Opinion: Secure sleeping websites provide San Francisco’s greatest homeless method

We start with the bad news.

We’re not going to end homelessness.

The scale is too daunting. There are now over 550,000 homeless in America, including over 150,000 in California.

People without shelter have been a persistent problem for decades. And now, with COVID and the dubious economy, people who never dreamed of being homeless are living in cars or tents on the street.

There’s even a report stating that if the pandemic recession is as severe as feared, homelessness could increase 49% in the US and 68% in California.

It is terrible.

Luckily we got a lot of advice here in the Bay Area. John Oliver took up homelessness on his HBO show “Last Week Tonight”. His solution? Give them a home.

He advocates permanent supportive living (PSH). Just place every homeless person in PSH.

Problem solved.

All that remains for San Francisco to do is upgrade its permanent support accommodations and we’ll have that under control in no time.

Apart from the fact that San Francisco has more PSHs than any major city in the United States.

To be honest, I didn’t believe that. So I went to the San Francisco Controller’s Office to find the 2017 report.

In fact, when compared to PSH beds per 100,000, San Francisco is slightly ahead of Washington DC and well ahead of cities like Philadelphia and Boston.

“And,” said a city official, who did not want to be named, “our streets still look like shit.”

So it’s not as easy to solve as it sounds.

It is unsustainable to place every unprotected person, especially with a growing population, in permanent supportive housing. Last month, The City announced it had hosted 1,200 people in hotels. But with a homeless population of over 8,000, that hardly throws a spanner in the works.

In addition, the National Academy of Science conducted a study on PSH and “Improving Health Outcomes in People with Chronic Homelessness.”

At first it was said that permanent living was not a panacea. It states: “There is a lack of evidence” to show “improved results”.

But it also called into question the economic viability of inpatient living. The “high capital costs” are “a major obstacle”. It names regulatory problems, permits and neighborhood resistance.

As we know, this is not just a San Francisco problem. It’s the Bay Area too. And it would be a wonderful day if all of the surrounding areas could put together a single, workable homelessness program.

I am not holding my breath.

But when they did, consider some overwhelming numbers. A report by bayareaeconomy.com in 2019 estimated it would cost $ 12.7 billion to provide permanent shelter for the 28,200 that needed it.

San Francisco has an impressive $ 1.1 billion homeless budget this year. But even with a conservative estimate of $ 450,000 per unit for Bay Area construction costs by the Bay Area Council’s Economic Institute, it would have to be tripled (8,000 x $ 450,000 = $ 3.6 billion) to accommodate everyone .

That’s a big chunk for a city trying to avoid a COVID recession. And by the way, where is the money for low-income housing and teachers?

Alright you say what’s your plan

Well, it’s not perfect, but I’d come back to Supervisor Rafael Mandelman’s idea of ​​safe sleeping places. These are organized places where tents can be set up safely and The City can provide services such as toilets and even showers.

There is one in the Civic Center now, and although the public reacted with horror when it was founded, it has been around for over a year and the problems are minimal.

There are several advantages. First, people who live in tents like the idea. In fact, two people who work with the homeless told me that up to 10% of tent residents actually have a place to stay. They prefer to live in a tent community. (In some cases, honestly, to be around your dealer.)

They also live with a partner, have a pet, and have their own space. Granted, it’s not a hotel room, but maybe the locations could be a way to transition into living when the rooms open up. At this point you are either accommodated or you are on the street.

Mandelman’s attempt to expand the program failed at the meeting of the Budget and Finance Committee in April 2021.

But it’s still a popular idea, and Mandelman is said to be considering putting it up for election across an entire city.

The politically intimidating Coalition on Homelessness initially backed the idea but has since hit a 180 and is against it. Instead, they say, they want permanent supportive housing. And so it goes.

There were some concerns about the cost of the campsites originally. A budget analyst report estimated it would cost $ 190 per tent per night, which would run into millions of dollars.

Supporters say these numbers have been skewed by the pandemic and that the cost would be much lower. If that’s true, we’d like to see receipts.

Still, websites could be up and running in a short amount of time. Almost no construction is required. It would be a matter of finding open areas and having a group, probably a nonprofit, oversee them.

Of course, that kind of crazy, pie-in-the-sky idea will probably never happen. What big American city would be crazy enough to try something like this?

Well, Los Angeles, for example. In September LA passed a two-pronged homeless camp law.

First, it restricted tent camps in several residential and commercial areas in the city. Tents must not be placed in doors, next to schools, or on sidewalks. Orders are enforced by the police.

But the city has also set up a prototype for a safe place to sleep. It offers space for 95 tent sites, toilets, showers, restaurants and social services. There is even a basketball court.

It is a beginning.

It also seems like the most honest approach to homelessness. We cannot accommodate everyone. There is no possibility.

But instead of ending homelessness, we may need to think about coexistence. Nobody wants a tent to block their door. But letting someone live in a safe space doesn’t sound like a bad idea, even if it’s a tent.

There is also a glimmer of hope. It was worse than that and we made it through.

After the Great Depression, there were over 2 million homeless in the United States. And homeless campsites have sprung up across the country.

And they stayed there until President Franklin Roosevelt worked out a nationwide relief plan called the New Deal.

A Comprehensive National Plan to Reduce Homelessness?

Now there is a concept.

Contact CW Nevius at cwnevius@gmail.com. Twitter: @cwnevius