Homeless II

I posted about the pending Supreme Court homeless case in April. In June, the court ruled that cities can ban people from sleeping and camping in public spaces. On July 25th, Gov Gavin Newsom ordered California state agencies to begin sweeping homeless encampments on public property. Other states and cities are following suit, which I expect to continue, perhaps indefinitely.

The SCOTUS ruling provides the clarity that California and another friend of the court petitioners desired. They can now address the homeless issue with some legal footing—they can sweep.

An April report by the California State Auditor’s Office, citing the state council tasked with overseeing the implementation of homelessness programs, most likely added impetus for the requested clarity on HOW California could manage homelessness. The report noted the state council's failure to track spending or the outcomes of those programs consistently.

Referencing this report, the LA Times notes, “California has spent $20 billion over the past five years dedicated to the state’s homelessness crisis, including funneling money toward supporting shelters and subsidizing rent. Still, homelessness grew 6% in 2023 from the year prior, to more than 180,000 people, according to federal “point in time” data. Since 2013, homelessness has grown in California by 53%.”

According to the Sacramento Bee, the figure is $24B.

Hey, a billion here, a billion there…

Stunning!

Thanks for reading Get Beyond It All! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

My intention here is not to throw shade on California, although I must admit that $20-24B is hard to get my head around. Anyway, I want to highlight two things:

First, efforts to reduce homelessness should focus on self-sufficiency—that should be the goal. Sadly, as the CA audit report suggests, it is not in many instances.

Second, the homeless population is growing partly due to the cost of housing and inflation in general. Working people, living paycheck to paycheck, slide into homelessness (while still working) because they can’t make ends meet. Some percentage of these will eventually exit the workforce due to the difficulty of maintaining employment without a permanent home. Many will end up becoming someone’s reentry client.

There are well-managed reentry programs nationwide that are doing good work. An over-abundance of funding burdens few. I’ll bet the principals and staffers of these programs could come up with pointed questions related to…

What—?—$20 BILLION?

Wait, what?

Right.

Just imagine.

Onward!