Within a few days, there was a backlash to Mr. Carpenter's article, much of which distorted what he was saying. I updated this post on 1/20/2015 to reflect some of the unfair criticism sent Mr. Carpenter's way. I think the most important thing to remember is that Mr. Carpenter is committed to getting the homeless into housing, even if others might disagree with his approach. Also, Mr. Carpenter has extensive first hand experience helping and working with the homeless, and is not just ignorantly "shooting from the hip".
Let's look at Mr. Carpenter's main points in the article. I provide commentary where clarification may be needed:
(1) 10 Year Homeless Plan Not Working: Agreed. 7 years in, and there are more homeless people than ever. Why do I appear to be the only one who is upset about the lack of progress? Should somebody be fired for not "carrying out the plan?" Apparently, this was not a real goal that anyone expected to meet. How sad.
(2) Housing First is the Best Approach: Agreed. The new "50 Now" program is currently doing this, but its just not enough. As of this writing, only about 14 to 17 of the 50 in the program have housing. Why, you ask? I am told that it is because there is none available for the program - there is no "affordable housing" out there for anybody.
(3) We Should Not Build the New Homeless Services Center (HSC): Mixed. As I have said all along, I would prefer it be built than not be built, but I agree with Mr. Carpenter that I would rather put the funds to other uses serving the homeless, including "Housing First" programs. First, I don't believe the new shelter will stay within budget, at least not if the drawings and artistic renderings are any indication of the degree of construction difficulty. To see what I am referring to, go to this link: New SLO Homeless Services Center.
Concerns about the new HSC:
1) Construction cost overruns (above).
2) Restricted operations after opening due to citizen complaints.
3) Loss of faith-based volunteers when the overflow program ends.
4) Lack of operational funds (larger facility serving more clients means higher operational costs and overhead); if operational funds are lacking now - what will happen when the utility bills and number of homeless clients served increases?
5) Building a "taj mahal" to the homeless, when a "down and dirty" facility is "the right tool for the job". The homeless are used to the grit of the street - who are we trying to impress with the new HSC that looks more like an art museum or a fancy library? The design better serves those who give tours of the facility, rather than the homeless, who are just "trying to get in out of the rain".
Main Benefit of HSC: As I have said many times over, the main benefit to the new HSC is that all homeless services will be combined under one roof - a huge operational and services upgrade.
(4) Case Management Should Be Optional to Getting Housed: Agreed. Note that Mr. Carpenter did not directly say this in his article. What he did say (my paraphrase): "[Another advantage of the] Housing First approach is that it does not force the homeless to complete/comply with treatment, mental health care, employment training, etc. in order to access housing". I have often argued for 2 levels of "Case Management". For lack of a better term, "Maximum Case Management" (what we now have) and "Minimal Case Management". Many homeless tell me that they have gotten banned from services for various periods of time (including lifetime bans) for various infractions, including violations as small as a single curse word. Others tell me that they don't use the services because of the controlling nature of case management. Existing Case Management has been used as a tool for simply making the undesirable homeless (mostly single men) just "go away".
(5) Keep Prado Day Center and Maxine Lewis Shelter Open: Agreed. Those criticizing Mr. Carpenter fail to point out that he is in favor of keeping Prado and the Shelter open as long as they are needed. Here is what Mr. Carpenter actually said in his viewpoint article: "I support keeping the Prado Day Center and the Maxine Lewis Memorial Shelter open, but only for the time being...As Housing First is implemented and success realized, it would dissolve the need for a new shelter."
(6) Transition Prado and Maxine Lewis Services to Faith-Based Groups: Mixed. Those criticizing Mr. Carpenter fail to point out faith-based organizations run shelters in a large numbers of cities all around the country.
Speculation: What might the faith-based groups offer that CAPSLO does not? Perhaps greater conviction to their cause: they do it not just just for employment, but because they also believe that "Divine Inspiration" leads them to do this work (think Mother Theresa). Plus, they may be in a position to deliver more volunteer hours, much as our local homeless shelter overflow does now. By my calculations, the 12 houses of worship involved in the overflow program deliver 1,200 to 1,500 volunteers per year, including Cal Poly students and the faithful.
Caution: Do not take this to mean that I in any way believe that CAPSLO workers are doing a poor job of running Prado or the SLO shelter. Overall, they do a fine job on an extremely limited budget, so I have mixed feelings about changing things up when they are largely working. However, I can't fault Mr. Carpenter for supporting the belief that Faith-Based Groups would be a better choice for running the homeless programs - they already do a fine job right in SLO County right now.
(7) Create an Addiction Treatment Center and Mental Health Facility: Agreed. This is not my field of expertise, but I continue to hear that locally there is an extremely limited number of addiction and mental health treatment programs. I cannot confirm the accuracy of this statement - can anyone help me here?
(8) Enforce Laws Prohibiting Illegal Behavior: Agreed. However, this statement is vague. I'm a law and order kind of guy, so I would reactively agree with this statement. However, I would remove/change current laws that outlaw activities that are the result of homelessness, at least until we provide some housing options for the homeless. Don't believe me? just google "homelessness as a crime". I did that google search, and up popped this link: More US Cities Consider Homelessness a Crime.
No article can cover everything, but this blog space is unlimited, so I shall expand on the above.
(1) Cal Poly Needs to Build More Housing on Campus: We need workforce housing in SLO, and right now, Cal Poly students (and their "beer-ponging" ways) suck it all up. Cal Poly needs to get the message: build, baby, build!
(2) SLO Policies Should Not Attract Homeless from Out of the Area: Adjacent counties to SLO need to do their part, so that our homeless services do not attract random homeless people from around the state and country. As a corollary, perhaps we should first serve homeless clients that have provable links to SLO county? We need a liaison between our county and adjacent counties to monitor and encourage homeless services. This will allow the homeless with ties to that community to stay there, rather than migrate her to better services.
(3) Expand Housing Options: Both the homeless and the low income (those in danger of becoming homeless) need affordable housing options. We need a full court press in offering as many different low cost solutions as possible. This can only be done by our politicians, due to the onerous fees placed on developing housing, and the restrictive zoning laws. Also, they must be market-based, and not subsidized. Some examples:
- allow granny units, including converted garages
- develop and promote "Homeshare" (renting out rooms to strangers)
- maximize mixed use retail/residential housing (example: Bonetti Ranch)
- allow affordable green micro-housing (200 - 400 sq feet per unit)
- co-op style housing, with meal program and tenants work 4 hours per week
- tiny house and tent cities like hope's village http://www.hopesvillageofslo.com
(4) Remove Laws that Make Homelessness a Crime: This is a trend in America that must stop (just google "homelessness as a crime"). Living in a street or vehicles turns a homeless person into a criminal. It generates so many citations that the homeless lose what little they have, and when they can no longer pay the citations, their criminal record stacks up to a level where they can never escape the legal debt burden.
(5) Follow-Up on Those That Get Into Housing: Once the homeless are housed, they often fall back into homelessness within 6 months to a year. We need a program to follow up on those who have been recently housed to make sure that they continue "on track" and don't fall out of housing and back onto the street (the vicious cycle of homelessness).
(6) More to Come!
No comments:
Post a Comment