally deranged, and, was pleasant enough that I could "get along" with others. Bad luck? I had the "life skills" to get by... I didn't get drunk, shoot up, rob, break into someone's house or car to "get my get by." Most the homeless aren't helpless - you try living "out there." But, they are, very very often, set in their ways. Some things YOU can't fix - but they could.
19
When public policy condones, or in California's case encourages uncivil behavior, you get more of it. It's that simple.
Add the fact that the temperate climate attracts vagrants from all over the US for its easy outdoor squatting and wahlah, paradise lost. (I don't many homeless here in St Paul because it was -8 F this morning).
There is only one real solution and it does not involve building more free or low cost housing. That would only attract more "homeless". We need tough love. Implement state wide criminal anti vagrancy and panhandling laws, and then round them up and relocate them to internment camps in the desert, where they can be sifted into two categories; the crazy ones (most of them) go back into state mental hospitals, and the the rest get dried out cold turkey until they are fit to be released back in their home states.
Yes this would involve spending considerable money to build the camps and refurbish the long abandoned mental hospitals, but still cheaper in the long run that ignoring the problem.
8
@BearBoy or you can approach it like Finland does. Put a roof over their heads, no strings attached. They have been doing this for over a decade and the homeless rate is dropping.
1
Virtue Signaling 101.
10
New housing in CA is always being blocked by the NIMBY homeowners of CA. Even in my super blue area, there are plans to build new apartments just around the corner from my neighborhood where there is a vacant lot and already my neighbors have issued a call to fight off this construction. These are the same people who complain about the prevalence of homelessness in the first place. The lack of compassion in these NIMBY homeowners is utterly disgusting. They only care about their property value, hoping to get a good resale value once they move out of state to retire.
10
The most practical of his ideas is letting local communities use the large swaths of state-owned land. We have tiers of homelessness here. A place to park with bathrooms and cleaners would really help the many who live in their cars. Trailer parks on state land would be hugely welcome for those who simply can't afford even the cheapest rental because it is quickly do-able. (The state needs to fund the salaries of those needed to keep the grounds clean.) High rises next to transit would take forever to build and would not be affordable to those who end up on the street. His idea of loosening the strictures for placing the mentally ill in care facilities are needed. And the state needs care facilities that are NOT privatized. Homeless addicts, I don't know what to do. What passes now for the long-established state-mandated 'affordable' housing here is for people making in the high five-figure and low six-figure salaries -- not for anyone else. It's one of the current and rather useless mandates that sounds good and lets legislators say they are doing something but is completely useless for the poor. I'm glad he's addressing it.
33
@Jan Shaw Talk cheap and action is hard. I will be surprised even shocked if Governor Newsome does more than kick the can down the road as Gerry Brown did.
2
@Jan Shaw what about liability? If someone is assaulted or murdered on State owned land it opens itself up to all kinds of legal problems.
1
@Jan Shaw Finally an article that tells the truth about California's housing crisis. We're where we are today in this state because the Democrats have sold their soul to those who are against all housing construction. State, county, & municipal legislators have made it impossible for new housing to be built. This is a Democratically controlled state from top to bottom. Affordable housing has always been one of the cornerstones of our party. This state should be a showcase of how well we can execute this policy. Instead, it's yet another example of our complete hypocrisy. It's symptomatic of a much bigger problem. The growing divide between some Democrats who want to practice what they preach & fanatical progressives who want to strangle everything. Environmentalists will go to the barricades to stop any housing projects from being built here. Mind you we are talking about affordable housing for working-class families. Thanks to their efforts the gateway to middle-class security, has been pushed way beyond their reach. The ease with which people can stop housing developments is a direct result of the numerous local & state laws that favor environmental concerns over affordable homes. The result: millions of hard-working people are without access to high-quality low-cost housing. If we can't fix affordable housing here then we are doomed. This issue is connected to so many problems we need to address in this country. We all have a stake in solving California's housing crisis.
2
Two points that need more focus:
One, housing in California is obscenely expensive and local governments refuse to approve more building projects. El Camino Real, the main road through Palo Alto has multiple shuttered single story store fronts that have been that way for years because the owners cant get permission to build. California needs by-right construction laws where any building that complies with local zoning is automatically approved.
Two: People keep talking about how mental health issues cause homelessness, but there's good evidence to suggest that homelessness causes mental health problems. California doesn't have so much homelessness because the people here are uniquely mentally ill. We can't use mental health as an excuse to ignore the real problem - that housing costs and rent are going up huge amounts every year.
43
@William The causal link you draw between housing and mental health deserves much more focus. Newsom mentioned it too, that housing is literally the foundation from which Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs is built - Physiological Needs. Using his paradigm, you cannot expect a stable psyche to develop without shelter, a fact which leads the unsheltered to develop various degrees of mental illness. Any life stressor can bring about mental illness, becoming homeless is just one such event.
Along with healthcare, housing should also be in the conversation about basic human rights in this country, especially considering - as Newsom alludes - the two are not disconnected.
6
@William
A US state is not a closed system and policy discussions too often pretend otherwise.
People looking to start over or leave their families often choose California for the distance, opportunities and weather. As a result, people arrive with no safety net and a higher likelihood of trauma, etc. This means an increased propensity for homelessness.
The best approach to homelessness in California might be improving education, social services, tolerance and quality of life - everywhere else.
13
I live in NYC. There is a shelter next door to my building. There are many shelters in my neighborhood. I volunteer at a shelter a couple times a month. I see homeless people on the streets and in the subways all the time. I visited CA last year for the first time in many years and a friend gave me advanced notice about the homeless situation, in San Francisco in particular. I dismissed this, thinking I was very familiar with the impact homelessness has on people and neighborhoods. Boy, was I mistaken. I was entirely unprepared for what I saw on the streets of San Francisco (and Los Angeles for that matter). Homelessness is rampant. There are people everywhere. I was familiar with the desperation but not on this scale and, frankly, not with same sense of permanence. And for the latter, Newsom and other CA officials really need to be held accountable. There are many factors that contribute to homelessness. And solutions to the problems are challenging. However, leaders need to set the tone that this is problem and it needs to be solved. In CA, you don't get this sense at all. Instead, you get the sense that CA has determined to tolerate/embrace/endure/accept permanent homelessness (including encampments that look like 3rd world shantytowns). This cannot be. Politicians play a role. Citizens play a role. Developers play a role. Law enforcement plays a role. Community groups play a role. None of this appears to be happening in CA.
98
@SJG California has up to half of the nations homeless.The elephant at the root of rampant homelessness that you don't mention is unregulated capitalism, crony, libertarian and their ilk. As California goes so goes the country as a whole. Wake up America! Sanders for president!
6
Scout, can you please name a segment of the American economy that falls under “unregulated capitalism”? I’m at a loss to find even one that isn’t covered by an abundance of laws
20
@Michael How about the fact that Amazon and Apple paid virtually no federal taxes? That is an example of absolutely de facto "unregulated capitalism".
1
Newsom sounds more like Trump every day.
2
For all the Liberalism California claims--this is a huge disgrace. I see cats and dogs clothed better than the homeless--so backwards. If these homeless were dogs and cats(which I love) camping out--something would've been done by now....
1
Nothing to see here, there is no crisis.
$1.5B and 150,000 homeless = $100K per homeless person, get to work Dem's!
3
Let's call the crisis what it really is: California has a population crisis, not a housing crisis. Our politicians continuously talk about the urgent need to build more homes in the state, with no consideration of the water, sewer, utilities, transportation infrastructure, schools, hospitals, services including police and fire, and similar needs these new homes will all require. Where is the water going to come from, and how can we expect PG&E to efficiently provide electricity to these new homes, when the utility already blacks out millions of customers for days on end, ostensibly to prevent fires?
As for the 'disgraceful homeless crisis', the city of San Francisco alone has an annual budget of over $400 million dollars to deal with the 8000 homeless people living in the city, with little to no improvement year after year. Walk along the streets in the city, and you are greeted by human feces and urine, used needles, and homeless people strewn about who are often either shooting up or smoking drugs in plain sight, drinking booze in plain sight, or mumbling incoherently. It's not a homeless problem, it's a combination mental health, drug addiction, alcohol addiction problem. Until California acts on these true problems - as in involuntarily forcing homeless people into proper treatment - the homeless situation will not improve.
26
As usual, the Democratic Elites think the Socialism is for everybody else.
14
California is a disgrace. Exhibit A of the problems you end up with when you have a one party state. The only thing California can think to do is tax everything.
14
New Law: Any home over 3000 square feet must allow a homeless person to live there free of charge.
C'mon California, where's your liberal compassion?
14
In San Francisco itself the issue of homelessness too often is less a humanitarian issue than one of cosmetics. People living in the city complaining of individuals and homeless encampments as offensive eyes sores that have a negative effect on the quality of life. But as significant if not more so, homelessness is feared as having negative economic effects making the city an undesirable tourist destination. It may well be homelessness impacting tourism and the business life of the state that’s roused the state politicians and Governor Newsom to take action. Homelessness is particularly visible in San Francisco, a city where an individual income below $100,000 a year is considered low income. Where $15 an hour is the minimum wage. A city where $50 an hour would be more realistically aligned to cost of living.
4
In California, the Legislature has been in Democratic majorities since 1970, both the Assembly and the Senate. So if nothing gets done on housing, homelessness, look to the Democrats elected. The recent defeat of the housing bill SB50 is a good example. No other Democrats has come forth with an alternate proposal. Just say No says the Democrats tied to local control that blocks housing permits and growth. The Democrats cry about money all the time yet California is among the highest taxed states in the US. It ranks behind Connecticut and New York. The Governor says the problem was not created yesterday but over years. Fifty years.
8
@nagus The GOP controlled the Assembly from 1994-1996. Check it out.
2
The first thing we need is a plan. Short term and long term solutions.
Short term we need some type of camps with temporary structures as you would do in an emergency (which we are in). Long term we need affordable housing but it needs to be built in an affordable manner (we have seen a few unites built here at a cost of $500,000 per unit).
In Los Angeles the homeless population has exploded in the last few years. We passed a multi-billion tax increase to help but there was no plan. Just saying here's a few billion and we are going to hand it out to 100 non-profits who each house a dozen homeless is not a plan or solution.
20
@Jon T... How about we go back to the plan we had? You get drunk, do drugs on the sidewalk, steal, litter, crap outdoors, pitch a tent where you don't have any more right to do so than I do - you go to jail. And, maybe the jail has a "program" for you - that you have to go through before you get out. And/or if any folks want to pay your bail, take permanent responsibility for you, AND take you to THEIR homes, fine. Couldn't they offer a spare room, a couch, a hallway to sleep in? Do you caring people care enough to do it right? Tired of soft-headed "carers" enabling the "homeless" to be homed wherever THEY decide to drop their cans. This didn't used to be a "thing." Get a new thing. Encourage them to get a new thing too. See if any do. I'll bet it's been offered many times before...
1
Well then do something Mr. Newsom. You were mayor of SF when things really started on the pressure of affordable housing in SF - I remember seeing you at the Balboat. I go back to SF and the buildings look the same (except for the increased homeless situation.)
In Seattle, it feels like a new apartment building (or skyscraper) goes up every day.
7
Newsom, like Pelosi and Schiff play endless anti-Trump political games rather than addressing basic problems with the liberal progressive nightmare policies in their state.
22
There's been recent articles on the multi-billion dollar fiscal surpluses that California has been generating with Democratic leadership. That is criminal when its citizenry is homeless. This is actually worse than the existence of multi-billionaire individuals, because this surplus billions belongs to the people...therefore, spend it on the people.
6
@Manko
You must remember, the government you are talking about is the people. Californians don't seem to want to see the development of multiunit housing apartment complexes where single family housing spread far out into the "hills" reigns supreme. NIMBYism and protectionist zoning at its finest. I doubt it would change under Republican leadership.
25
@Charles It would not change, but it is likely that the Republicans would've pushed a tax cut and let people just keep their money (right or wrong). What i find offensive is that they have the money already, but they don't have the guts to spend it in housing the homeless, because apparently staying in power can be much more important than doing the right thing (regardless of political affiliation).
@Charles it is not about affordable housing. The homeless people in CA are from around the entire country. You can not make housing affordable for those only receiving social security or disability.
When will people finally realize that the free market has utterly failed to provide enough housing to meet demand? And it never will provide enough, because the free market does not see housing as a basic human need that everyone deserves, but as a commodity for only those who "deserve" it.
3
And also, who would ever work if housing were free?
5
@Blaire Why are you talking about the market when California has incredibly restrictive building codes and zoning laws? There's no free market in California. There are plenty of states like Texas with laxer zoning that have no trouble building enough housing.
6
Newsom is the problem, along with all the rest of the politicians in the state. I will never come back.
8
California perfectly highlights the differences between rich, pompous, ivy-league educated liberals who pay lip service to progressive values, and actual progressives who fully internalize these values.
Liberals are all for economic and social justice -- unless it means building public housing near their gated, racially segregated, luxury communities. Progressives believe in the inherit equality of all man, and don't believe the ultra-rich should even exist when we have people living in poverty. Progressives say housing is a right. Liberals say, well, let's not be too radical. Liberals advocate the same failed right-wing policies, only not to the same extreme; progressives want a total paradigm shift.
6
Three million more voters voted for Hillary over Trump. The net margin was entirely in California. While Trump works to make America great again, California writhes in homelessness and drug abuse. I think those are all Democrat districts, right? Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi have the House, but no help for their homeless. Just hoaxes and grandstanding. Gavin Newsom is no better.
11
NIMBYism is regressive, anti-poor and anti-environmental. You cannot call yourself progressive in anyway if you are in favor of restricting development.
5
Yesterday, as I approached the driver's side of my car, parked on my driveway, I noticed a homeless woman lying/sleeping(?) on the ground, in a sleeping bag, her feet touching the rear tire of my car. Because I had to drive my husband to a medical appointment, I called the police, who said they would come by and "move her along." I woke up this woman and told her that she had to move her feet, because I had to back my car out of my driveway. She immediately complied and started packing up clothing on the ground, along with her sleeping bag and shopping cart. When we returned about two hours later, she had left. California Legislature, please act! We need more housing. I live a few blocks from the University of California, Berkeley.
6
@Not a camp site The campus area has been the armpit of Berkeley for decades. Why do you stay in that area?
1
@Josh . My spouse refuses to sell the house and move. I guess I could get a divorce.
While there certainly are lots of things which can help reduce the homeless population there only ways a couple of ways to "cure" it. None of them are palatable.
1) Incarcerate, institutionalize, expel, and/or eliminate any homeless person who is unwilling or unable to house themselves.
2) Eliminate the free flow of people from one state, or maybe even metro region in a place as big as California, to another.
OR
Appropriate "underutilized" structures public and private. Give access to the homeless and then make sure they return every night instead of going back to the streets.
While I am in no way advocating the above solutions, those are the only was to cure all homelessness. Some people don't want to be helped and some people are unable to help themselves. Being that a cure is worse than the problem, that means we need to focus on what we can actually to do to better the situation. We need to build housing. The only question is where?
6
@Still Waiting... no - this is inhumane.
@Still Waiting... re-open the state mental hospitals, humanely. Some people CANNOT live on their own. I work in the mental health system and I know this for a fact.
5
@Kirstie Dunbar-Kari
Building housing is inhumane?
The problem is not that enough money is being spent on homelessness. The problem is that California is not building enough homes. If you want to solve the homeless crisis, start by eliminating prop 13, which gives homeowners a gift of fixed property taxes while the value of their home increases exponentially. Of course homeowners don't want new housing. Why would they want to increase supply when that will only dampen the increases in the value of their home? If homeowners had to deal with increasing property taxes, they'd probably be a lot more interested in new housing. Right now they are allowed to have their cake and eat it too.
A second issue is creating by-right zoning at the state level. If a property is zoned for multifamily housing, a developer should be able to build as much housing as allowed without endless hearings and negotiations with NIMBYs. It is crazy how long projects take because of the approval process (and it almost always ends up in less housing being built than allowed).
The answer is not spending more money. As proof of this, San Francisco spent $157 million in 2012, $242 million in 2016 and $364 million in 2019 but the problem has only gotten worse. Spending is not the answer, building is.
15
@Matt J. The problem is that taxes are based on property values. So except for any improvements they might make, the owner of the property has no control over the valuation of the home they live in. Their tax burden is completely set by market forces.
I'm not an anti-tax person, but some middle way has to be found.
1
@Matt J.
You right to address the Prop 13 issue. Not only do existing homeowners have incentives to stay in their homes, but they can pass their houses with their favorable property tax rates on to their children. This just locks in the mismatch between the costs of government and the received benefits. That mismatch must be made up by taxing the new buyer.
Supporters of Prop 13’s scheme will tell you about the poor grandma on fixed income who would be forced to move. They don’t tell you about all those rich old professionals who are parking their new luxury cars in their garages and paying one tenth of the property taxes that would be collected from a new buyer. You bet they are not going to sell.
@Matt J. .... We need a forensic accounting of where that kind of money is going.
The Homeless problem is huge in California, but it has become a problem all across the US. Denver's homeless population is growing and all attempts to rein in it so far have failed. Housing costs are obviously an issue, but is that the only reason that homelessness has risen across the US? It's not. The opioid epidemic caused many people to lose their way and that minimum wage jobs no longer pay enough to keep an individual afloat. Then add into the mix those afflicted with mental health issues, alcohol and drug addiction, and you've got a mess. There needs to be a multi-prong approach to the homeless crisis that involves providing a safe home and meals and then as their lives stabilize begin mental health and drug counseling, job training, and education programs. It's not an easy fix and as we know many politicians aren't interested in tackling a problem that might take a few years before we begin to reap the benefits.
6
@JWyly It is a drug problem not a homeless problem. I know my business partners son is part of the problem.
@JWyly
Overall, homelessness has fallen in the US with the exception of California. CA now has somewhere around half of all the homeless in the country.
I live a few blocks from the University of California, Berkeley. Recently, two houses across the street from my home have been put up for sale, with these asking prices: (1) $899,000 for 1,026 square feet and (2) $1,050,000 for 1,511 square feet. My husband and I purchased our house in 1979 for about $54,000; we were both working part-time at that time.
18
In San Francisco the median home price now is well over $1 million. The median rent for an apartment in the city is now in the vicinity of $3,000 a month. A two bedroom renting for as much as $8,000 a month. In my own neighborhood over the last ten years numerous high rise apartment buildings have been constructed intruding into a residential neighborhood with traditionally Victorian buildings. These newly constructed rental buildings offering rentals in the $5,000 a month range.
4
Which is essentially a 7% growth rate over that period -- closely aligned with the broader market. Fortunately, the Berkeley area is renown for generous residents who could monetize their homes and donate much of the proceeds to fighting homelessness.
The homelessness problem, the high-rent problem, the shrinking middle class problem all come down to one thing. People in this country are seen as resources to exploit for money and you make the most money from poor, desperate people. There is an economic incentive to purchase trailer parks and raise the rent, and an economic incentive to increase productivity while hiring fewer workers without pay increases, and an economic incentive to require a college degree for jobs that don’t need it.
I don’t think we need to throw out the system like some progressives, nor do I think we should continue to reward the victors without acknowledging the social costs.
I think we need to change the measuring stick and tie measurement of the health of an economy to the welfare of it’s people. We need to understand that the job of a business is to make money and that the people of the country need to be repositioned as shareholders in the wealth of the country rather than resources capital can use to further its aims.
And for those on here saying it is all mental health or addiction you definitely haven’t seen enough. Families living in cars or RVs are pretty common around here and many of the homeless are elderly. I know. I talk to them like the humans they are.
29
California is just one of many states with a large homeless population but every state has their own populations.
Iowa legislators are now trying to pass a bill to have work requirements for those receiving Medicaid and SNAP food benefits. All of the recipients of those programs are already working for the most part except those on disability or caregivers.
Passing laws like this will only increase the number of homeless people in the United States.
8
I'm living a little north of LA. My landlord just raised my rent 7% with no justification. I guess they can do it because there's insufficient apartments on the better side of town. Now my rent is going to $2400 a month, plus $80/month for shared utilities like water, sewage and garbage, plus gas and electric totalling a around $100/month. That totals up to about 50% of my monthly net. Not as insane as the Bay area, but getting closer every year. Houses average in the $600k range. Wages haven't kept pace. I'm moving over to Nevada for lower rents and taxes.
40
@Dave California just passed a rent cap clause limiting annual increase to 5% plus COI (cost of living) for the area. Your landlord is playing the fair game, not that I agree with it. Being a native Californian I'm growing more and more open to leaving for the possibility of having a better financial life. Just hope we can get into other states before they start to do the same thing.
7
Good luck. Please register and vote Democratic when you get there.
9
@Michael So that Dave can turn Nevada into CA? My brother in Vegas wants the CA people to stay there
2
I'm with a few other posters here-the homeless I see in downtown Fort Worth, Dallas and Austin are not folks who just need a wash, job and then back on their feet. I see mentally ill and those in throes of addiction wandering around like zombies. Just last month I saw a man with his shirt off in 35 degree weather yelling at the sky while relieving himself on the sidewalk. I've seen a woman walking shoeless on the shoulder of a freeway staring at the sky oblivious to her proximity to semis going by. It's sad and it's pointless to call for help for them because there's nothing police can do.
They folks cannot function in society because of the demons in their heads and in their veins. Simple housing won't work. They need constant care in an institution and until we force folks to get help we'll be stepping over them or avoiding cities who house them for years to come.
60
@Mich Very well said.
I’m not a resident of California, but how is building new housing for the homeless going to solve this problem ? The vast majority of these people don’t have jobs and/or are drug addicts, how will they pay rent for theses homes the governor wants to build ? Are they to live there for free ? Will taxes increase ? Wouldn’t free housing just invite more homeless people to move to California ? This is not a solution.
41
@Susan Dallas
I am a 68 year old native Californian. You hit the nail on the head. No matter what measures you take the nation’s homeless will continue to come for the same reason that others always have - - - our Mediterranean climate is the best in the world . Our good fortune is no longer so blessed .
16
@Susan Dallas
Increasing the housing stock would drive down prices, incrementally reducing evictions of the working poor.
Free housing would simply attract more homeless from other states.
3
Gavin Newsom could actually do something to help the homeless.
Start a WPA program for those able to work like all those who lost homes and jobs during the wildfires. Doing nothing isn't working.
10
Expensive housing has been a problem in California since at least 1975, when my husband and I first wanted to buy a house. The price actually doubled during the time we spent touring homes and saving more money. Meanwhile, the newspapers were full of stories on the need for more housing, while homeowners in every community were passing no-growth policies. Newsom has the right idea when he wants to bypass local government and build, but it needs to happen quickly. As one NYT story has already shown, the homeless encampments in Oakland are worse than the ones in Mexico.
9
Sitting in one of those sun kissed coastal cities right now. My sweet town is one of the most expensive place to live in the entire country and the homeless occupy public sidewalks local parks and more. My take is that two things contribute- First, policies that refuse to allow needed development in our town - our young college students pay $1000 a month for a room/loft/shed - because the older generation of home owners claim that they want to keep the charm of our town while earning boatloads of money off the young and the working class. The second -the outrageously tolerant allowance for drug use of all kinds- liquor sold in every story including pharmacies, watching out for needles on the beaches and other public spaces- we somehow believe that the use of drugs and alcohol is a personal choice and that we should be tolerant of one another. But that self-choice is a disaster for too many and they often end of up on the streets living in tents in homeless communities that perpetuate drug addiction and self-destruction. And we all have to live with it.
61
@JBW
" . . .liquor sold in every store including pharmacies . . ."
We have this in Ohio; I don't think it's a phenomenon that is unique to California.
5
@eheck Exactly. California is by no means the only state that has it. They are unique in many ways, but not that.
3
So, somebody notices that the homeless are everywhere.
To deal with this situation we must take a lesson from the great "Okie" migration to California in the 1930s. The Arvin Federal Government Camp in California was beloved by those who were able to be helped by it.
John Steinbeck, the great American novelist and humanist, praised it and it's administrator, Tom Collins, even dedicating one of his greatest novels, The Grapes of Wrath, to him (...to Tom who lived it).
The camp is better known as Weedpatch. I suggest that California and every state in the nation create thousands of Weedpatches, basically, campgrounds with social services.
Solving at least the most tragic cases of homelessness has always seemed to me like a no-brainer because of the example by Steinbeck and Collins.
I won't go on. Homelessness is ridiculously easy to fix.
27
I grew up in Bakersfield and never knew the genesis of Weedpatch. It was just the humorous name of a tiny town to me and my friends. But, honestly, California and the nation need long-term solutions that start with constructing more homes and increasing density near transit so that people who have jobs can get to them in a timely and cost-efficient manner. We won’t solve affordable housing without millions of more homes.
5
@Jojojo The Okies came to California looking for opportunity and a better life.
If you were to set up a "Weedpatch" in California now (Where, exactly? In the desert?), it'd soon become a drug-infested, trash-strewn, crime-ridden money pit that would need an armed perimeter to keep people from leaving. That's called a prison.
The homeless in my former hometown, San Francisco, bear little resemblance to Steinbeck's Joad family, and if you'd ever been harassed at an ATM, stepped over an OD'd junkie in a BART station, stepped in human feces on a sidewalk or found your car window shattered more times than you care to think about you'd know that.
"No brainer?" "Ridiculously easy to fix?" Please.
19
These articles are a good reflection of why homelessness persists. They always interview one or two legitimate victims of the economy -- an unemployed handyman or evicted mother of two -- and then toss in a non sequitur about "tens of thousands of needles".
California has more homeless than other states for reasons that rarely get mentioned in these articles:
1. Great weather that supports 4 season outdoor living.
2. A romanticized view of the homeless population which avoids addressing the harder issues.
3. A social-services-only approach which makes California streets a magnet for the dissolute.
4. Indifference to the petty crimes, such as automobile smash and grab, that support the homeless communities.
124
@M. Casey
I agree. What is needed is both empowerment for those who want to better their lives, and rigorous enforcement of penalties for antisocial behaviors that are already illegal. This simple fact of someone's homelessness shouldn't lead to their detention, but those who persist in denying public space (like public parks, or sidewalks) to others by squatting (all too literally, sometimes), discarding needles, etc. need to be treated as violators. This is not a civil liberties issue. It's an issue of public health and safety.
It's possible to be homeless and still know how to act. But it's clear that all too many homeless people simply refuse to do so, and they'll take all the slack that they're cut and demand more. So I have no objection to chronic violators (and criminal offenders like vandals and burglars- of course!) being detained and sorted out, in order to attempt to address their personal problems- be they mental health issues, addictions, and blatant antisociality and/or criminal predation. I have no problem with dysfunctional addicts guilty of criminal offenses on the books being sentenced to a year in places dedicated to rehabilitation, or at minimum keeping them sober long enough to figure out that if they're determined to resume their self-harming behaviors, they'll need to do it without burdening everyone else around them- or they'll be forced into abstention detention again. That may sound cold to some folks, but it's the only sensible deal out there.
11
@M. Casey Speaking of street crime, what about corporate real estate smash and grab?
The Wall Street finance profits only approach to policy?
The harder issues of police violence & elimination of federal funding support for welfare, housing, health care, and education in an economy of deindustrialization and precarious "gig" jobs?
9
@Bill Wolfe
I know that question isn't addressed to me, but it's an entirely different topic. I think rapacity at the top needs to be forcibly reined in- and treated as criminal, when that's appropriate (and more of it should be treated as lawless.) The level of wealth stratification in this country is perilous.
But white-collar sociopathy and criminal behavior does not force anyone to defecate in a building stairwell, spread their bedroll on a public sidewalk, toss their dirty needles on a park playground, loll around for hours with their eyes rolled up in their head while locked in a public library bathroom stall, harass pedestrians for money or lulz, discard their half-eaten food and garbage on the street... there's no way that wealth inequality has some occult power to transform those behaviors into anything other than personal choices.
Not all homeless people, okay? I get that. I've met homeless people who were upright people, even sages and saints. Despite their personal struggles, sometimes. But the antisocial level of dissolution is all too widespread. And the heedlessness is contagious, especially among dysfunctional young males. Enforced by example and expectation, especially when not counteracted by law enforcement efforts.
6
It’s not just housing. Addiction and mental health issues drive this crisis as well. Enforce the laws, provide intensive treatment including medication assisted treatment behind bars and create community supports to keep it going. This is a big problem but other states have figured it out. Shout out to Rhode Island!
14
Experiments in other parts of the country have shown that society is much better off if it provides free housing to the homeless and a large % get back on their feet. Issue becomes convincing some of them to live in, for example, San Jose rather than San Francisco or Santa Cruz.
2
We already have our fair share in San Jose, thanks anyway. Housing is very expensive here too. Building high density housing does not address the problems of drug addicted and alcoholic people frequently with mental health problems building camps along roads and in neighborhoods.
If people set up a camp they can count on being undisturbed for about three months before the city comes in and moves them along. In their wake there is a site with tons of garbage and human waste which requires expensive cleanup. These are not people who will be in a position to work and pay rent. Most of them need treatment but we force no one into treatment. The city knows they are there, homeless services staff show up with sandwiches etc. but allowing people to camp where camping is illegal for three months or more is tacit permission for them to continue. We need to give folks an option to go to a shelter, an authorized campground, or a treatment facility, or to family if they have one that will take them in. We are doing neither the homeless nor the community at large any favors by our current policies.
11
Its just very difficult to get people to quit using substances when they dont really want to. These are not employable people so you have a bit of a stand off. Many seem to be surviving on their own terms, and it is after all a free country, isnt it?
2
Although California draws the most attention, this is a nationwide issue. Without addressing the root causes of increasing wealth inequality and steady removal of social safety nets, we are doomed to failure.
14
From the homeless persons I have encountered in my travels across the country, it is important to note that this is not a problem with a simple solution. I encountered many who were afflicted with addiction, suffering with mental illness, running from abusive homes, or just ending up in a run of bad luck. In all cases, they find themselves in a situation that is hard to get out of. It eats my soul and find myself motivated by a fear that with just one bad day, I could end up in the same situation. Clearly our economic and societal structure is flawed and we have to explore new (or maybe old?) ways of thinking that will build on our tribal roots.
6
The homelessness situation in California is untenable, and the most stark evidence for it are the streets of San Francisco. In my own town, the homeless camp out in parks, trails, and downtown. They appear in traffic in the middle of busy streets, endangering themselves and others, and they scare people by virtue of their presence. It is heartbreaking and frustrating, so I am glad when the governor addressed the issue with some concrete and compassionate solutions. Contrast Newsom's approach with Trump's recent punitive nose-holding, and callous solutions, if you can call them that.
13
Newsom allowed homelessness to grow in SF under his mayoral leadership. He gave away services like they were water without considering how that would enable the problem. At least in this State of the State speech he recognizes the need to change some of our ineffective laws on mandatory treatment of mental illness. But his idea of throwing more money at the problem is wrong. The state has no idea how much local and county money already goes to programs. California has no accountability of where dollars are spent and what results those dollars are yielding. Newsom’s approach of spend more, a classic Democratic quick fix approach, needs to stop. We need to demand our taxes be spend smarter. Tax payers should not have to continually foot the bill for layer upon layer of ineffective or marginally effective solutions that have not been vetted for outcomes.
44
We cant force people to get medical treatment. That is a matter of rights, not laws.
1
This is not only a CA problem and I think it’s naive to blame the crisis on high housing costs in the state. CA homeless are from all over the US. There will always be homeless here because of moderate weather and permissive attitudes. The entire country needs to take steps towards providing supportive housing.
27
@DRM What hourly rate of pay would a renter need to afford a basic apartment? How about a 2-3 bedroom for a family of 4? Are those jobs plentiful and do they require degrees beyond a Bachelors? Get real; affordable housing is a nationwide problem, greedy landlords and all. America can spend billions on wars but not housing?
6
@Betty
I think we’re on the same side Betty. I’m only saying there are issues beyond lack of housing with homeless in CA and building more housing in CA will not solve the problem. More housing and supportive housing needed across the entire US.
4
GN will die on this cross. A single unit costs $450,000 to build and they need many tens of thousands.
2
The solution is to eliminate all private property.
Then the homeless can move into any house they choose since all houses will be public property.
Sanders for President.
9
@jck: This is a frivolous answer to two serious matters. Not funny. Real people are suffering, and Sanders, like him or not, hasn't proposed anything remotely like confiscating homes.
3
The homeless problem has exploded without solution over the time he's been lt. governor and no solution or remedy was put forth by leadership. And, the CA economy has exploded but he had very little, if anything, to do with that.
I used to enjoy visiting San Francisco. Now I dread it. Same with Santa Monica. It’s not surprising though that California is a magnet for the homeless. If I was homeless I’d want to love by the beach in Santa Monica too.
30
I would like to see Governor Newsom in the Democratic presidential field in the future.
3
@Georgina Why?
@Georgina That could be interpreted many ways depending on what party that you belong to.
Fine, he finally acknowledged what we as citizens can see. I wish he would criticize the policies that have led to this disgrace too. CA has essentially been a single party state for 30 years and they own the outcomes of their housing and environment policies which were well meaning but failures. Time for a new approach. Come on Governor, you can do better.
16
@Paul reminds you of the fall out about Baltimore last year-billions spent-no one knows where it went. Not being critical just wondering where is the accountability.
2
@Paul
What single party state? You must have forgotten about about Republican governors George Deukmajian, Pete Wilson, and Arnold Schwarzeneggar - they account for more than half the time you're talking about.
11
@Paul You can thank the GOP for Prop 13, which lets existing homeowners not deal with the high cost of housing which is driven by a lack of supply.
6
Low income housing alone will not come close to solving the homeless problem in CA. Health care, including for mental health and addiction treatment, and job training are also critical.
I think this is the best solution:
1. Build UN-style refugee camps on unused city or state land outside of the busy and expensive parts of cities and towns. Provide healthcare, job training and food, much like the gigantic 50,000 plus refugee camp, Zaatari, in Jordan. Zaatari is efficiently run, and is more or less a permanent settlement for many people.
2. Make it illegal to camp, sleep, shoot drugs, etc. on public sidewalks, parks, freeway underpasses, etc. Zero tolerance. People who break the law will be gently removed in service vans and driven to their new home which provides shelter and ample services. Civil libertarians will howl but I see no other viable long-term solution.
87
@Andio Ryan
Bad idea. To put them all in one place makes it much worse. Breeds despair and entrenches unemployment.
No better to separate out the mentally ill, and treatt them and give them asylum in dispersed institutions.
Build dispersed public housing, solid permanent stuff,
and slow illegal immigration. First generation works in the fields, health breaks, second generation turns to crime, and of then to drugs and homelessness.
@Andio Ryan
On Point 2, very much agree with you but it's not as easy as it sounds. The Constitution limits the ability of local governments to do a lot of what you propose (link below). Where they have been successful, it has been because of drug use or homeless encampments have become so large that they pose a hazard to the health and safety of the homeless who live in them. But that justification doesn't work for individuals sleeping alone or in small groups under underpasses or in parks, which makes a zero tolerance program difficult to implement. Doesn't mean local governments shouldn't do everything in their power to help with this situation but we have to acknowledge the complexities (economic, health, legal, political, etc.) that elected officials face.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/politics/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/homelessness-and-constitution
2
@scientella
Dispersed public housing has not worked very well because it is contentious due to NIMBYism, expensive, and takes forever to actually develop. So how can dispersed housing for 50k + homeless people be built in a timely manner when we keep trying it 20-30 expensive units here and there. It's not working. Where as a multitude of semi-permanent tents can be erected in hours. Easy to separate the mentally ill and addicts from the rest. Look at what the UN is doing.
Homelessness mushroomed and has continued to grow exponentially since the Reagan administration cut funding nationwide for halfway homes. These homes are needed for people to transition and to provide them with the help they need. California cannot solve it alone. We need a federal government that doesn’t prey on States and people in this nation, but steps up and assists.
22
Good for him. At least he has the will to address the issue. Hopefully as part of the plan CA will also propose ways to address middle and lower middle class housing, which is also in crisis.
44
@Ryan Amen, brother. When HUD considers someone making $82k a year as qualifying for low income housing in San Francisco, you know that the problem is not just about the crazy guy on the street. It is impacting everyone but the rich.
10
@Ryan
Newsom? Forget about it. He got his national headline and will move on to something else. He's sitting on a "surplus" and has Democratic supermajorities in the legislature, yet it's now a crisis (when it's been a crisis for years). SMH
1